Parker Palmer. Healing the Heart of Democracy: The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit - Kindle edition by Parker Palmer. Politics & Social Sciences Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.
Healing the Heart of Democracy: The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit - Kindle edition by Parker Palmer. Politics & Social Sciences Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.
"He bravely takes on the current political climate, and this book provides therapy for the American body politic. His insights are heart-deep: America gains by living with tension and differences; we can help reclaim public life by actions as simple as walking down the street instead of driving. Hope's hardly cheap, but history is made up of what Palmer calls 'a million invisible acts of courage and the incremental gains that came with them.' This beautifully written book deserves a wide audience that will benefit from discussing it." (A "Starred Review" from Publishers Weekly, 8 August 2011)“Healing the Heart of Democracy is a hopeful book that lifts up and hallows the heart as a source of inner sight. Inspired by the efforts to understand and undergird democracy by Abraham Lincoln, Alexis de Tocqueville, Rosa Parks, and others; the author sends us on our way rejoicing with the small portion of hope that he has planted in our minds and souls.”
—Spirituality & Practice (http://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/books/books.php?id=21525)
“There is a deep and disturbing cloud hanging over the United States. It is a malaise that is leading to cynicism and self-centeredness. The antidote is to be found in the healing of the heart of our democracy, so that we might emerge from this private focus to a public one, which recognizes our interdependence. I know of no better guide to discerning the problem and the solutions, than this book by Parker Palmer. It is a prophetic book, one that needs to be taken with all due seriousness, if we are to emerge from our malaise stronger and healthier than before.” (Englewood Review of Books , 2011)
* A Starred Review from Publishers Weekly * Palmer's...newest was six years in the making. He bravely takes on the current political climate, with its atrophy of citizen participation, the ascendance of an oligarchy that shapes politics, and the substitution of vituperation for thoughtful public discussion. It's a tall order that became even taller because Palmer had to climb out of a pit of depression -- his constitutional proclivity -- to do so. But wrestling with essential questions of public life became therapeutic, and this book provides therapy for the American body politic. Palmer's use of acute 19th-century observers of American life and character -- Tocqueville, Lincoln -- as well as his use of anecdotes and lessons from his own long career provide context and tonic. His insights are heart-deep: America gains by living with tension and differences; we can help reclaim public life by actions as simple as walking down the street instead of driving. Hope's hardly cheap, but history is made up of what Palmer calls "a million invisible acts of courage and the incremental gains that came with them." This beautifully written book deserves a wide audience that will benefit from discussing it. -- August 8, 2011
~ ENDORSEMENTS ~
* We have been trying to bridge the great divides in this great country for a long time. In this book, Parker J. Palmer urges us to "keep on walking, keep on talking"--just as we did in the civil rights movement--until we cross those bridges together. -- U.S. Congressman John Lewis, recipient of the Martin Luther King Jr. Nonviolent Peace Prize and the Presidential Medal of Freedom
* The book we need for recovering the heart, the very core, of our selves and our democracy. -- Krista Tippett, host of public radio's On Being and recipient of a 2013 National Humanities Medal
* A master work by a master, a clear and uplifting resource that keeps shining light in all the dark places. Palmer is that rare, deep seer who is at home in the streets, a teacher by example who has the courage to stand openly and honestly in the public square. -- Mark Nepo, author of The Book of Awakening and As Far As the Heart Can See
All reviewersAll starsAll formatsText, image, video
3.0 out of 5 starsSheer fantasy (2.5*s)
ByJ. Grattan
VINE VOICEon October 6, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
While this book is obviously heartfelt, it is a dream; it is fantasy. The author has this notion - wishes for is more accurate - that people operating from their hearts can and will resurrect democracy in the US, with of course outcomes that just so happen to correspond with his ideals about America. The author is hardly ignorant of the actual nature of our society and its institutions, yet is scarcely deterred by the endemic isolation and huge resource differentials that practically guarantee that democracy in the US cannot work beyond the formalities of voting.
Operating from the heart involves intellect, but of more importance to the author are emotions, imagination, initiative, humility, compassion, and the like. He is almost Biblical in his call for the acceptance of strangers, of diversity, which reflects his religious roots and is necessary for democracy. For him, church settings are ideal for nurturing democratic instincts. However, he does not quite connect the togetherness that he finds in a small black church in Americus, GA with what is needed in a society of a few hundred million people.
