Zero Tolerance for Zero Tolerance

Zero Tolerance implies a black and white solution for a problem shaded in variations of grey. It is currently being used by the Trump administration to the (worldwide*) problem of immigration, but this latest incarnation has been applied before to many problems with limited success, at least in part because it is almost always trumped (no pun intended) by the Law of Unintended Consequences.

Zero tolerance has been used to try to make schools safer, with minimal, at best, (perhaps even counterproductive) results. ¹ (Here’s an irony: many of those favoring zero tolerance re: immigration oppose zero-tolerance re: guns in schools, and vice versa.)

Companies are starting to re-think their zero tolerance policies toward employee drug use and testing as they are increasingly struggling to fill vacancies in a time of low unemployment. ²

I’m guessing very few of us want a zero-tolerance enforcement by police officers when we get pulled over on a minor traffic violation.

How many of us raised our children with a zero-tolerance approach? How did that work out for you when you tried?

How many of your best teachers had a zero-tolerance policy (s)he fanatically enforced? What was your opinion of those teachers who never made exceptions for anyone or anything? Be honest.

It seems to me that we all recognize the limitations of zero tolerance, except perhaps when it doesn’t seem to impact us personally.

    It’s a complex world and while laser sharp black and white rules might look attractively clean and simple, under closer examination, even those are pixilated. (Also see Rule #42: Most rules written in crisp, dark black print on starkly white paper may be clear but are also fragile and easily broken. )

Jimmy Buffet got it right when he sang, Simply Complicated.

* Immigration is a worldwide problem, replete with shades of gray. It is, in fact, the one issue where citizens we have met from all corners of the globe** agree is problematical for their country. Problematical, but not the same problem. Canadian concerns are not English concerns are not Swiss concerns are not Aussie concerns are not Kiwi concerns are not American concerns. You get the idea. We share the issue in general, but not the problems it generates, and certainly not the solutions required.

¹ The [APA] task force reviewed 10 years of research on the effects of zero tolerance policies in middle and secondary schools and concluded that such policies not only fail to make schools safe or more effective in handling student behavior, they can actually increase the instances of problem behavior and dropout rates.

The research also showed that zero tolerance policies failed to increase the consistency of discipline across student groups and failed to decrease uneven enforcement of punishment across racial lines.)

²  Desperate to fill open positions, some employers are beginning to soften zero-tolerance drug policies, particularly for jobs where safety is not an essential function.

Low unemployment and increasing use of illegal drugs are narrowing the pool of qualified workers in many regions and industries. State laws allowing medical and recreational use of marijuana are complicating recruiters' efforts to find drug-free employees, as is the continued abuse of prescription opioids. [SHRM]

** Now there’s an expression that makes no sense, but I decided to use the cliché anyway.

Tributes to Traitors, Terrorists and Treason

To Say Nothing of Slavery and Racism

Because getting bent out of shape has become a national pasttime to which so many are addicted, I find lots of people complaining about the removal of symbols giving tribute to traitors and treason.

Yes, monuments to the Confederacy are, at a minimum, exactly that. The CSA was created to preserve the enslavement of human beings for the benefit of the landed aristocracy in the South. Armed insurrection against their country followed, creating a war that cost hundreds of thousands of lives and ripped our nation apart. Even sewn back together, the divide remained and the traitors, years later, erected monuments to honor their treason (plus honoring those who terrorized the new black citizens) and attempting to reshape the narrative. That revisionist history of the “Lost Cause” conveniently discounted slavery and attempted to transform sedition to nobility.

Monuments and flag worship have been part and parcel of that public relations coup. The virulent racism that continued and even grew in the post-war years exemplifies the statement, “The North Won the War but the South won the Peace.” Don’t believe me? Do some basic research about the corrupt deal settling the election of 1876 and preserving the presidency for the Republican Party. (Note: neither the Republican nor Democrat parties of 1876 are the parties of today.)

Does dismantling a monument or lowering a flag solve any of the pressing problems facing our nation? Of course not. Do those actions deserve the seemingly high priority assigned to them? Seems doubtful. But make no mistake, maintaining those artifacts of racism carries a price tag, both in terms of state and municipal treasuries but also in reminding those (or their ancestors) who were victims of that attitude that many people, and their state and local governments, considered them inferior, even subhuman. You need no more than a hint of empathy to understand how that feels, how that discounts the value of a significant number of Americans. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: Just because it’s not YOUR problem doesn’t mean it’s not A problem.

All that being said, I could never support the destruction of art (including today’s destruction of a 10 Commandments monument in Little Rock by a nut job with a history of such actions), no matter how offensive it might be to some people. (Not surprisingly, what offends me might not offend you, and vice versa.) I’m not suggesting we try some Orwellian erasure of history; it must be preserved (and analyzed and evaluated and debated). But such art (or history) needs to be displayed and maintained in museums or by privately funded entities. That apparently will be the case with the St. Louis monument to the Confederacy (created in 1914, long after the Civil War, but during the hey day of Jim Crow), as it is now in the custody of the Civil War Museum.

