Judgmentalism: Not Just the Right's Problem

The polarization in the West leaves me astounded.

I am amazed at the level of polarization and the way we compartmentalize people into different and neatly-defined groups.

An interesting and telling example of this are the way radio stations are organized in the U.S. versus in my home country, Nicaragua.

I grew up listening to a lot of music on the radio while I was living in Nicaragua. My favorite radio station had a good and interesting mix of pop, rock, electronic, and even disco music.

Growing up with this eclectic mix helped me appreciate many different musical genres, and it developed in me a taste of music that was quite varied.

Guns n' Roses played alongside amicably with Savage Garden, and nobody seemed to complain.

When I arrived to the United States, I was hoping to find a similar radio station. I was very frustrated at what I found.

If I wanted rock music I needed to tune in to the local rock station. If I wanted pop music, I needed to tune in to the local Top-40 station. If I wanted disco...you get the point.

And then, I saw how people ridiculed other people's taste of music. Rock music lovers were disgusted at the seeming superficiality and recycled lyrics of pop music. Pop music lovers were disturbed at the apparent masochistic and emo-styled music of rockers.

One group thought the other deficient in one way or the other.

This polarization leaves such obvious blind spots in the way we interact we each other (or for that matter, the way we DON'T interact with each other) that it seems magical how blissfully unaware we are of their existence.

One of the ways we classify people is through their political and ideological world views. We are either part of the Left, or part of the Right. We are either Democrats or Republicans. We are either wishy-washy, everything-goes, bleeding-heart liberals, or we are bigoted, close-minded and judgmental conservatives.

But are we really?

We are All Guilty of Being Judgmental
If we buy into this polarized mentality, then we can't escape being judgmental. Judgmentalism is as directly connected to our polarizing world view as breathing is to oxygen.

Trying not to be judgmental while holding tightly to our exclusive identity is like trying to lose weight on a diet of potato chips. We have to choose one or the other.

Liberals fancy themselves open-minded individuals. They seem to pride themselves on how inclusive and accepting they are. And to a certain extent it's true.

But then I hear them tearing apart people who disagree with them on many issues, with an endless list of ad-hominems, the most famous one being "judgmental".

If you don't see the irony here then I don't know how else to show it to you.

When liberals complain about the conservative's world view, are they not exercising their judgment, and by definition, are they not being judgmental?

When some liberal Christians, for example, make fun and minimize the creedal orthodoxy of some Christians, are they not being judgmental as well?

How many times have I heard comments like, "You still believe in all those fairy tales? I thought you were smarter than that."

I'm not saying that disagreeing with someone or a group of people makes you judgmental, but if you are unwilling to commune with people you disagree with, then it doesn't matter if you are liberal or conservative: you are still judgmental.

Being non-judgmental is much more than simply being accepting of some issues, a niche group of people, or a relevant cause.

It requires deep and hard work, where consistent and perennial observance of one's assumptions and opinions are being kept.

You are not being non-judgmental if you embrace your niche of people and reject and ostracize those whose ideas are different than yours.

This reminds me of what Jesus says about loving your enemies, for if you only love people who love you, what good are you really doing?

To my liberal friends: are you communing with people who disagree with you, who have different political ideas than yours, or are you criticizing their apparent close-mindedness to issues that are dear to you?

Are you keeping communication lines open, listening attentively to their stories, to the reasons they formed the ideas they now hold to,  and even after all is said and done, embracing them just as they are?

Or are you "loving" them from a distance, grimacing at the sight of them?

Being "open" and "accepting" is much more than just holding a required list of progressive agendas. It requires the hard work of loving your enemies.

Damaging the Environment: At What Point Does it Become a Sin?

For the last couple of weeks my mind has been occupied with the issue of Environmental Justice.

Given the release of Pope Francis' encyclical on the environment titled Laudato Si, I'd like to contribute my two cents on this very timely and important issue.

Societal Sin Vs. Individual Sin
As a community organizer I am trained to see societal issues as systemic issues, and much of our labor is focused on changing unjust systems that, we believe, are oppressing individuals.

Under this frame of thought, Environmental Justice can be seen as a systemic issue, and the way to fix the issue would require a change of the systems, the way we day-to-day business.

Under this frame of thought, personal responsibility can at best be recognized as a secondary issue, or at worst be completely disregarded and ignored.

Indeed, some would claim that a call for personal responsibility, in the context of Environmental Justice, is nothing more than a distraction, as our personal contributions (both positive and negative) to the environment pale in comparison to the gargantuan contributions of juggernaut corporations.

This is the dilemma I find myself in: How much personal responsibility do I own in damaging the environment? At what point does it become a sin for me to continue damaging the environment? Does the fact that my personal contribution to the environment is so minimal, compared to our collective carbon addicted systems, mean I'm off the hook?

