by Joe Kandra and Kathie MM
Category: Perspective-taking
Veterans, heroism and whistleblowing
By Mary Bess.
We need to understand the spark of divinity within human beings who put their lives at risk to benefit others. Of particular interest are those who commit acts of heroism for which they will not be honored and may even be vilified, despised and ostracized.
Especially on Veterans Day, helicopter reconnaissance pilot Hugh Thompson, Jr. and his crew come to mind. Their chopper was hovering over My Lai on March 16, 1968 when they saw what looked like a massacre taking place. Civilians – old men, women, even children, were being herded into a ditch and shot. Thompson brought down the chopper and warned U. S. soldiers that if they didn’t stop shooting civilians, he would turn his guns on them. Strangely, there wasn’t much screaming coming from the victims. Later it was learned that their tongues had been cut out to prevent screams. Pregnant women had been bayonetted through the belly. The lucky ones, according to Thompson, were those “who took a round right through the brain. There was a lot of evil.” This is not to say that the perpetrators of these war crimes weren’t victims themselves. A full account of the massacre can be found in “The Forgotten Hero of My Lai: The Hugh Thompson Story,’” by Trent Angers.
Thompson reported the incident in a tearful rage when he returned to headquarters. When charges were brought against 26 officers and enlisted soldiers, including William Calley and Ernest Medina, he testified against them. They were acquitted or pardoned.
Thompson was shunned and condemned by the military, the government and the public for his whistleblowing. Congressman Mendel Rivers (D-S.C.) actually said Thompson was the only person at My Lai who should be punished and unsuccessfully tried to have him court- marshaled for turning his guns on fellow soldiers. People made death threats and left mutilated animals on his porch. Subsequent to My Lai he suffered post traumatic stress, bouts of alcoholism and severe nightmare disorder. He was married and divorced several times. Although the military abandoned him for telling the truth, he did not abandon the military, serving until 1983. He died in 2006 at age 62 with his surviving crew member Lawrence Colburn at his side.
Anyone who thinks whistleblowing is an easy road is mistaken. Thompson told the Associated Press in 2004, “Don’t do the right thing looking for a reward, because it might not come.” Chelsea Manning, who was obligated by law under the Geneva Convention to report the murder of civilians gunned down by a U. S. Apache helicopter crew as they attempted to remove the dead and injured from an Iraqi street, was imprisoned in August 2013 for reporting the war crime as he was required to do. By doing so, according to the military, he was “disrupting good order and discipline” and “discrediting the armed forces.” Prosecutors did not present any evidence that the leaks caused harm to anyone. She served more than seven years of a 35-year sentence.
In 1998, 30 years after the My Lai massacre, Thompson and his crew were awarded the Soldier’s Medal, the highest award for bravery not involving contact with the enemy. In 1999 Thompson and Colburn received the Peace Abbey Courage of Conscience Award.
Why did Thompson continue to speak out instead of going along with the subsequent coverup? At least two factors would seem to have influenced his behavior. His grandmother was a full-blooded Cherokee, whose ancestors were victims of ethnic cleansing under the Indian Removal Act. He was raised an Episcopalian in a working class family that condemned ethnic discrimination and aided minorities within the community.
My Lai became a symbol for everything wrong with our presence in Vietnam when Army veteran Ron Ridenhour and Dispatch News Service reporter Seymour Hersh broke the story. Because My Lai is the only massacre from the Vietnam era to gain wide notice, it is thought to be an anomaly. It wasn’t. Hersh reports that, on a recent trip to Vietnam, he learned that massacres of civilians like the one that took place at My Lai were not unusual.
A study by the International Committee of the Red Cross reports that there have been 10 civilian deaths for every soldier death in wars fought since the mid-20th century. Practically speaking, civilians have become the enemy. Hugh Thompson reached out to enemy civilians in recognition that we are all one.
Note from Kathie MM: Originally posted on the Boca Beacon by Marcy Shortuse. Republished with permission. And thanks to Stefan Schindler for bringing this fine article to my attention.
Psychology’s “Dark Triad” and the Billionaire Class, Part 2
by Roy Eidelson
Psychopathy
The second component of the Dark Triad — psychopathy — refers to a person’s lack of empathy toward others and a tendency to behave in a callous and uncaring manner toward them. Here too, research by psychologists supports the view that, compared to their “lower-class” counterparts, “upper-class” individuals act with less compassion — and also fall short on certain basic skills necessary for building positive connections with other people.
In one experiment, for example, lower-income participants were substantially more willing to take on extra work to help out a distressed research partner than were the upper-income participants. In another study, lower-class participants demonstrated a stronger compassion-related physiological response than did their upper-class counterparts after watching a video of children suffering from cancer. In a related study, the lower-class participants in a stressful interview process showed greater sensitivity and compassion toward their competitors than did the upper-class interviewees. And in an experiment with four-year-old children, those from less wealthy homes behaved more altruistically than those from wealthier homes, donating more of their prize tokens to children they were told were hospitalized.
