Ah yes, the Nutty Professor (aka Leo Sandy of Plymouth State University) penned a column that just called for a bit of commentary. Although we have commented on him before, be sure that he is a very left-wing person who would have no problem in confiscating other peoples’ property for fairness and believes that we, as a nation, should renounce our sovereignty to the United Nations.
Professor Sandy has given us a column that perfectly shows the condescending and patronizing attitude that Progressives have toward most of the general public.
Instead of reinforcing his phrase "must accept the person as he or she is" and thereby acknowledging that the vast majority of the public are grown adults, he clearly elucidates and provides the perfect example of one of the Pillars of Progressivism – we, the elite, must "progress" the rest of society to a higher plane of being – we must undertake to "perfect you" – and then continues his column as if we are mere children under his tutelage.
He uses the horrible tragedy in Tuscon of a seemingly deranged person to subsume the notion of personal responsibility and free will to that of the Progressive ideal: it is the sense of a Collective responsibility & salvation, an entire society, that drives an individual to actions resulting in bad outcomes. The lesson he attempts to teach is that if only the rest of us were as self-actualized as he, society would be a wonderful utopia (but not until we all think like him).
What about his acceptance of who we are, sir, for it is clear that he will not. The majority of his words were spent in lecturing us on civility and the marketing of another Pillar of Progressivism – that of technocrats guiding the rest of society via a "scientific society" as his lecture of Maslov’s principles of psychology pointedly outlines. Then and only then, will we all live in efficiency, harmony and kumbaya-ness.
Hmmm, I do seem to remember a Letter from him just before the Nov. 2 election that pretty much made Republicans and Conservatives out to be the spawn of Satan and the second coming of Attila and his Horde. Acceptance of “the other”, Leo?
Perhaps before we allow the Progressives to “perfect we children” to his level of conformance of political correctness and behavior (where much of it demands we give up our individual selves to the collective), may I suggest that he spend a few moments contemplating the three words: mote, beam, eye.
From the Daily Sun (P 4) (reformatted to be more bloggish):
Needs & civilitySome people may view the tragedy in Tucson as the actions of a mentally deranged person acting in a vacuum. However, even insane people are not immune to their surroundings. All actions occur in context, and many forces are brought to bear on an individual’s decision to commit a heinous act. It is naïve and simplistic to believe that individuals simply act on their free will and that environmental experiences have no bearing on individual actions. This is another convenient fallacy to absolve society of any responsibility to prevent and appropriately deal with human problems. It’s what Richard Nixon referred to as “benign neglect” – a major contradiction in terms.
There are two aspects of this tragedy that need to be examined. One is the individual pathology of the shooter and the other is the cultural context that pushes unstable people over the edge whereby their aggressive fantasies are no longer contained but acted out. While it seems obvious that Jared Loughner was not normal, I will leave his specific diagnosis to mental health experts and focus mainly on aspects of the immediate culture of Arizona and the greater culture of the United States. Arizona has enacted a draconian immigration law that is nothing but a legalized form of ethnic profiling. Instead of arresting people who hire illegal immigrants, Arizona has decided to go after people who are just trying to survive. Another characteristic of Arizona is the recent denial of Medicare transplants to people who will die without them. Arizona also allows people 21 and over to carry a concealed weapon without a permit. What do these things say about Arizona?
Aside from the high level of handgun violence that exists in the U.S. and the fact that three quarters of the world’s serial killers roam our states, and that we are one of the few, if not only, developed countries in the world that still uses the death penalty, the more recent problem in our society is the increasing trend toward incivility at the highest levels of government, in the media and in daily discourse. For example, it is now common for students to swear at and call their teachers derogatory names. In one clip from an O’Reilly show, O’Reilly asked an anti-war Iraq veteran why he was against the war. When the person tried to answer, O’Reilly told him to shut up numerous times. Finally, O’Reilly told the person to leave or O’Reilly would assault him. Recently, a video was shown about Captain Honors of the Enterprise (my old ship) behaving disgracefully in an attempt to boost troop morale. When sexism and homophobia are used to build morale, we have surely lost our moral compass. What he did was wrong period. My commanding officer, Captain Dupoix, the first CO of the Enterprise, and who is now 93 years old, would never have done such a thing. He always presented himself as dignified and professional.
One way to view the massacre in Tucson is through the lens of Abraham Maslow’s theory of a Hierarchy of Needs that assumes that people act on unmet needs rather than conditioning or aggressive instincts. Given the findings that most mass murderers kill to be recognized, the theory may apply to the shooter. It seems to be even more applicable to all those who value violence and use violent language, that is, those who contribute to a toxic culture and who may provide the motivation for people like Loughner to go over the edge. The needs that Maslow studied are sequential in that as each need is met, the person can go onto higher needs. These needs are physiological (hunger, thirst), safety (security), love-affection-belongingness, esteem (respect), and self-actualization (full human development).
At the highest or self-actualized level would be people like Gandhi, Mother Teresa, Cardinal Romero, Martin Luther King,Jr., Albert Schweitzer and many other who show compassion to others and eschew violence. I cannot envision any of these people yelling, swearing at or calling people names. When society does its job, it can produce more people like these. Nurturing environments are powerful in their positive effects.
When individuals live with poverty, neglect and abuse, it is hard for them to develop the capacity for rational thought, self-esteem, empathy, compassion, self-control and independence. Some do land on their feet only because of strong resiliency and compensating experiences. However, no responsible society should leave such things to chance. Dysfunctional family environments and a culture of violence retard human development. When a child does not have his or her needs met in a family, it can lead to many problems, and when the culture is rife with violence in language, in the media and in sports, it can exacerbate individual problems. Thus, the society bears some responsibility for the violent acts of its citizens. The U.S. Constitution mentions the need to “insure domestic tranquility” and “promote the general welfare”. This does not suggest benign neglect to me. Instead, it suggests a very proactive and prosocial approach to government that is very attuned to Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Domestic tranquility and general welfare are the foundations of a peaceful and just society.
In order to develop people to be self-actualized, the structures of society must use human development as their main reference point, always asking the question, “Is this good for children?” We also need to focus on the following to enhance civility in society:
- We should teach people to be authentic, to be aware of their inner selves and to hear their inner-feeling voices.
- We should teach people to transcend their cultural conditioning and become world citizens.
- We should help people discover their vocation in life, their calling, fate or destiny. This is especially focused on finding the right career and the right mate.
- We should teach people that life is precious, that there is joy to be experienced in life, and if people are open to seeing the good and joyous in all kinds of situations, it makes life worth living.
- We must accept the person as he or she is and help the person learn their inner nature. From real knowledge of aptitudes and limitations we can know what to build upon, what potentials are really there.
- We must see that the person’s basic needs are satisfied. This includes safety, belongingness, and esteem needs.
- We should refreshen consciousness, teaching the person to appreciate beauty and the other good things in nature and in living.
- We should teach people that controls are good, and complete abandon is bad. It takes control to improve the quality of life in all areas.
- We should teach people to transcend the trifling problems and grapple with the serious problems in life. These include the problems of injustice, of pain, suffering, and death.
- We must teach people to be good choosers. They must be given practice in making good choices.
- We must also reach out to people whose ideas and beliefs run counter to our own so that we can enter into a dialogue, agree to disagree and even get to a point where we can learn from each other. The more I get to know those who disagree with me, the less I see them as abstractions and the more I want to befriend them.
Look, each of these things are fine and of themselves, but each and every column of his is pretty much built around these themes as if we didn’t know them already in advance (or his columns, for that matter).
