National Coming Out Day: A Reunion with Myself

 National Coming Out Day:  A Reunion with Myself

Mark Kaplan

October 11, 2021

Today is National Coming Out Day, a decades long celebration of the power of being oneself in the world.  It is a particularly relevant time for me to be thinking about my own coming out process.  I am returning home from my 40^th high school reunion.  When I think about my life, as an openly gay married man in 2021, in comparison to how I felt and what I thought was possible in 1981, I am grateful for how much has changed.  The pace of that change has been stunning in many ways.

In 1981, I hadn’t fully figured out who I was, although I had some idea.  I remember the anxiety about not being able to envision a future for myself.  I don’t just mean a career, or where I would live; I mean imagining my life.  From the time I sensed I was “different” in some way that was significant, I simultaneously knew that it was seen as a bad difference, and that I shouldn’t tell anyone.  Like many other gay people (and almost certainly people of any sexual orientation other than heterosexual), I began to live a double life.  I presented one version of myself to others, while trying to understand, suppress, and manage an important aspect of my true identity.  In what felt like a survival strategy, I went on some dates with girls, I tried to not act like a stereotypical gay person, and I tried to keep a distance from others when it came to true intimacy in friendships.  I certainly kept any real attraction hidden or well-camouflaged.

While this sounds difficult, and it really was, I still managed to form relationships that were intimate to a degree, supportive, and genuine.  I reconnected this weekend, and in the build up to the reunion, with some of those people:  the young woman I went to the prom with, a girl I briefly dated, and a group of friends who I intuitively trusted even back in those days of fear and anxiety.  They didn’t know that they were creating safety for me, but they were.  I wish I could’ve told them then, and I wish I hadn’t had to hide.  To any of my old friends who are reading this, thank you for what you did for me, unknowingly (or maybe not), all those years ago and since.  What I offer in return is my authenticity and my friendship.  Being out allows me to be a better friend, and it brings home the notion that we are all more free when everyone is free.

What was most impactful about the reunion weekend was my experience of myself, 40 years later.  At a reunion we might compare ourselves to others for better or for worse, but this is not the comparison that matters.  What matters is the comparison of myself from then to now.  Having the experience of being a more fully developed person, having accepted who I was and taken ownership for my life is a wonderful feeling, and one available to all who come out.  In comparing myself at different points in time I am able to see the arc of my life, remembering what it was like to be me, so filled with fear and anxiety, constantly managing others’ perceptions, against the current me who is happy to be who I am, fulfilled in my life and my relationships.  I remember National Coming Out Days in my young adulthood, when I was still early in the process and still living a double life, having come out to some but not to others, including my parents.  I remember the fear and dread I had of coming out to them, but also sensing (luckily) that it would all turn out well.  Indeed, it did.  Just like my 40^th high school reunion, National Coming Out Day reminds me of my journey, and invites me to be aware of and present to the power of self-acceptance.  Self-acceptance is a necessary pre-cursor to broader acceptance by others, and perhaps the most important step in the coming out process.

Even today, after being out to everyone in my life, and publicly, for more than 3 decades, I still wonder, when I share my orientation with people who I don’t know, often in some subtle way like an offhand mention of my husband, how they will receive that information and how it might change their perception of me.  Homophobia is nowhere near gone, despite all the progress, and we should respect that the journey to coming out can be fraught and tumultuous.

To those of you who have come out, I hope you will take a minute to reflect on that powerful act, and think about how it changed your life.  I hope the result has been that you feel, like me, that your life is more rich, more real, more authentic.  I hope you see that the energy you put into hiding who you are and trying to stay safe, was energy that you now put into living your life in the way you wish.  I hope you see that your coming out was not just a gift to yourself, but a gift to the others around you, who can now enjoy your authentic presence.  That might’ve been the best part of the reunion, that just being myself allowed me to reconnect, or finally connect, to the classmates with whom I spent much of my youth.  To those who have yet to come out, be gentle with yourself.  Yes, there has been so much progress in the last 40 years, but coming to terms with being gay in a society that is less condemning overall, but still neutral at best, is a challenging journey.  You are doing the best you can right now.  Keep going, and listen to the voice inside of you that knows everything will be alright.  Seek out support, and make your way in the way that you can.  Remember that there are a lot of people lovingly and patiently waiting for you, most of all yourself.

