Casual Cruelty

The recent, self-aggrandizing declaration by James Dobson, that he may be quiting the GOP, brings hope to all that the menace of casual cruelty may once again recede into the shadows of American life.

Since the 1960s, Americans had worked hard to teach our children that both calculated and unthinking pain inflicted on others--be it through violence or humiliation--is a blight on our country. To be a good person, we have taught our children, is not only to reject casual cruelty, but to help build a society that rejects it. And America has become a better place as a result of that effort.

Since the 1970s, however, Dobson has worked to teach America's children the exact opposite lesson: that a healthy America begins with the act of inflicting pain on others. Dobson's casual cruelty is anchored in a sadistic view of parenting that he articulated in books that brought him great financial success--books that preached the notion that parents must inflict pain on their toddlers or else risk turning them into bad Americans.

While Dobson claims his sadistic method of parenting creates 'values,' America do not agree. Our 'values' come from a different place and can be summed up in just a few words:

end cruelty toward others

This idea has a very specific implication for American politics--that the purpose of our civic life is to band together and work in unison to end cruelty and sadism in our society. With occasional setbacks, American society has pushed forward in that direction.

As American philosopher Richard Rorty (1931-2007) once wrote:

the casual infliction of humiliation is much less socially acceptable than it was during the first two-thirds of the century. The tone in which educated men talk about women, and educated whites about blacks, is very different from what it was before the Sixties. Life for homosexual Americans, beleaguered and dangerous as it still is, is better than it was before Stonewall. The adoption of attitudes which the Right sneers as "politically correct" has made America a far more civilized society that it was thirty years ago. Except for a few Supreme Court decisions, there has been little change for the better in our country's laws since the Sixties. But the change in the way we treat one another has been enormous

the casual infliction of humiliation is much less socially acceptable than it was during the first two-thirds of the century. The tone in which educated men talk about women, and educated whites about blacks, is very different from what it was before the Sixties. Life for homosexual Americans, beleaguered and dangerous as it still is, is better than it was before Stonewall. The adoption of attitudes which the Right sneers as "politically correct"€� has made America a far more civilized society that it was thirty years ago. Except for a few Supreme Court decisions, there has been little change for the better in our countryâ€'s laws since the Sixties. But the change in the way we treat one another has been enormous

(Achieving Our Country, p. 81)

By teaching parents to treat their children with pain, Dobson tried to turn back the clock. Thank goodness he failed.

Rorty understood what Dobson did not: we may not agree with everything that our neighbors or our children do, but in disagreeing we must not be sadistic. To treat others with violence, to carelessly inflict humiliation--that is the fundamental violation of American values that we do not tolerate as a society. If a person's vision of the family violates that idea--as is so painfully evident in Dobson's view--then it will not last long in this country. Because Americans reject casual cruelty and they will continue to do so.

James Dobson has made his money bucking this idea, and he will likely continue to retain a certain influence and power in a fringe of the Republican Party (or his new "Dobson Party"). But his short-term success at forcing casual cruelty back to the heart of American life will never return to what it once was.

And not a moment too soon.

(cross-posted from Frameshop)

Comments

[Plus15]

James Dobson: "When I returned I held up the belt and again told my angry dog to get into his bed. He stood his ground, so I gave him a firm swat across the rear end and he tried to bite the belt. The tiny dog and I had the most vicious fight ever staged between man and beast¦ I eventually got him to bed, but only because I outwieighed him 200 to 12".

What a wonderful, heroic, God loving man. Where does this country find these rabid turds and how and why does the media and some of our fellow citizens go to such lengths to turn them into "admirable" examples of our world?

[bookish]

Dobson got too big for his britches and realized even he has to do his share of GOPer backscratching. He's not going anywhere. What, and renounce the limelight? Without churchiness and GOPers he's just another goof.

[Camel54]

I am certainly no fan of Dobson and his ilk, but for the sake of discussion I have to ask some questions:

Is it really wrong to inflict a small amount of pain onto a child in order to prevent severe injury or death? Children aren't reasonable. You can't make a child understand consequences on the same level as most adults do. Obviously, I'm not saying they should be beaten, but I am asking is a slap on the hand worse than a one-year-old putting a spit covered finger into a socket? Is a swat on the butt worse than a two-year-old running into the street?

