ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Friday, October 18, 1996 TAG: 9610180016
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-9 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RUDI GELSEY
AFTER A season of blizzards and the winter of our discontent, it was good to travel to Washington in April and see the cherry trees aligned in beauty along the Potomac, symbols of spring and renewal.
The occasion for the trip was attendance at the National Summit on Ethics and Meaning. The convocation in the nation's capital, at the epicenter of political infighting, launched a new value-based concept under the name "the politics of meaning."
Personally, it was an opportunity to revisit my youthful enthusiasm, to restore hope and a can-do spirit in a world where to be cynical is an ever-present temptation and ideals are dismissed as pie-in-the-sky.
The summit sought to give answers to the question on the minds of 1,800 attendees: What would it be like to transcend the conventional labels of conservative and liberal? Right and left? How do we get beyond ideological gridlock?
The premise of the politics of meaning is that conservatives and liberals are both half-right and half-wrong. Both can point to valuable insights and achievements, while also carrying within themselves serious and potentially fatal flaws. Both operate within an overall climate of selfishness and special interests, a situation that undermines their proclaimed goals.
The last decade and a half in our nation has been marked by an upswing in the fortunes of the conservative cause. Michael Lerner, author of ``The Politics of Meaning,'' seeks to understand the reasons for this shift. What attracts people to the conservative direction, he claims, is the yearning for old-fashioned values, emphasis on a spirit of community, a wholesome skepticism as to social engineering and a conviction that government regulations and bureaucracy cannot do it all.
William Bennett, in his ``Book of Virtues,'' an anthology, sums up his conservative vision in the title of 10 chapters: self-discipline, compassion, responsibility, friendship, work, courage, perseverance, honesty, loyalty and faith. Such a compendium of qualities is unarguable, though one might be surprised by the inclusion of compassion, not generally associated with conservatism.
Yet ``compassion,'' says Bennett, ``comes close to the very heart of moral awareness, to see in one's neighbor another self and that we are all in the same boat.'' Liberals would agree with such a statement, though they would question whether conservative spokesmen like Newt Gingrich, Pat Buchanan, Rush Limbaugh and Jesse Helms are good role models for compassion.
Having given full credit to the conservative ideal, Lerner takes issue with conservative policies. His fundamental critique is that conservatives suffer from a psychological split. On one hand, they promote family values and community; on the other, their political platform subverts those objectives. It is hard to see how resistance to a living wage and a humane workplace, opposition to environmental protection and to the Endangered Species Act, support for Uzis and the defunding of National Public Radio will contribute to higher moral values.
Lerner articulates another concern. Traditionally, the conservative right has tended to vent its frustrations upon minorities, Jews, gays and lesbians, legal and illegal immigrants, the poor. Intolerance and playing the blaming game devalue the conservative cause.
What makes liberalism attractive is its defense of individual rights and of a social safety net, basic to a democratic way of life and a just society. However, the liberal left has its own set of inner contradictions. Compassion for the disadvantaged and the dispossessed has not been well served by a bureaucratic welfare system. The emphasis on treasured individual freedoms had a shadow side. It can undermine the spirit of community and a vision of the common good.
Lerner, along with college President Peter Gabel, have come up with a new vision in politics that might be summarized as follows:
* Thou shalt participate in building a society where caring is the bottom line.
* Thou shalt recognize each person as precious, ``made in the image of God.''
* Thou shalt not look out for No. 1, for selfishness and greed are destructive of human community and our natural environment.
* Thou shalt oppose oppression in all its forms: ethical, spiritual and psychological oppression along with male and white supremacy, homophobia, environmental degradation, class privilege and religious discrimination.
* Thou shalt be aware that everyone is both victim and victimizer, for even the oppressor is unfree.
* Thou shalt avoid divisive polarization and seek the higher common ground.
* Thou shalt support family life, including single-parent families, families without children and gay and lesbian families.
* Thou shalt commit yourself to integrity and take personal responsibility as a citizen.
* Thou shalt not demean or demonize people with whom you disagree or who are in leadership positions.
* Thou shalt celebrate and nurture imagination, delight, awe and wonder.
The politics of meaning is not a voice crying in the wilderness. Mainline churches, evangelical churches for social responsibility, the Catholic Church and African-American churches have joined forces under the title ``A Call for Renewal'' to develop a vision and an agenda similar to those of the politics of meaning. Together, the two groups are offering us a viable alternative to the current dysfunction of the American political system.
Rudi Gelsey is minister of the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of New River Valley.
LENGTH: Medium: 100 linesby CNB