So if you want to get upset, you can add this piece to the list of things about which to fret. Or you might invest your energy in working to discover common ground and find solutions to problems that affect us all.

The Anger Games – Where The Odds Are NOT in Your Favor And No One Wins

I’m trying to take what I hope is an objective look at the 2016 election, free of recrimination or accusation. I am having trouble organizing my inchoate thoughts. I apologize if this seems disjointed. And too long. I’ve edited myself as best I could, without taking more time. I want to get this written and published and then take a break. It’s too depressing. And I’m not talking about the results of the election, but rather the stereotyping and bitterness that continues to spew from both sides. We all need to remember that half the country voted for the other candidate. But what I seem to be seeing on social media (which is why I plan to take a nice long break) is a new reality show, The Anger Games. “You think you’re pissed?! Well, see how pissed I am! Take that!” And back and forth it goes.

November 8 marked the first (and last) time I voted for Hillary Rodham Clinton, and it was more about voting against than voting for. Not that I believed most of the propaganda shoveled in her path; she was flawed, certainly, but I demand more evidence than hearsay and tenuous conspiracy theories before I buy into most of the accusations against her. Did she lose the election because she was a woman? Not really, although she was clearly held to a different standard than men and subjected to more intense scrutiny than male politicians. But anyone who voted against her because she was female wouldn’t have voted for a male with her belief system, either. (President Obama faced a similar challenge; the votes he lost because of race were not votes he could have ever won.)

Had HRC presented with the same characteristics as President-elect Trump, she would have had zero chance of even getting into a primary, much less out of one. I confess I still do not understand how his obvious flaws could be overlooked, not only overlooked but often celebrated. I hope his supporters don’t have to look back and consider the adage, “Be careful what you wish for.” I doubt that will happen, of course, and I’ll address that shortly.

But the primary cause of my reluctance, both this year and in 2008 is that she is, and has been for decades, a polarizing figure. Her mere presence in the political arena generates such antipathy in our country that I saw no way she could be an effective leader, no matter what other positive attributes, and in my opinion there were many, she might possess. However, the obvious polarization manifested since the election of Mr. Trump seems to point not to any particular candidate, but the widening division in our country. I fear that the number of people on either side who have closed their minds is growing and the rift between us is becoming a gaping chasm.

Still, Mr. Trump’s victory speech said the right things, calling for healing and unity. I hope (and will give him the benefit of the doubt) that those were more than just words, that he meant what he said. I further hope his more ardent supporters (again, half the country voted for the other candidate) also take those words to heart, although I haven’t seen too much of that yet on social media; granted, the occasionally unhinged comments of those who opposed him hardly constitute an olive branch either. Winners, however, real winners, are magnanimous in victory and don’t feel the need either gloat or to respond to every perceived slight. Responding with even more anger to the bitterness of the disappointed only drives the sharp wedge of division deeper into our collective soul.

We might want to remind ourselves (as I am not finished reminding you) that an essentially equal number of citizens voted for each candidate and that we need each other if we are to become “one nation, indivisible.” If Mr. Trump can lead us (supporters and opponents alike) in that direction, that would indeed be a step toward greatness and the most important accomplishment of his presidency. That will require, however, that all of us stop pointing fingers, laying blame, matching insult for insult (“An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.”), but instead go about the hard work of actually listening to each other, recognizing others’ points of view, practicing empathy (just because something is not your problem does not mean there is no problem), understanding that good people of good will can, and do, see the same picture differently because their life stories are different. Not better, not worse, just different. All those stories need to be valued.

I also call on President-elect Trump’s supporters stand up to the unsavory elements of his base. I know many, many good people who supported Mr. Trump. Undoubtedly, most of them were. Contrary to some extreme thinking, voting for Mr. Trump did not make someone racist, sexist, xenophobic, etc. However, I’m pretty sure that every racist, sexist and xenophobe did, in fact, vote for him, which is their right, just as it is for unsavory characters on the left. But I would challenge his supporters to call out the racists, the sexists, the xenophobes when they rear their ugly, deplorable heads. And, by that, I mean truly stand up. Tsk, tsk, head-shaking or even, “Well, that’s not me,” and the like do not constitute a sufficient response to the ugly poison of racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia, etc. That is your responsibility to the rest of us. And our responsibility to the rest of you is to also point out the same, respectfully. Just because you do not recognize or believe something to be racist (and all the other -ists) does not mean you are correct.

I also hope that his supporters will objectively assess his presidency, statements and actions, and not go into auto-defense, bunker mentality, blindly defending his every move. He will be criticized by many, (over half the country did not vote for him) because listening to and accepting criticism is part of the job of being President of the United States. I don’t see this as a great strength of Mr. Trump, so it is up to his supporters to keep those lines of communication open and not reflexively strike back at the legitimate concerns of those who disagree. If you just sit in the echo chamber, defending every action because you somehow feel that you need to be “all in” (this expression is the only valuable thing to come out of televised poker, IMO) on your support, to the point that you cannot disagree or be critical, you do neither your country nor your president any favors. That, too, is your responsibility to the rest of us. On the other side, if, like me, you did not vote for Mr. Trump, our responsibility as citizens of the United States of America is to not reflexively oppose everything or everyone on his team.

