February 27, 2012
Losing Our Demons, Finding Our Peace – the Promise of Cultural Maturity
A world at peace is much more achievable than we might imagine—at least a world free from the cataclysmic sort of conflict we most fear. It is essential that this be so. The weapons-of-mass-destruction genie is out of the bottle. And better defenses will only spawn even more dangerous weaponry. Any hope for the future must come from something deeper than putting in place more effective military counter measures. It lies in lessening the forces that have led to war in the past.
Understanding how to do this requires a new and greater sophistication in how we think and act—a fundamental kind of “growing up” as a species. I call this Cultural Maturity and see it as the defining task of our time. Stepping beyond the mechanism that in the past has produced the larger part of human conflict is a pivotal ingredient in Cultural Maturity changes and follows from them.
As human societies grew in scale and complexity, there was a tendency to distinguish self – the “chosen” – from others – the “barbarians.” Since civilization’s earliest beginnings, demonizing others has played a key role in establishing social identity and creating the close bonds needed for social order.
The theme is so embedded in our collective psyche, it is natural to assume it is part of our genetic heritage, something whose influence we cannot escape. The perspective of Cultural Maturity is that this is developmental—a necessary step, but not the endpoint, of our cultural evolution. In fact, two events in the last couple of decades point to hopeful progress.
The fall of the Berlin Wall provides the most striking illustration. Few anticipated it—certainly not the suddenness of its collapse. While many leaders tried to take credit for it, political initiatives in fact had little to do with the collapse of communism. In effect, the world community had grown beyond the absolute dogma and knee-jerk polar animosities the wall represented.
As momentous as those events of 1989 were, it is what has happened—or not happened—since that is truly significant. With the end of the Cold War, “evil empire” animosities between the United States and the former Soviet Union transformed with unprecedented quickness to a relationship of mutual, if begrudging, respect. Though the two countries still have many policy differences, there has not been a return to the deep rooted polarization of the past since the wall came down.
A second major event, the 9/11 World Trade Center attacks provided every reason for us to make terrorism the new communism, a response that would have undermined any possibility of effectively addressing terrorism’s threat. Worse yet, in response we could have made the whole of the Islamic East the new “evil empire,” and turned new uncertainties into a clash of civilizations. But while some leaders have played the “demon card” in response to terrorist activities, to a surprising degree most citizens have not fallen for the bait. Viewed from an historical vantage, this outcome is remarkable. It offers hope that we are up to the rigors of a new Cultural Maturity.
If we can recognize—and find significance in— our differences, we can leave cultural demonizing in the past, and find our way to a more peaceful world.
February 12, 2012
End of the Inside Track – Congressional Insider Trading Derailed
Those in Congress occupy a unique niche in American society. They are gatekeepers for the creation of the laws we are bound by as citizens. In that role, the temptation for gaming the system for financial advantage is great and often the oversight is weak. Over the last several decades, Congress has often demonstrated an unapologetic propensity to live above the laws they make for the rest of us.
A case in point – insider trading. American citizens are constrained by the provisions of the 1934 Securities and Exchange Act from trading the stocks of companies about which they may have important, non-public information. However, members of Congress have no such constraint under this Act thanks to the very lucrative exemption they created for themselves. Members of both parties were happy to exploit this convenient exemption, ignoring the ethical lapse it represents, until the CBS news magazine 60 Minutes brought the matter into full public view.
The research underlying the 60 Minutes report was developed by Peter Schweizer, a fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution, for his new book Throw Them All Out. The uncomfortable exposure brought a sudden rush to support the STOCK Act, legislation to curtail insider trading of securities by lawmakers and officials in the executive branch. The bill had languished for years with only 2 sponsors. On February 9, the House of Representatives passed the bill overwhelmingly by a vote of 417 to 2, with over a hundred sponsors.
This initial test of support for the STOCK Act, complete with the ethical posturing by members who had only months before been happy to profit on non-public information, was impressive. But the real test will come as the final bill gets worked out in conference committee meetings. One of the key issues is how to deal with the purveyors of political intelligence – often former members of Congress in the employ of hedge funds or other groups that can profit from inside knowledge of Congressional activities and intentions.
The Founding Fathers designed the government to operate within a system of institutional checks and balances. But when it comes to curbing the “legal graft” practiced by those with the power to make laws, the most powerful check has turned out be the transparency brought by our ubiquitous, instant and always on media.
Perhaps the STOCK Act will go some way toward improving the very low esteem in which Congress is held these days – with job approval ratings now at 11 percent. It is critical for us as a society that we not lose trust in our governing bodies. As Meg McCardle noted in her recent article “Capitol Gains” for The Atlantic magazine:
“In the end, the problem with congressional insider trading isn’t that it undermines confidence in the market—Congress frequently does that openly. The problem with congressional insider trading is that it erodes confidence in our political institutions. We can’t really afford to deplete that pitiful stock much further.”
February 8, 2012
The Long Shadow of Childhood Trauma
We hear a lot about the healthcare crisis – generally framed in economic terms. But often lost in the haggling over cost figures and acrimonious debate about whether healthcare is the province of the government or the free market is a much more important and frightening reality – the poor state of health among our nation’s children.
In a recently published book Scared Sick, Robin Kaar-Morse and Meredith Wiley provide sobering statistics about the state of children’s health in the US. Their research, compiled from government and private studies, paints a grim picture. For example:
- Among the seven largest industrialized nations in the world, the US ranks last on infant mortality rates and longevity.
- The overall well-being of American children ranks twentieth among twenty-one wealth democracies, behind Hungary, Greece and Poland.
- One in three children born five years ago will develop diabetes in their lifetime.
- Child abuse death rates are far higher in the US than in all of the seven largest developed countries; three times higher than Canada and eleven times higher than Italy.
- Five children die every day as the result of child abuse; three out of four of these are under the age of four.
- 15.5 percent of all babies born in the US are low birth weight and / or preterm at delivery.
- Just over 20 percent of children either currently or at some point have had a seriously debilitating mental disorder.
- An estimated 26 percent of all children in the US will witness a violent or traumatic event prior to age four.
- One in one hundred infants is born with fetal alcohol syndrome, the leading preventable cause of mental retardation, birth defects and learning disabilities in the Western world.
- Of children ages three to seventeen, 4.7 million have a learning disability.
(Page xv, Scared Sick, 2011.)
The scientific evidence is mounting that conflict and trauma can take a toll on our organs and biological regulatory systems during development and lead to serious health issues as adults. This should be reason enough to re-examine our nation’s healthcare priorities. But work in a relatively new field of biology should provide an even stronger incentive.
Research in the rapidly evolving area of epigenetics is hinting at biological mechanisms that link trauma experienced by one generation with diseases that develop in subsequent generations. Epigenetics focuses on the way that cells facilitate or inhibit the expression of our genes. Epigenetic functioning,unlike our genes, is more directly affected by environmental influences. In some cases, it appears that epigenetic mechanisms damaged by environmental factors in one generation may be passed on to future generations. This means there could be a generational echo to diseases provoked by conflict or trauma during childhood. This is in addition to the psychological damage that often results in abused children turning into abusive parents.
As the rhetoric over healthcare in America ratchets up in this election year, we should look at the very real and long-term consequences of neglecting our children’s health. As Herbert Ward observed, “Childhood abuse casts a shadow the length of a lifetime.” And now, we suspect, that shadow may be much longer.