Justice for All

We’ve been through a lot in the last 40 or 50 years together. We’ve witnessed some significant changes in our landscape and in our environment. All those changes didn‘t just take place around us. They altered and reformed us internally as well and quite possibly were set in motion to lead us to a bigger moment.

As members of a great world, in order to understand what makes it great, it is important for us to realize what has remained steadfast throughout this time of change.

Within the limitations of a fair and reasonable society, we remain free to choose our own paths and speak our own minds. Our thoughts and beliefs, no matter how silly or inappropriate, may be displayed publicly even in a form such as this where intent may be so easily misconstrued and content may be so easily inspected and misjudged.

But when speaking of our rights today, in the midst of relentless change, we must remind ourselves what the almost foreign and antique word “unalienable” really means. It was written so long ago that now we may take for granted that it has endured some change as well.

In truth, the meaning of that word has not changed. It still means our rights are undeniable, absolute and impossible to forfeit.

Even if you accept that, we’ve learned that every now and then we still have to demand our rights from those who find the opportunity to deny them. We are now reminded of that fact every year as we celebrate the life of Martin Luther King, Jr.

I know we are reminded of a few other things as well. I did not know King other than through his celebrity but I suffered his death along with so many.

I understand he was no saint but was an imperfect man as prone to error, misperception and addiction as we all are. Unfortunately, once a man has a national holiday named after him, the myths have a tendency to become legend and the human truth is packed away. In spite of this distraction, as significant to his life story as it may be, he did teach us a lot about our rights and left us a perfect legacy to contemplate.

Unwittingly, perhaps, he also taught us what it means to be a true martyr for a cause. It is not news that the many odd people in this world who desire fame and martyrdom could learn from King’s example. As it turned out, from him we learned martyrdom is not earned by a fleeting human whim and a martyr is not selected by his or her desire to be one, no matter how passionate that desire may be. In fact, a true martyr is like a genius savant or exceptional athlete, chosen from the wide display of humanity for reasons unknown to us all, doomed by their own unique gift and elevated not by their cause or ability alone but by the perfect reason and justness of their actions.

And, to me at least, the utter beauty of King’s non-violent protest can’t be denied.

King’s cause was a simple yet powerful demand that if we are to say all men are created equals then we must constantly and without deviation put that concept into common practice. Yes, if not practiced, needless and painful human tragedy is the result. Our government, our society and our culture must all support this notion otherwise suffer the disease of hypocrisy.

And as all heavy thinkers know, hypocrisy is the mother of all evils.

Hypocrisy is usually well hidden and often curiously justified. The document used by King as a basis for his demand for equality was our Declaration of Independence.

“I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed - we hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.”

MLK, Jr, Address at March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, 1963

The Declaration does say all men are created equal and our founders signed off on that. After those words were written, King pointed out that the only unusual and curious part is how the same men who were once comforted by that document spent the next 150 years or so ignoring it.

There is evidence today which suggests at least some people listened when King pointed this out to us. Then again, there is evidence that any progress on that matter has been all too slow and incredibly reluctant.

For me, I prefer to believe the words “on this earth” are written after the word “men”. I don’t think that’s an unrealistic alteration. Honestly, if that document were written again today, I’m sure the word “men” would be changed to “mankind” or some other similarly sweeping term. I think it’s reasonable to assume the original idea was about all people, everywhere, not just in our country alone.

In fact, some organizations have tried to restate the meaning of that document a time or two. Perhaps the most significant attempt was with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) ratified by the United Nations in 1948.

In order to be somewhat politically acceptable to most everyone at the time, the UDHR is not established as a rule of international law but only described as an “obligation” for nations of the world to observe and consider. It does go a bit further than the American declaration by defining certain rights such as freedom of opinion and expression, freedom from torture and inhumane treatment, and the right to an education.

“Taken as a whole, the Delegation of the United States believes that this (UDHR) is a good document – even a great document – and we propose to give it our full support.”

