Kaepernick, Racism, and Football

Can we look past Kaepernick and actually talk about race?

Fresno Bee, September 3, 2016

The Kaepernick kerfuffle is an example of how moral discourse works in the Twitter era. San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick refused to stand during the national anthem.He explained, “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color.”

The response was typical. Donald Trump suggested Kaepernick should find another country. Fans burned Kaepernick’s jersey. Supporters spoke of Kaepernick’s right to free speech. A group of veterans for Kaepernick defended his “right to sit down.”

Instead of talking about the race problem in America, the conversation shifted to Kaepernick’s refusal and his right to free speech. Soon enough people were criticizing Kap’s socks. He wore seemingly anti-police socks during practice.

How bizarre. Racial injustice continues to be a problem without a solution. Poverty and prison plague the black community. Unarmed black men are shot by police. Riots break out. And here we are talking about a quarterback’s socks.

Rather than talk about race and justice, we prefer to change the subject. It’s easier to cast stones at a celebrity than to think about complex questions of social justice.

Kaepernick has the right to sit out the anthem or wear socks of his own choice. But defending that right does not confront the tough question of racial injustice and inequality. We skim the surface and avoid the depths.

Of flag salutes and other rituals

And so it goes with flag salutes and other rituals. They are nice. But they are only skin deep. We can mouth the words without meaning them.

At least Kaepernick appeared to be thinking about the meaning of the flag he chose not to salute. Of course, we cannot dig into the secret recesses of his mind. Nor can we plumb the souls of the athletes and fans who stand and salute.

The conscience is a deep well where we ruminate on meaning. Songs, salutes and socks rest on the surface. The commitments of the heart are independent of the motions of the body. To get to the heart of the matter we need to talk, listen and think.

Standing for the flag is fine. But flag salutes are symbolic, not substantial. Some claimed Kaepernick was disrespecting the troops. But we support the troops most directly by paying our taxes.

Which brings us back to football, which has a strong commitment to supporting the troops. Until last year, the league itself didn’t pay taxes, since it was listed as a tax-exempt nonprofit. To be fair, local franchises pay taxes. But the NFL itself did not, even though the commissioner earned $30 million to $40 million a year.

At any rate, it is strange that the football industry has become a public good, wrapped in the flag, when it is a profitable private enterprise. This is no stranger, I suppose, than the fact that Budweiser renamed its beer “America” this summer and covered the label with patriotic slogans. Budweiser is owned, in case you are wondering, by a foreign beverage corporation named InBev.

Many layers of patriotism

This is a reminder of the complexity of flags and patriotism. Patriotism can be heartfelt and sincere. Or it can be thoughtless jingoism. Patriotism may also be conscientious loyalty to a nation’s highest moral principles. And in some cases patriotism is a useful marketing strategy.

The Roman author Juvenal worried that the Romans were too focused on “bread and circuses.” Today it is football and beer. Trivial distractions undermine thoughtful and sincere citizenship. They keep us too preoccupied to have meaningful conversations about morality, justice and the common good.

And so we mock easy targets and ignore the hard questions. Kaepernick is a millionaire with weird socks sitting alone on the bench. It’s easy to malign the man. But the difficult question of race in America remains on the table.

That question is connected to complex social, psychological, economic and political questions. Like every other important question, the racial problem needs long and careful deliberation. But we ignore that complexity when we blast away on Twitter.

Marketing and propaganda make us think that the truth is obvious and easy to understand. In reality, important ideas take a lifetime to figure out. And flags, socks and songs only touch the surface of things.

Andrew Fiala is a professor of philosophy and director of The Ethics Center at Fresno State:fiala.andrew@gmail.com

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/andrew-fiala/article99549522.html#storylink=cpy

August 6, 2016August 7, 2016

Ancient wisdom and climate change

Maybe it’s time to learn from our past

Fresno Bee, August 6, 2016

Clean energy is a good idea. It is smart to believe in science. But we also need a dose of ancient wisdom. Ancient traditions teach that a simple life is best. The climate crisis is a symptom of a spiritual malady that has been with us since ancient times: unbridled desire.

