Two news
stories arose in the same week, each illustrating the significance
of living one’s life with integrity. The first involved allegations
that Republican Congressman Mark Foley had engaged in explicit
sexual e-mail conversations with teen-aged male pages. The other
informed us of the killing and wounding of a number of young Amish
children by a deranged man. In the mirror images of these events
are reflected both the pathological nature of our world, as well
as a vision of how a society might function when men and women
live with principled wholeness.
By “integrity,”
I mean living one’s life without contradiction or moral confusion;
being integrated – or centered – in thought and action; expressing
both spiritual and material values without conflict; and having
an uncomplicated mind with which to function, creatively, in a
complicated world.
The reaction
of the political establishment and its self-styled opinion leaders
to the Foley matter illustrates the utter lack of integrity in
political systems. Statists and a bamboozled public can recite
the virtues of “peace,” “freedom,” “protection of life and property,”
“responsibility,” and other life-sustaining qualities to be sustained
by the state while, at the same time, engaging in wars, restraints
on individual liberty, the killing and looting of individuals,
and acting without being accountable for the consequences of their
behavior.
The state
– which enjoys a legal monopoly on the use of violence
does nothing more than steal people’s property, force them
to do what they do not choose to do, and kill millions upon millions
of persons whom it is convenient to its interests to destroy in
wars and genocides. Such perversions – far more damaging to young
people and to a nation than are lewd e-mails – pass without criticism
within the halls of state, academia, or media studios. That so
many of us continue to see the political system as essential to
“social order” reflects our intellectual and spiritual bankruptcy,
as well as providing testimony to the remarkable effectiveness
of the state’s propaganda machinery.
The state
survives on our individualized lack of integrity. For most of
us, our thinking and emotions are in conflict; our principles
are muddled. It is our weaknesses that keep it strong. Not wanting
to confront the contradictions that lie within our unconscious
minds, many of us eagerly project our self-directed fears onto
others, and demand their punishment, a debilitating practice
upon which the state depends for its existence. Mr. Foley provides
a vivid example of how this trait corrupts all sense of integrity
in both the individual and the political institution. As a man
with an apparent penchant for sexual conversations with teen-aged
boys over the Internet, he was Co-Chairman of the Missing and
Exploited Children Caucus, and authored legislation “Internet
Crimes Against Children” – that may have criminalized his actions.
The political
establishment has circled the wagons against Mr. Foley, treating
his offense as sui generis. But his wrongs pale in comparison
with those regularly engaged in by virtually all members of congress
and the executive branch: including the use of outright lies,
forgeries, and other forms of deceit to fabricate conflicts with
other nations. On the basis of such intrinsic and pervasive dishonesty,
the state sends young men and women off to foreign countries to
kill or maim innocent people, and be killed or maimed themselves.
The use of torture against anyone the state deems “suspicious”
is now widely accepted in Congress and, apparently, among the
general public. Such dishonest and destructive acts continue with
only token objection. But let someone direct lascivious e-mail
messages to teenagers and the forces of self-righteous indignation
are loosed.
By contrast,
if there is a sizeable community of people in America who live
with a more centered sense of wholeness than do the Amish, I have
not discovered it. I have long admired these people, and spend
one class session each year discussing them in my informal systems
of order seminar. One year, after a lengthy description and analysis
of their ways, one of my students asked whether it was possible
for non-Amish people to go live with them. “Why would you want
to do so?,” I inquired. “Do you share their religious views, or
have a desire to do farm work? Are you prepared to live the austere
lifestyle upon which they insist?”
My student
answered “no” to these questions, acknowledging that she was too
much of a Southern California person to make such a fundamental
change in how she would live. “So, what is so powerful about the
Amish that attracts you to the possibility of living amongst them?”,
I asked. “Is there something about the integrity of their lives
that you find so compelling?” I then urged my students to explore
the question of whether there is a way of emulating the Amish
system in a major urban setting.
It is the
integrity of the Amish that attracts most of us and makes us want
to defend their freedom to live as they do. Over the years, state
and federal governments have tried to force the Amish into their
coercive systems, such as government schools, Social Security,
military conscription, jury duty, etc. The Amish – consistent
with their peaceful ways – have always refused such participation.
I recall, in the mid-1960s, the efforts of one state school system
to force Amish children to attend government schools. A front-page
newspaper photograph was about as expressive of the contrast between
these two cultures as you could find: an armed sheriff’s deputy
chasing Amish children through a cornfield in order to force them
onto a school-bus. The scene was so repugnant to any sense of
human decency that even most Republicans and Democrats insisted
that the state drop its efforts. There seems to be a widely-held
sentiment in society – perhaps faint echoes from our dying inner
voices – that the Amish should be left alone.
Those who
wonder if it is possible for people to live in a condition of
anarchy need look no further than the example of the Amish. These
people refuse to have any dealings with the state – except for
the taxes they are forced to pay – and respect the inviolability
of one another’s person or property interests. Their contracts
with one another are grounded in nothing more than mutual promises
to perform. Their system of protection and security is found in
one another, not in institutions. Anyone who deviates from Amish
community standards need fear no jails, fines, beatings, or confiscation
of their property: the neighbors will simply refuse to deal with
them – to withhold their approval until the offender reforms.
To the Amish,
their work – particularly as farmers and carpenters – is the worldly
expression of their religious views. Unlike many of the rest of
us – whose divisive separation from our work is reflected in negative
bumper-stickers – the Amish find wholeness in their labors. Nor
do the Amish regard technology as an “evil”; they resist bringing
anything into their communities that will make them dependent
on the outside world. Thus, the automobile is not looked upon
as the “work of the devil,” but as a tool which, if brought into
their lives, will make them dependent upon tire and parts manufacturers,
oil companies, and the suppliers of other auto necessities, the
net effect of which would be to destroy their system.
The Amish
community provides its members no more guarantees of protection
from hostile elements than does the dominant political structure
in America. Not unlike our experiences on 9/11, the Amish world
was terribly disrupted by the intrusion of a destructive force
from the outside. Though the innocent victims were at work in
a humble schoolhouse rather than towering skyscrapers, the Amish
shared with others the painful consequences of disturbed men from
a deranged world who could find only in their suicidal attacks
the most effective expression of their conflict-ridden madness.
I doubt,
however, that members of the Amish community will respond to the
slaughter of their children in the same way most Americans reacted
to 9/11. Even with the holes ripped into the fabric of their culture,
the Amish will be able to transcend these horrible events without
sacrificing the integrity upon which their lives are founded.
They will not put aside the principled nature of their society,
but will find comfort and energy within it. They have already
demonstrated this.
But
for those of us who still struggle with the meaning and effects
of 9/11, and who do so on the basis of principles and practices
that are a mass of confusion, conflict, and contradiction, our
responses have proven consistent with the normally neurotic –
and often psychotic – foundations upon which our social systems
rest. Our alleged principles and values – which have long found
expression only as empty abstractions rather than integrated into
our sense of being – were among the first unwanted cargo to be
thrown overboard, lest they prove a hindrance to the onrushing
sea of fear and doubt in which we found ourselves. We eagerly
jettisoned our compasses as well, allowing the politically ambitious
to chart new directions for us, and obeying their urgings to “stay
the course” to wholly unknown destinations.
The
Amish will survive their pain, bruises, and broken hearts, but
they will do so intact. Their values will sustain them, while
ours have been lost in the darkness in which we live our lives.
Such are the pragmatic, real-world, “bottom line” contrasts –
and consequences – between living with and without integrity.
Perhaps my
seminar student was on the right track when she asked whether
it was possible to live in such a community as the Amish enjoy.