We Are Still, Mostly, Liberals

 

Blog:  We Are Still, Mostly, Liberals

MGK

March 11, 2021

 

I am enrolled in a graduate program in Philosophy, and the latest course is in Economic Philosophy.  It is fantastic to learn more about economic approaches and systems and think about how they interact with culture and politics.  I have learned much that has made me slow down and think, and I wanted to share a little bit of that.  I’m not an expert here; I’m a learner, but I thought you might want to learn along with me.

 

If I said to you that much of the country, moving from left to right from anywhere near the center of the political continuum, and including traditional Democrats and traditional Republicans, are liberals, you might challenge that.  The problem is in the way the word “liberal” is used, whether pejoratively (by some on the right) or inaccurately.  We think of liberals as progressive, tolerant, open-minded, and not concerned about conserving cultural and religious traditions.  However, in a political-economic context, the term “liberalism” has a long history going back a few hundred years to the period known as the Age of Enlightenment, to the work of western Enlightenment thinkers such as Immanuel Kant, John Locke and Adam Smith, among others.

These Enlightenment ideas are central to American political and economic life, and have been since our beginning.   Liberalism, or “classical liberalism,” is an idea centered on the primacy of the individual and the individual’s rights, rights which are “self-evident” and “unalienable.”   I’m sure you are familiar with those words, and the related ones, also from our founding documents, such as our individual rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”  Our country was founded on the platform of classical liberalism, based on individual rights and freedoms.  However, it is worth noting that we are still, some two hundred and fifty years later, trying to fully realize this vision of individual rights and liberties.  When our country was founded, women, people of color, and many other groups, were not afforded those same rights, despite the vision having been clear.  We continue to work to close the gap between that vision and our lived reality.

 Traditional conservatives and Republicans are classical liberals.  Those fighting for lower taxes and less regulation are classical liberals.  Those fighting hard for the rights of women, people of color, trans people, are classical liberals, too.  Most of us living in the US are classical liberals.  Indeed, what holds us together is our shared belief in the rights and liberties of individuals.  Basically, since this country’s beginning, classical liberalism, translated as the belief that the rights of the individual are more important than the rights of the collective, has won.  This doesn't mean we are entirely individually-oriented.  We do, like some Enlightenment thinkers, consider the common good and shared interests, but individuality does stand on a higher shelf.

 Americans have always opposed central control, also known as socialism.  Socialism, based on a collectivist approach, has always lost badly.  “What?” you say?  “I thought we were on the verge of becoming a socialist country, like the ones in Western Europe.  I hear it on the news and read articles about it on social media!”  Well, not really.  Socialism is a system wherein government controls the means of production, meaning all companies, factories, etc.  A socialist system is not a democracy; it is a collectivist approach wherein the central government owns everything.  We are nowhere near that, and will likely never be, at least in our lifetimes.  Bernie Sanders is not a Socialist, he is a Democratic Socialist.  Democratic Socialism, as it is called in Western Europe, is a democratic system with a more substantial social welfare component which provides forms of government assistance for the welfare of citizens, for example retirement income supplements, healthcare, food and housing assistance, as well as more regulation of the employer-employee relationship.  Their business economic systems, however, are largely privately owned, just like ours in the US.  Think of Democratic Socialism as the left end of the classic liberal continuum, with Libertarianism as the right end.  It is far from Socialism, as it accepts capitalism and democracy, though it does attempt to take the rough, perhaps cruel edge off free market capitalism.