200 Years from Now, We Will Look Back in Horror to What We Did to the Environment
I believe that 200 years from now we will look back in horror to what we did to the environment in the same way we (hopefully) look back in horror to issues like slavery.

200 years from now, questions will be asked of us, questions like "What were you guys thinking?!" and "How could you be so blind to the consequences of your actions?" and "Why did you wait so long to decide that enough was enough?"

We will look back and question our apparent complacency to systems of unsustainable carbon consumption. We will look back and see that we did a lot of talking, and yes, maybe participated in some actions and protests to change the system, but overall we will be horrified at the irony that we still drove our SUVs or flew in a plane to our environmental justice rallies.

We will look back and marvel at our hypocrisy, for we still drove to our grocery stores, we still bought cars, and we felt good about ourselves for owning a hybrid.

We will look back and realize that more radical action was needed.

As a Christian, what is required of me as I maneuver the two horns of seeking systemic change and personal responsibility? In this context, what does God require of me?

Be the Message: Avoiding a False Dichotomy
I have reached the conclusion that this is a false dichotomy. Seeking systemic justice should not be used as a way out of personal responsibility.

Yes, big corporations and other systems contribute more to damaging the environment.

Yes, even if I and other idividual reduced our carbon footprints it would not be enough to offset the tremendous damage that powerful systems are making to the environment.

But all of this doesn't take away the fact that these systems depend on our active participation to survive and thrive.

I think the solution has to be twofold: we have to embody the message we are proclaiming. We have to live lives that perpetually protest and speak truth to power. We must make changes that may look too radical, and perhaps too inconvenient. And we must do all of these things at the same time that we demand systemic changes.

Would you have trusted, 200 years ago, a self-proclaimed abolitionist who owned slaves?

How is this world to believe us, and how can we dare speak truth to power, unless our lives reflect the change that we demand?

If we work purposefully to not only reduce our own consumption, but to make radical changes in how we contribute negatively to the environment, then our lives will be a much powerful prophetic witness against the powers that be.

Our demands for change will have not only the power of our voices, but will carry the feared power of our character and integrity.

We should make these changes not because our personal choices alone will solve the issue, but because the changes themselves will serve as a prophetic witness to the world around us.

We have to be the message before we proclaim it.

Note: I was planning this post before the horrific events in Charleston, SC. I am grieving this terrorist act along with the nation, but don't have the words to speak to it at this moment. If you'd like to revisit my personal thoughts on racism in this country click here.

American Arrogance & Racism

I have been thinking on the role arrogance has on racism, and how much more connected they might be than it is currently acknowledged.

It seems to me that there is no other period in history where human arrogance reached its height than in the enlightenment period. This, mixed in with a healthy dose of Epicureanism, where the gods, or God, did not interfere with human affairs, turned the scale over to the over-reliance of human achievement, autonomy and power, governed by all powerful Reason, which, in the end made us the center of the universe.

Armed with Reason and autonomy, new constitutions arose, new ways of doing government saw the light of day. Modern day civilization was born. This peculiar civilization, however, was mostly European.

Those who adhered to this sort of mentality and worldview were view as "civilized". Missionaries bought into this mentality and included in their preaching of the gospel a good measure of "civilizing savages". That our civilized culture was superior was unquestioned.

And so, white Europeans were civilized, and therefore better, and the rest were "savages" with their only hope of redemption being civilized with western ideologies.

Western civilization was King, the god of the new age.

This disgusting arrogance only added more fuel to the fire of racism, where people who did not fully adhere to our enlightenment worldview were viewed as savages, and therefore, inferior.

Native-Americans, Africans, and those less "civilized" nations, were deemed as less than humans.

If this arrogance is indeed connected to racism, then part of our solution to racism has to deal with humility.

We still carry this arrogance, especially in the United States. Much has been said about our arrogance and sense of entitlement that I don't need to prove the point here.

How many times, with patriotic spirits, have I heard people proclaim "this is the greatest country of the world!"

How many times have I heard presidents proclaim the U.S. as the beacon of hope to the rest of the world, with the greatest insert virtue here "the world has ever seen".

This is nothing short than bullying patriotism, and it causes more harm than good. This is false love of country, for true love "does not boast..." (1st Corinthian 13:4).

Anti-racism without humility is like trying to be a democratic leader with a heart full of dictatorship dreams. A shift of worldview, away from the arrogance of western civilization, needs to happen for the fertile ground of anti-racism to fully materialize.

Maybe what we need, to address the poisonous state of racism in this nation, is to first deal with our arrogance, repent from it, and seek humility before God. Maybe, with this new-found humility, we can start seeing the other as they are: human beings made in the image of God.