The author is most assuredly correct to suggest that democracy requires practice on a small scale. Yet our major institutions, schools, churches, and workplaces, are rigidly hierarchical with virtually no chances to assert democratic initiatives. Beyond those places, the urban neighborhoods and small towns that facilitated face-to-face contact have largely disappeared. Sterile, tightly controlled malls have replaced main streets, automobiles are needed to drive from suburbs to shopping areas, and television and now the Internet with their highly packaged content have replaced the untidiness of the county fair and the raucous political rally.
Beyond a very few, short-lived examples there are no venues for wide-ranging discussion about issues in the US. The substitute is wildly inflammatory, distorting rhetoric that is usually privately received, misrepresents realities, and demonizes anyone not on board with the message. Invariably powerful, rich interests are behind those efforts to control thinking; it is essentially propaganda. The last thing that is wanted is open discussion of the issues.
The demonization of government, of the political realm, is especially interesting. The ancients, that is, the Greeks, considered those who remained in the private realm to be idiots. It was the responsibility of adults - only males in those days - to participate in the public realm, which directly under laid the political structure and gave them much control over the direction that their society would take. That is so in contrast to the modern political sphere. The only public/political role envisioned for most people in the US is to be bombarded by simplistic, obscuring sound bites for months on-end via various media outlets with no real way to respond, and after voting for a media-created person, leave governing to a distant bureaucracy that is largely infiltrated by powerful interests. Of course, they do not want day-to-day citizen oversight as done in a Greek democracy.
The author goes on endlessly about the genius of the creation of the US political system, which ignores the fact the founders, for the most part, were interested in curtailing the raucous democratic actions that had sprung up in several states after the War. Notwithstanding the fact that most democracies in the world have avoided incorporating the roadblocks of the US Constitution, in theory, the US system could be bent to the will of the people. But that is precisely the problem. There is no intelligent, coherent will of the people, because there is no public realm that has produced a governing philosophy. All that exists is the aggregation of private opinions that have been molded by outside authorities, whether it is through sterile curriculums of school systems or the more obvious propaganda of political campaigns.
The good thing about this book is that the author realizes that we do not have a functioning democracy. Beyond that, the book is simply wishful. He wishes that schools, churches, and workplaces facilitated democracy. He wishes that we were not isolated in our little rooms with our TVs and computers. He wishes that we actually have political discussion in public settings. He wishes for no less than personality changes in people, which is what his call for a heart-based approach really is. He really does not address what practical changes are needed in government or who should be in government. When fat cats are elected to Congress, how could it possibly be expected that the policies of the US government would address the needs of most Americans?
Ultimately, the book is totally frustrating. The author, a PhD social scientist, seems to think that his life as a sometimes activist translates into most Americans going down a similar trail of enlightenment. That is total fantasy. He really ignores the polarization and propaganda that permeates US society. He totally underestimates the lack of opportunities for significant democratic action in places that occupy most of our time each day. The actual fact is that, given our modern technological, isolated world, we may be further away from effective democratic action than at any time in our history and believing that there can be a democratic transformation based on a vague notion of heart-based actions seems almost ridiculous.
---
43 comments| 60 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----
4.0 out of 5 starsRejuvenating Our System of Self-government
ByPaul Froehlichon September 29, 2012
Format: Hardcover
Our nation was inspired by JFK's most famous words, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." But that was in 1961. It's doubtful that the nation today would find those words so inspirational, given our weakened sense of community and impaired concern for the common good.
Mitt Romney's disparaging comments about the 47% of Americans supposedly dependent on government is a striking example of how polarized politics have become.
Like most Americans, Parker J. Palmer knows that political polarization is a threat to our democratic republic. Some 95 percent of Americans believe civility in politics is important for a healthy democracy. Palmer understands that compromise is indispensable in our political system -- as opposed to a Parliamentary democracy -but that requires approaching conflict with civility and creativity.
In Healing the Heart of Democracy, Palmer proposes how to reweave the tattered civic fabric that gives rise to poisonous rhetoric and political gridlock. Palmer became a Quaker as an adult, attracted to a faith that has long encouraged cooperation in public affairs, and that appreciates human diversity.
Diversity can undermine community if we let it. "The benefits of diversity," writes Palmer, "can be ours only if we hold our differences with respect, patience, openness, and hope." Palmer prescribes creative tension holding, building trust, and valuing - not just tolerating - differences.