I hate to sound like the right-winger here, but there is a serious discipline problem in this country. Schools are in the state they are at least in part because the students are running things. They refuse to be disciplined for anything or their parents run in and attack the teachers and threaten lawsuits. They are growing up into the spoiled work-force that demands praise and awards simply for showing up and doing what they are hired to do.

Spanking may not be the answer, likely it isn't, but the direction we're heading now is certainly not either.

[gulopartisan]

Enforced, fair, consistent punishment for behavior that has been prohibited works nicely without violence. I spanked my son once, and he turned out just fine -- bright, fairminded, with all the values Americans pay lip service to. I have also had two great dogs in the last five years, neither of them terrorized into obedience and both of them paragons of dogitude.

My mother spanked me once or twice. She preferred to beat up my sister, who was smaller and not as bright (possibly with brain damage, I realized many years later), and quick to forgive. She beat her daily, sometimes for resenting the beating.

She also favored random, arbitrary displays of favoritism and hatred as a parenting skill. She once told me, by way of punishment, how sorry she was that her miscarriage had not been me. I grew up determined to be a good parent by never doing anything the way she did.

My sister grew up determined never to have children, because she knew -- in the front of her understanding, now that she is in her sixties -- that she was hopelessly tainted with her mother's evil. She is a wreck: living on disability, alone after two abusive marriages and a rape, essentially friendless and incapable of a normal friendship.

I got my mother's sociopathic distrust and contempt for others, and I have managed to led a relatively normal public life with career successes and a personal life less successful.

My mother would have worshipped James Dobson. When she died, my sister and I shrugged.

[nickyboy1]

The SPOILED work force? When was the last time your worked? Come to a Long Island company and spend a week. Workers work longer and harder hours than ever, earn less pay and even less praise.

[theyak]

well let's see. Spanking as a negative reinforcement has been an effective means of raising children for millenia. I was raised before Dr Spock published his books. Looking back at my childhood, I can honestly say when I got spanked, I remembered why and recalculated the worth of the action bringing the spanking. But then I was raised by loving parents who had control of themselves as well. I think the confusion of corporal punishment with child abuse during the 70's and 80's has hamstrung parents, and children are NOT reaping the benefit.

[westwind]

The idea that calculated and unthinking pain inflicted on others is not acceptable may have become the norm with regard to Americans about Americans, but judging by the calculated and unthinking pain inflicted on Iraqis by the US, and the relative lack of concern by the people and politicians who allow it to happen, the concept of foreigners as human beings deserving of the same rights as us, has yet to take root.

[JimR]

Uh-huh. How about the calculated and unthinking pain that Sunnis and Shiites inflict on each other? There is a widely accepted belief that if U.S. troops leave, that kind of pain is going to get a whole lot worse.

[ImmanuelGoldstein]

We have no way of knowing whether that is true or not (I no longer accept the concept of an 'expert opinion' in matters of middle eastern politics) but at least it won't be US doing the inflicting.

[SensibleAmerican]

To me there is no difference between the likes of Dobson, Perkins, Roberts etc. and the mullahs in Islamic theocracies! There holier-than-thou pronouncements are just a guise to hijack political power and to promote thier extremist religious zealotry and bigotry!

Their likes are a part and parcel of the neocon cabal that formed in the early 70s bringing into its fold right wing "TransAmerica" hardliners, the military industrial complex, Christian hardliners and fanatic Israel supporters

Ironically, Rove's strategy although kept Bush in for 2 terms has all but destroyed the Republican Party and the influence of these "American mullahs" ...

[PADDYWHACK]

Sensible,you're right I used to vote GOP till Halfwit got in.I think they're done especially if the Dems put up moderate candidates.No one wants to see them again,tho HRC seems like a closet Neocon.A clever approach would leave Halfwit as the executioner of the GOP and cement his place in history.

[JimR]

I never underestimate the Democrats' ability to screw things up.

[tomsfork]

Agreed. Consider the "likes of Dobson, Perkins, Roberts, etc" and why are they the way they are. What is their agenda? In a word, empire. If these people are fiercely religious, that is because they have everything to gain - power, money, and the hot babes that go with it (ever notice how many of these "moral giants" got caught with their pants down?). Religion is the lazy and incompetent man's path to power and glory, and your money as well.

[tomsfork]

Hey, y'all, as I wrote this previous reply, CNN is reporting Senator Craig has been denied right to withdraw his guilty plea, and has announced he will remain in the Senate. A religious maniac who cannot give up power. Now, why does this not surprise me...?