By the same token, disappointed, or even angry, Clinton supporters must also recognize that good, decent people, millions and millions of them, voted for President-elect Trump, about the same number that voted for HRC. Although their votes may seem like a personal attack on your values (in much the same way that your vote for any other candidate might seem like a rejection of everything they hold dear), it was not. Their vote was not about you any more than your vote was about them. We all have our own perspectives, and until we start listening, truly listening to those perspectives, working to understand those perspectives, our divisions will not only remain open sores but will fester and the infection that plagues us and threatens our democratic republic will spread. It is all of our responsibility to treat those wounds, deep as they may be, gently, with respect, and work to heal them.

I do not minimize the difficulty of these responsibilities. I hope you do not minimize their importance. United we stand; divided, we will, inevitably, fall, and our once great nation will fail and truly no longer be great. And it won’t make a damn bit of difference which side is in power when that happens.

Thanksgiving & White Privilege

Many years ago, as part of a consciousness-awareness-raising workshop or in-service, I was introduced to the concept of “White Privilege.” I didn’t find either the workshop or term offensive. I’ve known for a long time I was a child of privilege. The SAT tests I took in the ‘60s were written for kids just like me, white, middle class, the progeny of striving parents (both first generation HS graduates, btw). It’s not the only reason I did well, but it was an advantage I had that was not universally shared, including by a significant percentage of white kids.

Neither did I take it personally or get defensive, though some of my colleagues were resistant and did feel attacked. However, I did reject the projected guilt that seemed to be expected by the presenters. It was no more my fault that I had been the beneficiary of so many advantages than it was the fault of the vast majority of kids I taught, both black and white, that they weren’t. Slavery and its pernicious, continuing aftermath was neither my fault nor reversible. I had long ago recognized that not everyone starts from the same place, that where you end up in this marathon of life is, at least in part, determined by where you start on the course (and, yes, sadly, less but still all too often, the color of your skin), and you have no control over those factors. 

But no one starts at the finish line (and I would pity them if they did; without struggle there is no growth). Maybe I did only have to run a half-marathon over fairly smooth roads instead of a 39.3 with innumerable hills, hurdles, obstacles, and even land mines (in the case of some of my Bosnian students, not a mere figurative reference). I tip my hat to those whose course was longer and more rugged than mine, but I still have to run my race, which is still not finished. 

It’s why I’m so proud of so many of my former students, because I know how tough their race was, and, in some cases, continues to be. It was a continuing frustration for many Hancock staff trying to counterbalance the self-imposed low expectations of too many of our kids, kids who openly said, “Hey, what do you expect, I’m from Lemay.” And for the majority who have succeeded or are still working to succeed, I can understand why some of them, in spite of everything, don’t feel “privileged,” and struggle to recognize what that is supposed to mean in relation to their life experiences.*

Recognizing privilege, at whatever level it exists – or doesn’t exist – is neither an excuse nor cause for celebration. Those who won or lost the genetic and/or socioeconomic lotteries are still responsible for their lives. But we all need to recognize that no matter how many obstacles we may have faced, others have faced more, and while it’s no excuse, it might just be at least a partial explanation, and true empathy mitigates a lot of anger and resentment.

But privilege is so much more than economic opportunity. I never have to worry about being looked at suspiciously when I walk into a store because of my race. I never have to worry about poor or no service at a restaurant because of my race. I never have to worry about getting pulled over by the police because I don’t “fit” in the neighborhood. The list goes on and on, the privilege, if you will, that I get simply by being white. That key component CANNOT, MUST NOT, be ignored.

So this Thanksgiving, like so many I’ve celebrated over the past decades, I choose to recognize my many blessings, with no resentment for those who may have had even more advantages, and empathy for the oh-so-many who had fewer, hope that I’ve done what I could to give back and share my blessings with those who have had a much more challenging race to run, and resolve to continue to do as much as I can, for as many as I can, as long as I can.

Here’s hoping that all who read this find their own blessings this Thanksgiving Day. Peace and love.

    * When I first posted this piece, two years ago, a number of my formers suggested (kindly, respectfully, but not in so many words) that I was perhaps being condescending, that for any number of reasons, but often to the credit of their parents, they did not feel underprivileged, and, although I notice now that I did not use that exact term, I understand that the word (or its implication) has a negative connotation; what I meant to suggest is that privilege, like prejudice, is a continuum, not solely an either/or proposition. At whatever level of privilege each of us started, it is our obligation to recognize that there are many who have had a more challenging story to live; they deserve not our sympathy, but our empathy. 

    Incidentally, IMO there are no adequate synonyms for empathy, which is why I kept repeating it.