Negotiation Rather Than Faith in Institutions
by: Valerie Elverton-Dixon on February 2nd, 2010 | 4 Comments »
In President Obama’s first State of the Union Address, he spoke of a loss of faith in our nation’s biggest institutions. He is correct. Faith is a fragile thing. It is intangible. We cannot measure it, or weight it, or know what color it is or how it smells or tastes. We cannot tell by touch the texture of it. Faith never stands alone. It walks hand in hand with doubt. “I believe, help my unbelief.” (Mark 9:24). When faith is broken, it is very very difficult to repair. Faith, like love, requires courage because we expose our vulnerabilities when we believe.
Faith in the transcendent, in God, however we understand the concept, comes over time. It comes with experience. Our childhood faith grows into a mature faith when we have done our best, acted in accordance with what we thought a loving and just God would require and have nevertheless been disappointed, nonplussed, undone, hurt. Time passes and we come to see how the thing that hurt us so deeply was the thing that made us stronger and taught us an important lesson. The disappointment was a tool that hollowed out a space that was later filled with more accomplishment, more love, more joy. The disappointment became a blessing for which we thank a merciful and loving God. And our faith in God grows.
In contrast, when human beings and institutions disappoint us and our faith is broken, our trust is never quite the same. Even if we are able to restore our faith, it is a cracked vessel and the evidence of the fissure remains. Our faith in many of our public institutions was broken a long time ago. The credibility gap during the Vietnam War, Watergate, the savings and loan scandals, corrupt politicians, abusive clergy, Enron, World Com, big pharmaceutical companies selling bad drugs, the media cooperation in selling the Iraq war to the public, the financial crisis of 2008 are a few of the events that have broken public faith in our biggest institutions.
Now, we have to live in relationship to our institutions –government, business, media, even faith institutions – with a moral logic that does not require faith. That logic is the logic of enlightened self interest. The people who run these institutions make decisions according to their own self interests and according to the interests of the institutions within which they work. In a democratic republic, citizens need not have faith in the people who work within the structures of government. We give and withdraw our support of our elected officials according to how effective they are in advancing our wellbeing and the wellbeing of our nation.
This is how the founders structured our government. They lived in a theological moment in history that taught that humanity was a fallen creation, that there was no intrinsic good upon which we could rely. They had no faith in humanity’s ability to act purely from the common good. This is the reason there are checks and balances built into our system of government. They did, however, believe that human beings would act in their own self interest. We see this at work in our politics today. Republican obstructionists clearly think that it is in their own self-interest to block legislative progress. It seems as if the logic is that if Democrats cannot get anything done, then the voters will turn to Republicans in the next election. We will see in November whether or not this strategy will work.
When citizens get enough of hyper-partisan obstructionism, we ought to vote the people out of office who are not cooperating to get our business done. We ought to relieve them of the responsibility we have given them. This is true with other institutions as well. When banks misuse our money, we ought to move it. When the media gives us half-baked, echo-chamber, sound-bite journalism, we ought to write, complain, and/or choose a different news outlet. When businesses are dishonest, we ought to do business with a different company. We ought not to invest our money in them.
The important thing about faith, because it is at once powerful and irreparably fragile, is that we ought not to put our faith in everything or everyone. We ought to choose the people in which we have faith very carefully. We ought to put our faith in that which is ultimate, in Radical Love. The rest is a negotiation.



Valerie –
This is a radical post that will set me thinking for a good long while. I come from a time and place that still hung onto a naive sense of optimism and trust. I have let go of much of that over the last 40 years as a result of the issues and events you cite in your post. But when I read, “We ought to put our faith in that which is ultimate, in Radical Love. The rest is negotiation,” it made me almost gasp. I’m a feminist who completely shares finances with her husband — because I trust him and our relationship, our ability to work things out. My husband (who comes from the same sort of background) is a businessman who says that trust is the most important currency in a business relationship. So…although I might agree with you in principle, I doubt that I would agree with you in practice.
And as I write this response, I’m not sure I want to agree with you. We live in a time when we have to protect ourselves as individuals — from scam artists, (many) politicians, (many) businesses, (many) media outlets, etc. But to reduce (almost) all human interactions to the market relationships of negotiation based on enlightened self-interest is not the path towards the future I hope for. In fact, the reason I decided I would blog for Tikkun Daily has a lot to do with the “Global Marshall Plan” and its strategy of generosity and the Network of Spiritual Progressives who declare that one of their central goals is “to create a world that is safe for love, intimacy, and caring, a world in which these aspects of life are not undermined but supported by the economic, political, social, intellectual, cultural and media institutions of the society.” Of course, we can’t be Pollyannas about who we’ll trust. But if we just continue to follow our enlightened self-interest, I don’t believe we’re moving in the direction of the caring world I want to create.
Nancy,
Thank you for your comments. I am always happy when anything I write makes someone stop a moment and think.
I do not say that we ought not to trust anyone or any institution. I say we ought to be careful in whom we place our faith. Trust, generosity, intimacy,and caring are not antithetical to enlightened self interest. I think we ought to trust the power of our own radical love loving to transform the world into the place we want it to be.
Peace,
Valerie
Valerie — I’ve also been influenced by the gift economy people (see http://imow.org/economica/stories/viewStory?storyId=4777 as an example). Negotiation fits in with the exchange economy we now live within, and the gift economy is the utopia I think we’re aiming for.
Nancy,
I read the essay that you reference and I think there are some interesting ideas there. When we consider the gift, it is something that is not paid back. If we pay back a gift, we have entered into an economic exchange. I am influenced here by the work of the late French philosopher, Jacques Derrida. When he discusses cultures where gift-giving is an important aspect of the economy, he points out the reality that at some point, after some time has passed, a gift is given to the giver.
This is certainly true with the gift of mothering, the gift of parenting, or nurturing. As infants we receive the gift, when our parents become elders, we give the gift of care back to them. When considering our moral relationships with institutions, I am not sure the logic of the gift applies. My vote is not a gift. It is an instrument of accountability. I give it to a person or a party that has worked to earn it, has worked to make my country a better place in which to live. This is also true for media, banks, businesses. This is where the logic of negotiation applies. And the radical love loving that I speak of is a love that is fiercely protects family, community, nation and world from exploitation by people who would take our trust and abuse it for their own ends.
Thanks for sending me this essay.
Peace,
Valerie