Palmer repeatedly invokes Lincoln's phrase about "the better angels of our nature," and Tocqueville's analysis that American democracy depended upon developing what he called "habits of the heart."
The heart must be open, Palmer writes, to vitality & engagement, transcending the tendency to think in terms of us and them, in order to learn from differences. We must cultivate the ability to hold tension in life-giving ways, to hold creatively contradictions and disagreements. When we are disappointed - heartbroken -- about the direction of our country, we should resist the urge to withdraw into cynicism and anger.
Sharp disagreements, when dealt with by open hearts, can lead to democratic renewal. If we cannot or will not recover the sense of unity among strangers, then debates degenerate, distrust grows, and people are driven from the public square.
America needs a rejuvenation of public life, which refers to community involvement, to voluntary associations, which Lincoln said builds "the bond of social and political union among us." Tocqueville also identified a vigorous public life among Americans as the critical layer of democracy's infrastructure.
People who have the least contact with strangers tend to have the most fear of them and to assume the worst.
Palmer describes ways to encourage people to come out of isolation for a while to enjoy each other's company, developing a stronger sense of civic community in the process.
"If we aim to be `one nation, indivisible,' the capacity to imagine ourselves as members of one another, despite all that separates us, is essential."
Schools and congregations can and should play a vital role in not only teaching the habits of the heart but in practicing them. Students who have never had practice in collective decision-making won't suddenly become active citizens at age 18. Breaking bread together is one of the best ways to create community, both within a congregation and with folks in the larger community.
There's no question that American democracy needs healing. Palmer offers a hopeful pathway to do so. ###
1 comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
2.0 out of 5 starsA Major Disappointment
ByMichael W. Kruseon February 13, 2012
Format: Hardcover|Verified Purchase
I have really appreciated Parker Palmer's books over the years but this book is a profound disappointment. I quit reading at the halfway point. If you are a liberal/progressive, then I suspect you may enjoy the book. It plays very well into the meme that at core of the discord in our country are conservatives. I can't help but feel that Palmer missed an opportunity.
I know he is a Quaker pacifist. I've suspected his political views were to the left based on other writing I've seen. I have no problem with that. But his topic is "Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit." Every few pages he trots out examples of the values and misbehavior that are contrary to his aims and they are invariably those of conservative citizens (without him ever explicitly saying this.) The outrageous values and misbehavior of the left are not on his radar. And that is the problem.
We each see our opponents actions as threatening and crazy but we feel justified in our threatening and crazy behavior because we know our opponents wrong. That is how Tea Party rallies (where some park service people report that participants left venues as clean or better than when they came) can be dubbed terrible hate-filled racist mob, while the Occupy Movement with its illegal occupation of property, vandalism, defecating and urinating on police vehicles and passersby, is heralded as a wonderful expression in Democracy. (I actually think both movements are hopeful signs of our democracy, that both have their excesses.) That is how there can be obsessive anger at activists talking about death panels, while be oblivious to the President calling Congress terrorists and hostage takers, as well as the VP and leading Democrats talking about Republican desires to kill people.
The first step in restoring democracy is to resolve not to use other people's bad behavior as excuse for your own. I don't think Palmer is there. I will continue to give his "Let Your Life Speak" book to others as gifts. I still think his "The Active Life" book is one of the best books I've read. But this book simply isn't worth my time.
1 comment| 34 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
4.0 out of 5 stars
America's Spiritual Cardiologist SPEAKS!! So....Listen & Act
ByWilliam DahlVINE VOICEon November 16, 2011
Format: Hardcover
In Healing the Heart of Democracy - The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit, one of my favorite authors, Parker J. Palmer, pours his heart out, integrating the myriad of dimensions of why this effort is so essential, your role in it, and the realistic possibilities/opportunities for the outcomes he so vigorously advocates for.
In one sense this book is about you, the American citizen. It's a call to come off the couch and assume a new posture of chutzpah and humility. Chutzpah to speak your mind or your heart about issues in America. Humility to do so in a civil and respectful way - holding the same tolerance and courtesy toward those whose views are contrary to your own.
Consider the following:
"But as long as distrust and contempt keep "We the People" from having a generative conversation, our will cannot be known let alone voiced."(p.16).
Just as the central thesis of much of Palmer's writing is about the human heart - it is a subject this book cannot escape. "The heart is where we integrate the intellect with the rest of our faculties, such as emotion, imagination, and intuition. It is where we can learn how to "rethink the world together," not apart, and find the courage to act on what we know." (p.18).