Eleanor Roosevelt, 1948

Well, perhaps what Eleanor meant to say was that we propose to give it our full support in the same manner as our own declaration. Like our own declaration, we tend to only recognize human rights causes which meet the test of our own self-interests.

The truth is that the American law of the land today is rooted not in wordy declarations to protect individual people but in the pure sense of National Interests. Our money, our time, our lives are all subjugated to this singular concern. We may talk the talk of inalienable rights, but the de facto practice is to deny those rights to both our brothers within our borders and our cousins from without when it meets the needs of our nation.

I’ve often wondered what National Interests we serve every day. Our government leaders love to issue a sort of blanket clause by saying we direct our national resources, military forces or diplomatic influences only in the service of National Interests. Rarely do they go on to describe exactly what constitutes those interests and that is more than just a shame.

For example, I think it would be refreshing to hear a talking head say we only commit the overwhelming weight of American military forces when American lives are directly threatened. Then the burden of proof would be on the government to show how that condition exists. It seems natural to me for such strict guidelines to be established when pondering the use of lethal force and the ultimate sacrifice of our sons and daughters.

Instead, the words “National Interests” are tossed around to reserve the government’s right to use our most precious resources for all mysterious purposes under the sun, not necessarily to protect our own individual rights.

Of course, America is not alone as all nations of the world follow suit. But what we do, the way we offer our “full support” to human rights does influence others. I am one of those people who say only our actions prove what we truly believe. I say the day we place the rights of individuals from around the world above the needs of our “corporate citizens”, above the needs of our “national ego” and above our need to win every confrontation is the day we can say the lofty dream of equality was not murdered in Memphis in 1968. Only then will people have no choice but to honor our words.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence, 1776

Self-evident … undeniable … really? There are philosophers who argue that no one can claim unalienable rights since no proof exists that they were ever “endowed by their Creator”. I admit this is a confounding problem for me. Well, modern philosophy as whole confounds me. If nothing else, I am pleased that Mr. Jefferson took the time to try and explain his philosophy and where he thought these rights came from anyway.

Years apart, Jefferson and King both pointed us in the same direction using similar methods, using tools surely fashioned by their upbringing. They both suggested our rights are self-evident and undeniable based on the gifts of an unseen Creator and bequeathed in traditional Christian scripture.

If we were to leave the justification for human rights at the doorstep of an indescribable “Creator”, then I’m afraid we will have nothing but argument on this subject to the end of time. Not everyone around this world, much less our own country, can agree on what our Creator was or is or even what might have possibly motivated our own existence.

But, based on my experiences, I think most everyone agrees that our common purpose is not found in the alternative. Nobody I’ve met seems to feel we were created to live under the abject tyranny of another man. Nobody I’ve met seems to think we were bred to serve oppressive dictatorships or monarchies of any kind. Nobody I’ve met believes we grow to enjoy individual minds and free voices just to have them hammered shut by agents of any self-serving government.

Perhaps only those who are practiced in the art of tyranny, dictatorship and self-serving government believe any of that.

Unlike Jefferson or King, I can’t plant my flag of undeniable rights in the holy ground of scripture. On the contrary, I think the proof of their self-evidence is found in something far more natural and worldly, something else that Jefferson and King liked to preach about.

To me, our rights are unalienable based on a common understanding held in the breast of every person, every monarch and every peasant who ever walked this earth. It is pure justice in its most simplistic form.

There may be a day in the not-too-distant future when the world-wide soul is finally realized and laid bare, when we all communicate on a global scale and fully understand what we all already knew. When that happens, I think we may be surprised to learn just how common our belief in justice really is.

When justice rules our days and our actions both at home and abroad instead of selfish and greedy interests of wealth and power … well, then it will be a bigger moment and we can all say we are equals and that we are truly free.

"Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."

MLK, Jr, Letter from a Birmingham jail, 1963

Cheers,

Mb