 What is so concerning about our recent politics is that we have come close to embracing a political movement that it is illiberal.  In other words, we have witnessed an attempt to bestow a large amount of power into an individual leader, giving that individual “above the law” status and allowing that leader to circumvent democratic processes, such as how public funds get appropriated and how elections get decided and certified.  This movement is really a movement against liberalism, dressed up as populist nationalism.  It has a militaristic fascist component.  It represents a break from our traditional liberalism, and we should all be very concerned should another Trump-style leader and movement gain decisive power in our three branches of government again.

 The Trump movement is much closer to the centralized power that we fear from Socialism, and it is much farther from our modern Democrat, Republican and Democratic Socialist parties.  Sometimes it seems that the political “wars” between traditional Ds and Rs are exhausting and unending.  Indeed, they can be, but that isn’t always a bad thing.  It means conversations and debates are taking place between liberals, i.e., classical liberals.  The existential threat to our system is not the fight about tax rates, or minimum wages, or immigration, or healthcare.  Those can all be dealt with inside of the large tent of classical liberalism.  The threat is whether we are willing to turn over our liberties, our institutions, and our laws to an individual and a movement that want to be above them.  The true threat, and the real choice, is between liberalism and fascism.  I could ask the question: “Which side are you on?”, but I think it is better to ask: “How have you been thinking about this?” 

 What I have attempted to present here is an historical and intellectual description of economic systems, but the cultural aspect is equally important.  From a cultural perspective, we are very polarized, and often, it seems that our political identities are not always aligned with our views on issues and policies.  We largely agree on many important issues - more often than we think.  We focus on our differences, making them bigger than they really are.  In the US, we live in a big tent of classical liberalism.  It is at the core of our founding; it is the core of who we are.   We argue in this tent, but there is plenty of room for debate.  We must not forget who we are.  Let’s not miss the forest for the trees.  Even at our most polarized moments, we have always been on the same side in terms of the kind of country we are, or at least the kind of country we strive to be.  Let’s remember that.

The Obviousness, Ridiculousness and Societal Risk of Racial Bigotry and Racism in America

 MGK January 15 2021

There are a lot of ways to look at the January 6 attack on our Nation’s Capital, and one of those is to look through the lens of race.  The events at the Capitol Building earlier this past summer and now on January 6 make the state of race in our country quite clear.  Comparing the vastly different police and military reactions to the summer’s Black Lives Matter protests and last week’s insurrection, it is easy to see both racial bigotry (an assumption that black people are more violent and less worth of respect and consideration) and racism (the use of organs of the state to institutionalize and act on that bigotry in terms of policies and practices).  Not only is the racial bigotry and racism obvious, the more light shone upon it demonstrates how ridiculous it is.  However, it is much more than just ridiculous, as these recent events demonstrate the risk to the country of unfettered bigotry and racism. 

The difference in the treatment of a group of very racially diverse protestors with a group that was almost entirely white is obvious to see.  Just contrast the pictures of police and military in combat gear with combat weaponry lined up in the hundreds surrounding the Capitol building as BLM prepared to protest, to the pictures of a relatively small police presence with limited weaponry and few reinforcements on January 6.  Given what was known about each group, it is easy to see the ridiculousness of racial bigotry.  According to research at Harvard’s Kennedy School (Chenoweth and Wallach), BLM protests were largely peaceful, with a few exceptions, and the violence that occurred was not insignificantly from police or right-wing counter protestors.  In 96.3% of the BLM protests, there was no property damage or police injuries.  The study’s authors concluded that “[T]he protests were extraordinarily nonviolent, and extraordinarily nondestructive, given the unprecedented size of the movement’s participation and geographic scope.”  Contrast this to what we are now learning was known about the Capitol rioters.  The FBI not only had intelligence that there was likely to be violence by a large group determined to invade the capital, they also knew that dozens of known domestic terrorists who were on “watch lists” were intended to be in Washington.