The book is filled with prescient observations:
"in the absence of an engaged public, democracy begins to die, and some form of oligarchy emerges to take it's place." (p.25).
"We must develop habits that allow our hearts to break open and embrace diversity rather than break down and further divide us." p. 36.
"Democracy demands that we become engaged with "the other."p.38
Palmer goes on to illuminate Five Habits of the Heart required by the American citizenry to respond to 21st century realities:
1. We're all in this together
2. The need to develop an appreciation for the value of "otherness."
3. The ability to hold tension in life-giving ways.
4. Generate a sense of personal voice and agency.
5. Strengthen our capacity to create community.
Palmer's life's work can be summarized in what he writes on page 60: "there is an eternal mystery about how the shattered soul becomes whole again." He suggests we are now at a place in time within the evolution of the "idea of American democracy" whereby: "We are now at such a place as a nation: we must restore the wholeness of our civic community or watch democracy wither."p. 60. Again, he goes to the reality of the heartbreak that permeates the American landscape as the source of opportunity to "heal the heart of democracy." He suggests that "We the People" must become "a vital reality rather than a philosophical abstraction." (p.99).
Palmer also highlights the penchant for focusing on short-term tasks that promise instant , visible results - yet, maintain paralysis on the larger challenges facing the broader society.
The works of Parker J. Palmer are both numerous and noteworthy. As a point of forthright, full disclosure, they populate my personal library. Palmer can be considered, in my opinion, a legitimate spiritual cardiologist, who has spent a lifetime exploring the mysteries and miracles of the human heart.
As I read Healing The Heart of Democracy, I recognized not only his acumen with matters of the human heart, but an authentic concern with the heart and soul of America - in all its various dimensions - government, principles, representatives, sources of power and influence, citizens, processes, humility, the silent, the overlooked, the marginalized, freedom, hope, innovation, and creativity.
You can't write a book like this unless:
a. You are deeply concerned over the state and trajectory of America.
b. You possess the courage and strength to publicly share your concerns.
c. You have both the wisdom and experience with the "matters of the heart" to define legitimate, well thought out approaches to healing the maladies that currently threaten our collective health.
Read this book. Get three and share it with others. Intentionally gather to talk about it's call to action. This isn't a book filled with words and catchy phrases - it's a behavioral prescription for healing...our hearts - and that of our nation...
Both of which Parker J. Palmer deeply cares about...
If your cardiologist looked you in the eye and gave you specific instructions to "change your lifestyle or else!" What would you do? This is the question and posture that Parker Palmer leaves us with. You have the cardiologist's instructions - now it's up to you!
1 comment| 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Politics of the Brokenhearted
ByRobin FriedmanVINE VOICEon August 15, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
In times of national difficulty, it is both tempting and desirable to step back, reflect upon the situation, and see what might be done to make things better. The process might carry its own danger in the rush to either easy or impracticable answers. I took the opportunity offered by the Amazon Vine program to read Parker J. Palmer's new book "Healing the Heart of Democracy: the Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit" for the insight it might have on our national situation as witnessed by the recent budget and debt-ceiling deliberations and their aftermath. Palmer wrote his book before these events occured, but they make his examination all the more timely. Palmer (b.1939) received his PhD in Sociology from the University of California at Berkeley in 1970. This book was my first exposure to his work, but he is a noted writer on educational and social issues with a focus on spirituality.
I liked a good deal of this book especially its personal tone. Palmer tries to combine events and feelings in his life, and the way in which he reflects upon them, with our national experience as Americans. He uses throughout the figure of the "habits of the heart", the title of a book by Robert Beulah which derives from de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America". Palmer discusses his own experiences of loss, disappointment and "brokenheartedness" in his life. When these experiences occur, the spirit, or the heart can be shattered. The better course is to put the pieces together, use disappointment creatively, integrate conflicting feelings and move ahead from weakness to strength. So it is, for Palmer, in a democracy.