According to NASA, the first half of 2016 was “the planet’s warmest half-year on record.” The warmest previous years were 2015 and 2014. The Earth’s atmosphere is more than 1 degree Celsius warmer than it was a century ago. Polar ice is melting. Sea level is nearly 3 inches higher than 25 years ago.

And yet we go about our business, unable or unwilling to change our collision course with climate calamity.

Some are in denial. Donald Trump has described climate change as “expletive.” He has claimed that it is a hoax foisted upon the world by the Chinese. His running mate Mike Pence has called climate change a myth. Trump wants to cancel the recent Paris climate agreement.

Others admit the climate crisis, while imagining high-tech solutions. At the Democratic National Convention, Hillary Clintondeclared, “I believe in science.” She said, “I believe that climate change is real and that we can save our planet while creating millions of good-paying, clean energy jobs.”

A CLIMATE-FRIENDLY LIFE WOULD BE SIMPLE.

Ancient sages teach that happiness and virtue are found in restraint and self-control. Desire is a flame that easily burns out of control. Materialism distracts us from higher goods. Tranquility and joy are found in peaceful harmony.

The Buddhists aimed to control desire. The Taoists sought harmony in simplicity. Jesus warned against greed and wealth. And the ancient Greeks praised modesty, moderation and temperance.

But we crave the goods of carbon culture: cars, planes and cheap plastic goods. We like air-conditioned houses, stocked refrigerators and weekend getaways. Billions of poor people dream of joining the American middle class in our relentless pursuit of happiness.

I thought about this as I watched shooting stars blaze across the sky on a recent night in the Sierra. The stars were amazing. So too is our hubris and hypocrisy. I spewed carbon on my drive to the mountains, contributing to the climate crisis.

Such is our predicament. Our daily choices contribute to the problem. It is difficult to imagine living otherwise. The habits of affluence fuel our economy and inflame our desires.

Something’s got to give. Or we’ve got to give something up.

WHAT ARE YOU WILLING TO DO TO COOL THE PLANET AND SIMPLIFY YOUR LIFE?

One interesting suggestion comes from Arnold Schwarzenegger. Schwarzenegger has become a spokesman for meat-free meals as a cure for climate change. In a public service announcement he says, “less meat, less heat, more life.”

Schwarzenegger’s advertisement was made to support the Chinese government in its plan to reduce meat consumption as a response to climate change. Meat consumption creates more carbon emissions than a plant-based diet. Locally grown foods also produce fewer emissions.

All of our consumption habits have environmental impacts. Coffee is shipped across the globe. Coffee culture creates vast piles of disposable cups. Beer and soda also have an impact. Energy is used to refrigerate and transport it. There are ecological costs in manufacturing and recycling cans and bottles.

Even our hygiene habits have climate impacts. Hot showers produce carbon emissions. So do our hair and clothes dryers. And so on.

A climate-friendly life would be simple. We would take fewer showers, air-dry our clothes, take few long trips, and rarely eat meat. We would walk or bike to work, drink mostly water, and generally curtail consumption.

This is how most people lived before electricity and fossil fuels. The nights were darker then. The stars provided entertainment and inspiration. We rarely see those stars today.

A simple life is unimaginable in the era of unrepentant indulgence. Our lights and gizmos blaze at all hours. There is no space for silence or stargazing.

Studying the ancients reminds us of the value of simplicity. Of course we need science. But we also need to understand that burning carbon cannot create virtue or happiness.

It’s a hopeful sign that Arnold Schwarzenegger has become an advocate for climate-friendly behavior. If Conan the Barbarian is giving up meat, what are you willing to do to cool the planet and simplify your life?

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/andrew-fiala/article93860892.html#storylink=cpy

July 29, 2016August 8, 2016

Political Life vs. Living Well

Take a break from bitter politics – go fishing

Fresno Bee, July 29, 2016

After two weeks of political conventions we need a break from hype, hyperbole and hyperventilation. We need to go fishing. Catch our breath. And clear our heads.