This demonstrated the ridiculousness of how these events were dealt with so differently.  While there was no reason to anticipate destruction or violence at BLM events, the police and military preparation was very robust and aggressive, culminating in the violent clearing of a peaceful protest in Lafayette Park so that the President could be photographed holding up a bible in front of the church across from the park.  Peaceful protestors were attacked, and pepper-sprayed, for a political photo op.  Contrast that with pictures of police taking selfies with the invaders of the Capital and with police opening up barriers to allow protestors on the Capitol grounds.  Yep, that is ridiculous.  It is not just ridiculous though; it is also risky.

Do we know if the reason for this very different law enforcement treatment is racial bigotry or racism, or both?  It sure seems that way, and we will know more soon as the investigation is just starting.  However, what we can see very clearly is that a great deal of risk is created by these attitudes and actions.  Some have known about the risk racism presents for a long time.  We can see this awareness broadening recently, as Donald Trump’s FBI concluded in the past year or so that our greatest national security threat is right-wing, white supremacist, domestic terrorism.  FBI Director Christopher Wray said, "What I can tell you is that, within the domestic terrorism bucket category as a whole, racially-motivated violent extremism is, I think, the biggest bucket within that larger group, and within the racially-motivated violent extremist(s) bucket, people subscribing to some kind of white supremacist-type ideology is certainly the biggest chunk of that."  The mainstream public dialogue about race and racism rarely goes to risk, as our dialogue is more often a debate about the extent to which racism is real, or a problem, or significantly impactful in people’s lives.  We need to shift the race conversation more often onto this topic.  Think about the risk of January 6.  According to some, we were literally a couple of minutes from what might’ve been a hostage-taking and/or massacre of members of Congress.  This would not only have been a human tragedy, but it also had the potential to greatly destabilize our government, create a constitutional crisis, and perhaps even a successful coup by Trump and his supporters.  If we are unable to confront, combat, and significantly reduce white supremacy, we put our ability to govern at risk.  These are the most apparent existential threats that unmitigated racism evokes.  There are many other threats related to our ability to lead in the world, to develop beneficial relationships, and to be the country to which the world’s best creative and innovative talent wants to come.

We are an increasingly racially diverse country, and that is not going to change.  In fact, we are going to become even more racially diverse, with whites becoming less than 50% of the population in about 25 years.   Is the racial bigotry and racism on full display now a reaction or backlash to our changing racial demographic?  I think yes, to at least some extent.  I also think some level of reaction and backlash to real change is inevitable, whether we are talking about the shift from in-person to online-based banking or the changing racial composition of our country.  We can look at this backlash as not only inevitable but also a sign that real change is taking hold.  Change heightens risk though, and can bring about a crisis.   The Japanese symbol for crisis is a character that includes words equivalent to “dangerous opportunity.”  The obviousness and ridiculousness of racism is on full display, and I believe this is evidence that real change is underway.  Can we manage the crisis? Can we mitigate the risk as we move through this period, so that we can stand on the other side celebrating one more big step forward?

---

 

The Coming Presidency of Joseph R. Biden: A Bridge Through Troubled Waters

MGK

January 3, 2021 and updated April 22

Preface:   I found this short essay that I wrote in April 2020 and never published.  I think it is still on target, generally.  The economic recovery has been a K, not a V, as wealthier people most have seen their wealth recover quickly from the pandemic lows while many middle and working class people, especially those in the service industries, are experiencing difficult times with employment uncertainty.  I am not sure whether the coming historic election that will mark a real shift is 2024 or 2028; I now lean towards 2028, as the election showed how polarized we still are, and are likely to continue to be in 2024.  The dam of our polarization might not break until late in this decade.  I do still see Biden as an historic transitional figure.  His election, in spite of  disasterous Congressional and State-level results for Democrats, is an incredibly important event; it dwarfs everything because it gives us a more stable path through the transition. Four more years of Trump might’ve been too much for already strained democratic institutions to bear.  Autocracy could have been the result, and violence from the left and the right would've occured.  This would’ve given Trump an opportunity to consolidate even more power.  Think about how close we’ve come to one of those scenarios and it is easier to see why Biden was the best nominee this cycle.  He is moderate and experienced enough that a backlash to his election will not gain sufficient strength to truly destabilize the country.  When I wrote this, I predicted his presidency wouldn't be seen as an immediate success.  My view is shifting, as he is taking bold action that is broadly supported.  He is embracing, and I believe will fulfill, an archetypal role of facilitating a generational transition.