Palmer offers some inspiring stories to illustrate what he means. He describes meeting with members of a small African American church in rural Georgia in 1974 who showed the strength and discipline to carry on in hard times. He describes meeting a New York City cabdriver who, while navigating the city streets, explained that the attraction of his job was that it allowed him to hear and consider the varied opinions of the many different types of people who rode in his cab. He praises openness to difficulty and a willingness to accept tensions -- in the form of divergent opinions -- and work through them. Palmer also makes excellent use of historical figures. Abraham Lincoln emerges as the hero of the book for his ability to overcome his own demon of depression and for his attempt to reconcile tensions in a crisis as shown by both his First and Second Inaugural Addresses. Alexis de Tocqueville, for his diagnosis of the strengths and weakness of American democracy also receives valuable discussion. Palmer explains his own conclusions in a few words: "We must be able to say in unison: It is in the common good to hold our political differences and the conflicts they create in a way that does not unravel the civic community on which democracy depends."
There is an excellent focus in the book on commonality and civic life, as witnessed in the use of public streets, bookstores, pubs, libraries and other places where people of different backgrounds and persuasions can meet and get to understand one another. I am writing this review, as I generally do, in a public library, largely because I share Palmer's commitment to the use of public space. Palmer also emphasizes the value of people explaining to one another the reasons why the believe what they do on important, controversial matters, based upon their own experiences without attempting to demonize someone who thinks differently. I tried to follow this good advice after reading the book, as I exchanged lengthy emails with a close friend who holds an opinion different from mine on same sex marriage. Perhaps it helped to air the reasons for one's belief and to understand those of another person.
I liked aspects of this book less well. Palmer does not always handle well his own project of openness to ideas with which he disagrees. He frequently translates his project into support for his own distinct agenda and tends to belittle those who think differently. In a passage early in the book Palmer shows awareness that he does this as he comes close to demonizing his political opponents, perhaps by reducing them to straw men ("Get me going on politicians who distort my faith tradition to win votes or on racial bigots and homophobes who want to translate their personal shadows into public policy, and this nice Quaker boy from the Midwest does a passable imitation of the Incredible Hulk") before half-heartedly catching himself and falling back. There is a good deal of cliche and half-formed ideas in this book intertwined with much that is insightful. I found, for example, Palmer all--too--quick in his uncompromising discussion and rejection of "consumerism". Although Palmer has much good to say about the need to both develop and hold one's opinions and to have a degree of modesty and humility in thinking about the opinions of others, his use of the overused term "chutzpah" distorts and distracts from his point. His discussion of American public education, I thought, made a variety of points, some good, some questionable. In places, I thought Palmer was expecting too much from ordinary citizens. Democracy, and the American political process, was made to accomodate a degree of human weakness. And some of the thinking in the book I thought wooly and undeveloped.
This is a worthwhile book to read and to think through. It has many insights but it is not a panacea, in my view, for understanding the current condition of American democracy. Like much other writing, the book deserves to be read but read critically and with skepticism.
Robin Friedman
1 comment| 11 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Route to Healing Our Ruptured Democracy
ByNick Nicholas, MSWon March 9, 2017
Format: Paperback|Verified Purchase
If more people were to read and heed Parker Palmer's Healing the Heart of Democracy, it would go a long way towards lessening the coarseness and hostility of contemporary political discourse. He presents an appealingly calm and rational approach to resolving political differences by first examining what those who stand in political opposition have in common and then proceeding from there. However, with the temper of political difference being what it is these days, the advice offered by the author seems naive. Politics are so polarized that even efforts to find common ground are likely to be rejected.
Palmer focuses his attention on the notion of the heart broken *open* so that it can contain a creative tension for the resolution of political difference as opposed the the heart broken *apart*, the heart shattered. He frequently turns to the figure of Abraham Lincoln who urged an appeal to the "better angels" of human nature following the conclusion of the Civil War. Unfortunately, the polarization of contemporary politics may make such an appeal to "better angels" impossible.
Palmer admits that he is a Quaker, and the quiet approach of Quakerism informs the approach advocated in this book. It is a very appealing approach, but its applicability in the times of Donald Trump's presidency is doubtful. Nevertheless, it is an approach worth trying with those who are less radicalized, either on the right or the left. It is an approach that would be attractive to those who are open to having their minds changed, but it is doubtful Palmer's method would be effective with those whose hearts are defiantly hardened.
Nevertheless, this is a book well-worth reading, if only to begin the necessary healing process of our ruptured democracy. Our polarized nation cannot be sustained without substantial damage to the fabric of our nation, and Palmer offers a route for beginning that road to healing.
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Gift of Great Value - Finding Our True Voice
ByMarianna Cacciatoreon September 10, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Verified Purchase
Parker Palmer is one of the few people I know who can write about the heart and politics in the same sentence and not diminish either but, in fact, deepen our understanding of both. He does not offer a schmaltzy version of the heart. Rather, a very hardy and honest description that includes atrocities driven by emotions. He goes to the core when he writes of heartbreak and asks what we can do "so that it yields life, not death?"