Here’s some of what we witnessed in the past two weeks.

At the Republican convention, delegates chanted “lock her up,” when Hillary Clinton was mentioned. One Donald Trump supporter, Al Baldasaro, called for Clinton to be shot for treason.

Trump’s convention speech prompted pundits to call him a fascist and a dictator. If the rhetoric is true, this leaves us with a choice between a Caesar and a criminal.

On the one hand, we have a billionaire who takes pride in firing people claiming that he understands the plight of the middle class. On the other hand, we have the wealthy wife of a former president claiming the same thing.

WHEN ASKED TO TAKE A JOB WITH THE EMPEROR, THE ANCIENT CHINESE SAGE CHUANG-TZU SAID NO. POLITICAL LIFE ENDS IN UNHAPPINESS AND DEATH.
HE SAID HE WOULD RATHER GO FISHING.

Bernie Sanders concluded his campaign claiming that Clinton would “end the movement toward oligarchy.” Sanders’ supporters walked out. An apparent anti-Sanders conspiracy in Democratic headquarters confirmed the suspicions of those who think the system is corrupt. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the head of the Democratic National Committee, resigned as a result of the damaging email dump.

Democratic Party operatives, including President Barack Obama, suggested that Russia was behind the email leak. They insinuated that Trump is too cozy with Russia, since he benefited from the leak.

Trump responded by calling on Russia to find the missing emails from Clinton’s private server. The Clinton campaign replied by saying, “This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent.”

Each side has basically accused the other of treason, duplicity, stupidity and criminality.

Can it get any worse?

This is all disheartening. But it is not surprising. Politics has always been a repugnant business.

Within the lifetimes of our two candidates we have witnessed anti-communist witch-hunts, political assassinations, Watergate, the Iran-Contra scandal, Clintonian philandering and lying, Bushian incompetence and a host of other crimes and misdemeanors.

History discloses a political world that stinks to high heaven. That’s why the world’s religious and philosophical traditions have often taught us to avoid it.

Socrates thought politics damaged the soul. Jesus advised his followers to render unto Caesar only what belongs to Caesar. He suggested that his kingdom was not of this world. Both Socrates and Jesus were killed by political authorities.

The Epicurean philosophers of ancient Greece advised us to avoid politics entirely. True happiness, they argued, is found in good health and in the private company of good friends. Christians often retreated behind cloistered walls seeking peace and communion with God.

IF GOOD PEOPLE GO FISHING, FISHY PEOPLE WILL TAKE OVER AND DESTROY OUR FISHING HOLES.

A related idea comes from China. When asked to take a job with the emperor, the ancient Chinese sage Chuang-Tzu said no. Political life ends in unhappiness and death. He said he would rather go fishing.

How nice it would be simply to go fishing with the Taoist sages. But if good people go fishing, fishy people will take over and destroy our fishing holes.

We might like to be left alone. But injustice and stupidity have a nasty way of spreading. The philosopher’s garden, the monk’s monastery, and the Taoist’s mountain retreat are still connected to the political world. No one can withdraw completely.

Politics is a necessary evil. We avoid it at our peril.

The political world is a bit like our bodily functions. We must occasional get our hands dirty with this messy business. Justice requires us to wade into political swamps. But we should not be surprised by how bad the whole thing smells.

Nor should we view political life as an end in itself. There are higher and more lasting goods to be found elsewhere.

The challenge is to make the best of a putrid situation – to keep our heads clear despite the hot and fetid air.

Critical thinking skills help. Suspend judgment until you get all the facts. Control your emotions. Keep the larger sweep of history in mind. Remember that there are no utopias and no morally perfect politicians.

We also benefit from taking a break from breathing hot air. Go fishing. Recharge your critical batteries. Clear your head. This is going to be a nasty and noxious political season.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/andrew-fiala/article92507247.html#storylink=cpy

July 8, 2016July 27, 2016

Nostalgia poor guide for politics

There’s no going back in world affairs

Fresno Bee, July 8, 2016

Nationalism should give way to cosmopolitanism
Globalization benefits us all
Nostalgia is poor guide to politics

After Britain voted to leave the European Union,Donald Trump explained, “People want to take their country back. They want to have independence in a sense. You see it with Europe, all over Europe.”