In other studies, individuals from a lower social class were significantly better than upper-class participants at judging the emotions being portrayed when they were presented with photos of human faces. The researchers concluded that this enhanced ability may reflect the reality that those who are less well-off must rely more on accurately reading their social environment, because they depend more on interpersonal relationships and collaborative efforts in their daily lives. On the other hand, individuals with extensive material resources like today’s super-rich are more likely to find close relationships, especially with people of lesser means, quite unnecessary in their goal-oriented pursuits — and their perspective-taking abilities may suffer as a result.
In the business world, a compassion deficit among members of the billionaire class isn’t very hard to see. For example, rarely do we hear the CEOs of today’s corporate behemoths acknowledge the critical role that they themselves play in blocking upward mobility and financial security for millions of working-class Americans. Most obviously, union-busting and related “right-to-work” efforts suppress the wages and benefits that could dramatically improve the lives of working families. More broadly, despite substantial increases in worker productivity over the past few decades, the super-rich have directed the rewards of economic growth into their own pockets rather than into their employees’ paychecks. Likewise, international trade agreements, written in secret with strong corporate representation, have prioritized protecting profits for huge companies over safeguarding wages, human rights, and the environment. Perhaps this callousness is captured especially well by Amazon’s billionaire CEO Jeff Bezos, who reportedly once described his negotiating approach as similar to “the way a cheetah would pursue a sickly gazelle.”
Narcissism
The third trait of the Dark Triad — narcissism — refers to an individual’s sense of superiority over other people and convictions about personal entitlement to special treatment. Once again, in a diverse set of psychological studies, individuals of higher social class displayed greater levels of narcissism and entitlement than did their less wealthy counterparts.
In one study, for example, participants who rated themselves higher on a measure of socioeconomic status also scored higher on a scale designed to measure psychological entitlement; a sample item from that scale is “I honestly feel I’m just more deserving than others.” Another study instead used a nonverbal measure of entitlement. Participants looked at sets of circles of varying sizes and were asked to identify which size circle best described how they saw themselves compared to others. Those of higher social status picked larger circles as their self-descriptors than did those of lower social status. In a third study that used a behavioral measure of narcissism, upper-class participants were more likely than their lower-class counterparts to make use of a wall mirror before having their photos taken. In a survey study, researchers in Germany directly assessed a sample of very high net-worth individuals. They too found that this group scored higher on a measure of narcissism compared to a separate sample of people of lesser economic means.
In the board room and beyond, the narcissistic super-rich are accustomed to being in charge and to having things their way — unlike those they sometimes refer to as “the little people.” Of course, they don’t necessarily feel fortunate in this regard because, by their own account, they fully deserve all the benefits and privileges bestowed upon them. The special favors they receive are particularly apparent when we consider the corrupting influence of wealth on “equal justice under law,” the hallowed words engraved atop the Supreme Court Building in our nation’s capital. Indeed, unequal treatment runs the gamut from the likelihood of arrest and prosecution to the leniency offered in sentencing. As one example of these unwritten norms, wealthy tax cheats have developed a broad repertoire of arguments — based on notions of personal superiority — for why they should receive a light sentence or no sentence at all after being caught, prosecuted, and found guilty (all rarities in their own right). Their farfetched justifications — which some judges nevertheless find persuasive — include all of the following: they’ve already suffered sufficient public humiliation for their misdeeds; although they cheated, they’ve also been generous in their charitable donations; the fines they’ve paid were sufficiently punitive; and their status as “job creators” makes it unwise to remove them from the community and put them behind bars.
Note from KMM: Pegean says, Narcissism? Narcissist? Where have i heard those words before? Somewhere in this blog….
CARTOON: Global warming and the slippery slope
by Joe Kandra (cartoonist) & Kathie Malley-Morrison
Monday’s post on Engaging Peace provided a warning about two obstacles to recognizing when someone is lying to you: 1) you don’t really want to believe people (at least some people) will lie to you; and 2) your personal biases. Now there’s a slippery slope!
Here’s a test. Whatever your personal beliefs are about global warming and other threats to sustaining life on earth, assume for the moment that you’re skeptical about all the global warming warnings (which some people assert are “fake news”).
Really try to get into the character of a doubting Thomas. Now suppose you have the opportunity to listen to a speech by one of the individuals portrayed below. Also suppose you’re actually curious about the ongoing climate debate. To whom would you choose to listen? Who looks sincere and honest and might even have some chance of converting you to the environmental cause?
Even if you’re dubious about this entire exercise, please choose one:
Okay. Which individual did you select as someone worth listening to, someone who wouldn’t lie to you? Why did you make that choice? Were you equally as likely to trust a woman as a man? a person of color as compared to a white individual?
Now think about the current candidates for political office who are trying to recruit supporters. Do you believe they are all telling the truth? If not, what factors are influencing your judgments about them? Do you know?
Pegean says, Personally, I’d be more likely to trust another kitty than a lot of people (but maybe I’m biased). Bottom line, I sure hope someone will put an end to fossil fuels and start reducing global warming. I’m already too hot!