“We all are going to die,” at least according to a prominent senator. This observation leads to two conclusions, both of which are unsatisfying. One is that religion (Christianity, according to the senator) will provide “salvation” in the next life, so we don’t need to fix things in this life. The other is that no matter what we do, we will die and that will be that.
Further, our collective failures might one day become a burden we will be unable to bear. Kenneth Clark once suggested that civilizations die of exhaustion – because people simply lose the will to be civilized. No civilization has survived mass resignation.
Must humanity endure cycle after cycle of optimistic growth and ignominious decline? Must we allow a few, guided by their avarice, vanity, and hubris, to burn through centuries of progress, only to destroy what others have struggled to build?
The last 30 years have revealed that no matter how far we have come, ignorance, fear, and hate have traveled with us. In the 1970’s, I had high hopes that bigotry and sexism, among other primitive reactions to those who are not like us, would in my lifetime be practiced by a relative few, and most of us would agree to at least live and let live. Now, it seems conformity, inequality, and alienation have displaced their antonyms.
We rush to find someone to blame – those who are most vulnerable generally. And it’s easy to dehumanize those who are somehow different. They can be demonized, ostracized, accused, arrested, jailed, deported, and killed before enough of us come to our senses and reclaim what’s left of our decency. Nevertheless, if our lives don’t measure up to our expectations, generally it’s not because this or that group is holding us back. Perhaps we need to examine our own lives, as Socrates suggested, before we blame our problems on others.
Margaret Mead reportedly said, “A broken femur that has healed is evidence that someone has taken the time to stay with the one who fell, has bound up the wound, has carried the person to safety, and has tended the person through recovery. Helping someone else through difficulty is where civilization starts.” I’m not sure that’s the start of civilization, but it seems to me compassion is a necessary ingredient. Whenever a population becomes callous to the needs of others, turns them into scapegoats, or uses them as cannon fodder in the name of “the greater good,” their society is on shaky ground.
While helping others is extremely important, perhaps a more revealing part of the mix is that “civilized” people continue to argue about who they should care for – family, friends, neighbors, tribes, villages, cities, nations, colors, genders, ages, abilities – and there are some who can’t resist ranking other human beings in order of supposed “value.” It seems to me the debate about who deserves care reflects childish thought and morality. Jesus clarified, “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.”
Some champion a “right to life” while shrugging their shoulders with the thought that “we all are going to die.” Certainly, we are. The question is, how can we prevent unnecessary deaths and possibly extend human life? Otherwise, what good does it do to say we are pro-life? In the last century or two, average life expectancy has nearly doubled. What if doctors, scientists, donors, businesses, and governments had given up because we’re all going to die anyway? Many animals take care of their young, but so far none of them have been able to conduct research, discover vaccines and treatments, fund health care, or regulate their environment.
So, what’s the point? Should we just wait for death to take us, especially the young, old, sick, or disabled? Should we deflect responsibility by saying, “better days are coming by and by?” Should good health and long life continue to be the privileges of the rich, as these have tended to be for thousands of years?
Or should civilized people reject the notion that “those people” are on their own because “we all are going to die?” Could there be a better way? Could it be that the point is to build a society that looks for reasons to care rather than reasons not to?
All our mighty machines, towering cities, formidable weapons, technological innovations, and financial achievements will amount to nothing if we just let people die. If there is no greater purpose, humans are no better than microbes that live, eat, excrete, and die until they finally become extinct. What if the goal of civilization is to build a better world for our children’s children in as many ways as possible? How can we do this if we shrug at the idea of preserving life?
One might argue that one percent of the world has always decided what would become of the other ninety-nine percent. It seems if one is rich enough, there is no need to care about those who are not. Yet, the world was not made for the few. A small number are not entitled to prosper at the expense of the rest. The words, “we all are going to die,” are a rationalization for those who have decided to give up on others. Let’s not do that.
MurrayWorks 