I’ve been traveling in Europe this week, on my way to a conference in Poland. There is resurgent nationalism in some countries. Anti-immigrant sentiment exists. A few right-wing parties are gaining strength.

But European society is deeply cosmopolitan. In the streets of Munich, Bavarians in lederhosen mix with Turks in headscarves. African men in flowing white robes stand on subway platforms with German soccer fans. American brands – McDonald’s, Pizza Hut, Starbucks – compete with German beer gardens, sushi restaurants and falafel stands.

The same is true in the U.S. We enjoy German sports cars, Indian cuisine and Mexican labor. And we profit from the global economy. The Apple store in Munich is around the corner from the cathedral and old city hall.

THE GENIE OF GLOBALIZATION IS OUT OF THE BOTTLE.

And yet, politicians appeal to nationalistic nostalgia. In a recent speech supporting Trump, Sarah Palin said, “We’re going to take our country back, and you are either with us or against us.”

But what would we go back to? Contemporary nation-states are modern inventions with a complex and often ugly history. And nationalism creates strife. Each nationalistic line in the sand comes at the expense of someone else.

This is obvious in central Europe. Poland, Lithuania, Hungary and other nations have come and gone, swept along by the tides of history. Some countries have disappeared entirely.

The Kingdom of Bohemia was swallowed up by the Austrian Empire. In the 20th century, Bohemia became Czechoslovakia. Then the Nazis invaded. And the Soviets. After the Cold War, Czechoslovakia broke in two. The Czech Republic was formed in 1993. The country recently adopted a new name, Czechia.

North American history is also full of conflicting identities. Europeans stole the continent from native peoples. The United States was formed out of English, French, Spanish and Russian lands.

THE PAST WAS OFTEN WORSE THAN THE PRESENT.

Alaska was purchased from Russia. It joined the union in 1959 along with Hawaii. What would we say if native Hawaiians wanted to take their country back?

Some people long for the good old days of homogeneous national identity and nationalistic pride. But there never were such good old days. Nostalgia is a poor guide for the present because it is not based in reality. The truth is that political life is constantly changing. Ethnic, racial, linguistic and cultural identities are fleeting realities.

The dangers of nationalistic identity are obvious in central Europe. Concentration camps dot the landscape, along with memorials for those killed in the nationalistic wars of past centuries. Here in Munich, Hitler began the process of transforming Romantic German myths into the monstrous deeds of the Third Reich.

Nostalgia can be fun. My American passport contains inspiring scenes from the American past. There is a picture of a pioneer plowing with oxen and another picture of cowboys herding cattle. But no modern farmer would trade his tractor for a team of oxen. And it’s no longer common that cowboys ride the open range.

The past was often worse than the present. And it was at least as complicated. The reality of the past included dysentery, racism, war and the subordination of women.

THE TASK OF THE FUTURE IS TO DISCOVER AND CELEBRATE OUR COMMON HUMANITY.

There is no going back. We can only move forward. We are in the middle of an unprecedented economic, cultural, technological and ideological transition. We are moving away from isolated nations toward a global society based upon shared notions of human rights.

Not everyone likes that development. But the genie of globalization is out of the bottle. Most of us benefit from it. Open travel, free trade and cultural admixtures make life profitable and interesting.

The Czechs, Poles and Germans seem to have discovered a way to coexist. Despite the atrocities of the nationalistic past, they are participating in the cosmopolitan European experiment.