The Coming Presidency of Joseph R. Biden:  A Bridge Through Troubled Waters

April 21, 2020

Note:  Obviously, it is audacious to assume Biden will win.  I don’t know it to be true but I believe it to be likely.

If Joe Biden wins the presidential election, for much of the country it will feel like a huge sea change, the end of the Trump era.  It will feel to some like we’ve “crossed over” a dark period.  Many will expect big shifts in how we feel, what we do, and how we engage each other; in short, a change in the basic socio-political dynamic.  They might also expect that the pandemic will end and the economy will improve; a “V” recovery so to speak.  I think they will be wrong.

The Biden Presidency will more likely be a period of deepening the political divide during a time in which the economy will worsen.  The long-building problems in our society are coming to a head, and will be for next several years, no matter who the president is.  There are any number of important issues that have been simmering for decades.  Income inequality and the wealth gap tops the list, as this affects everyone and the status quo is unsustainable.  This is directly related to the kind of economy, even the form of capitalism, that will work best in the future.   However, these aren’t the only issues coming to a head.  Cultural and religious conflicts have taken far too big a role in our public policy discourse, creating false dichotomies and deepening political schisms unnecessarily.   Our ongoing journey around diversity and inclusion is coming to a head as the dominant white majority is soon to be less than 50% of the population.  The level of open and covert racism in our socio-politico debates and our policies (i.e. immigration, voting rights, social safety net) is unsustainable. 

Essentially, a lot is happening and it is coming to a head now.  The pandemic lays it all the more bare.  Perhaps this is due to cyclical change processes that repeat over time, connected to generational transitions (i.e. The Fourth Turning, 1997) or socio-economic and institutional cycles (George Friedman, The Storm Before the Calm, 2019).  However we look at it, we are being roiled, the pandemic is enhancing all of this, and it is going to get more challenging.  The seeds will be planted though, for a better future.

In Biden’s presidency, things will get done but it might not seem that way.  The political climate will be as, or more, contentious than ever, but some issues will get addressed.  Healthcare is a good example.  Even in the very politically polarizing Obama presidency, the Affordable Care Act was passed and it changed the whole discussion of healthcare.  Several years of public polling show that the support for the fundamental changes the ACA brought in the areas of pre-existing conditions, a goal of universal coverage, coverage not dependent upon on employer, etc. is strong.  So even while in a contentious period, real change happened.  I think with President Biden real change will occur as the ACA is built upon in some significant way; a pandemic reminds us of the value of universal healthcare.  It is possible that after months of clearing skies and oceans, there will be more appetite for substantial investment in green energy, particularly as part of an economic stimulus program.  Quite possibly some substantial steps on immigration could happen, though that might wait for the next President.

After Biden’s one-term presidency, the country will be ready to shift, more ready than we will sense at the moment.  2024 could be an historic election.  In my work helping organization’s change I have noticed that the times of the most contention are often the times when the biggest changes are about to happen; contentiousness can be a sign of engagement, and engagement creates the social and political energy for change.  The Biden presidency will not be viewed as particularly successful, as there will be much sacrifice and pain, though our regard for it might grow with time.  We will look back at Biden as the leader who created the bridge to the next generation of leadership.  This bridge though will not be constructed over the troubled waters but instead will pass through them.  Let’s hope it can hold.