We ought to embrace the cosmopolitan future, while defending human rights and a global ethic of compassion. That requires an educated understanding of history. Superficial slogans mislead us. Nostalgic myths are dangerous and divisive. The task of the future is to discover and celebrate our common humanity.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/andrew-fiala/article88483562.html#storylink=cpy

June 11, 2016

Political Correctness and Free Speech

We need to hear bad ideas so we can argue against them

Fresno Bee, June 11, 2016

Free speech is the best cure for bad ideas
Political correctness gets in way of genuine dialogue
Americans don’t like political correctness

People don’t like political correctness. A February poll by CBS’ “60 Minutes” found that 55 percent of Americans think that political correctness is a danger to free speech. Nearly 70 percent of Republicans don’t like political correctness.

Donald Trump has made this a theme. In a January speech Trump said, “We’re going to protect Christianity, and I can say that. I don’t have to be politically correct.” In a recent response to the backlash about his criticism of Judge Gonzalo Curiel, Trump said, “We have to stop being so politically correct in this country.”

Trump supporters agree. In a story about a Fresno kid who was not allowed to wear a Trump hat to school, Brooke Ashjian said, “If he wants to wear the hat, he should. If people are disturbed, too bad. There is so much political correctness people are afraid to rally.”

Democratic dialogue depends upon liberty, honesty and accountability. Without sincerity and freedom we end up with hypocrisy and duplicity. This is not good in a democracy.

Nor is it good for the pursuit of truth. Philosopher John Locke once said, “the truth certainly would do well enough if she were once left to shift for herself.” Speech codes that limit the free exchange of ideas undermine the pursuit of knowledge.

When people say what they mean and mean what they say, we have a basis for judgment and evaluation. Without free and honest speech, we do not know what anyone really thinks. That’s a problem in democracy, in business, and in life.

Frank and forthright speech is revealing and occasionally disturbing. Consider what Trump’s unconstrained speech teaches us about him. He has admitted he is suspicious of Mexican-Americans and Muslims. It is better that we know this than if he kept those ideas to himself.

WE SHOULD HOPE THAT LIBERTY PROVIDES THE BEST CURE FOR STUPIDITY.

Free speech allows for education and progress. Consider the case of Leslie Rasmussen, who wrote a letter in support of a friend who was convicted of rape at Stanford. Rasmussen blamed her friend’s conviction on political correctness. She wrote, “Stop worrying about being politically correct every second of the day and see that rape on campuses isn’t always because people are rapists.”

To claim that rapists are not always rapists is a contradiction. The complaint about political correctness is a red herring. But that’s why we need free speech. If we don’t know what people think, we cannot evaluate their ideas – or criticize their logic. Nor can we change their minds.

Rasmussen’s remarks provoked a backlash. Her band was dropped from a number of concerts. Some may see this as an example of the stifling effect of political correctness. But it’s part of the free market of ideas. And the backlash allowed Rasmussen to clarify her position. She recently apologized for her remarks.

That’s an important lesson. Unconstrained speech can result in dumb things being said. No one is perfect. Sometimes our tongues outpace our brains. When we say something dumb we ought to correct it and apologize. Honesty and liberty require accountability.

WITHOUT SINCERITY AND FREEDOM WE END UP WITH HYPOCRISY AND DUPLICITY.

We learn and grow through free, sincere and accountable dialogue. When people say what they believe, we can evaluate them accordingly. We can even try to persuade them to think differently. But when discourse is constrained and people don’t say what they mean, we cannot have a productive dialogue.

In the best of all possible worlds there would be no hateful words. But in our flawed world, the next best thing is for bad ideas to come out of the closet. Political correctness can cause people to say the right thing for the wrong reasons, while remaining committed to dumb or indecent ideas.

Genuine civility remains an important good for social life. But genuine civility is not mere political correctness. Authentic civility is grounded in respect, compassion and commitment to the common good. Gandhi explained, “Civility does not mean mere outward gentleness of speech … but an inborn gentleness and desire to do the opponent good.”

Eloquent courtesy can mask cruelty and violence. Political correctness can be oppressive. And inhibited speech prevents genuine dialogue.

Americans have the right to say what we believe. We need to hear bad ideas, so we can argue against them. And we should hope that liberty provides the best cure for stupidity.

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/living/liv-columns-blogs/andrew-fiala/article82987487.html#storylink=cpy