In these cynical times we think of politics as mostly the purview of powerful politicians. For me, Parker dispelled that idea by offering page after page of thoughtful insight, historical information, and practical ideas that got me thinking of ways I can actively contribute to strengthening this gift of democracy I was born into.
"The impulses that make democracy possible--and those that threaten it--originate in the heart, with its complex mix of heedless self-interest and yearning for community. From there, these impulses move out into our relations with each other in families, neighborhoods, workplaces, voluntary associations, and the various settings of public life...these are the places where we can make a difference, too, once we free ourselves from the illusion that we are at the mercy of forces beyond our control." (from pages 22 & 23)
He goes on to write about holding the tension of opposites--with true-life "political" stories to illustrate this ideal and skill; "habits of the heart" that help us live a democratic life; and interesting ways to widen the scope of community to include those beyond our family and chosen friends. All in service of We the People finding our voice and using a combination of "Chutzpah and Humility" to take our rightful place in the creation of the life we share.
If I could have one wish it would be that everyone, upon reading this book, becomes inspired to take personal actions to strengthen the democratic life most of us take for granted. This book has the power to do just that. I close this review with a passage at the core of the book's teaching:
"Heart...is a word that reaches far beyond our feelings. It points to a larger way of knowing--of receiving and reflecting on our experience--that goes deeper than the mind alone can take us. The heart is where we integrate the intellect with the rest of our faculties, such as emotion, imagination, and intuition. It is where we can learn how to "think the world together," not apart, and find the courage to act on what we know." (pgs. 17 & 18)
Parker Palmer has given us a gift of great value. Everyone should know it exists.
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
2.0 out of 5 stars
No country for old men
ByNamyriahon May 28, 2013
Format: Hardcover
This book is written in the "Something must be done!" mode. Apparently the "something" is the usual liberal panacea: stew in your feelings and throw a lot of emotion-laden words around to prove you are the good Samaritan on steroids. If the author had a dollar for ever occurrence of "heart" in the book, he wouldn't need the royalties. Yeah, I know it sounds mean (rather, "coldhearted") to diss a book that has its hearts in the right place (every other sentence). But as I made my way through this "heart"-filled book, I wondered if the author had kept playing that tedious 60s anthem: "Smile on your brother, everybody get together, try to love one another right now." Nice sentiments (written by a convicted druggie, btw), but not much of a political platform, especially when politicians get all huggy-kissy with their fellow travelers, then go out and give a speech where they thoroughly trash the other side. In the word of Jesus, "even the pagans" love their friends, but loving the enemy is difficult, and even if we love the enemy, we don't have to love his stupid and toxic ideology or sit by and see it imposed on the citizens, do we?
And speaking of love of enemies, consider this lovely sentiment: "Get me going on politicians who distort my faith tradition to win votes or on racial bigots or homophobes who want to translate their personal shadows into public policy, and this nice Quaker boy from the Midwest does a passable imitation of the Incredible Hulk." In your dreams, author. Aside from creating a very comical visual image, the sentence is utterly irrational: "bigots" and "homophobes" are liberalspeak for "people who oppose racial preferences because they are unfair" and "people who side with several thousand years of human tradition which limit marriage to male and female" - but obviously words like "bigots" and "homophobes" will get a rise out of the reader. After going on page after page about valuing "the other" and "differences," here the author shows the typical liberal pleasure in proclaiming himself superior to "the other." Does he really think the Incredible Hulk ought to be beating up sane and decent people who believe "equal opportunity" ought to mean "equal opportunity" not "white males go to the end of the employment line"?
I give him credit for understanding that democracy isn't just messy, it's SUPPOSED to be messy. It always was, and Jefferson, Adams, and the big "saints" in our history were notorious for backstabbing and slandering. Palmer, like too many people today, thinks things have gotten worse in recent times. The record says otherwise. The real difference is that our ancestors, lucky dogs, had to get their political nastiness in the form of a daily or weekly newspaper, not 24/7 news feeds. There isn't more political malice today, just more opportunities to express it.
But despite all the rancor, the author is optimist - and could never be mistaken for a realist:
"We can learn how to rethink the world together."
"Violence is what we get when we do not know what else to do with our suffering." (Is he aware that violence was relatively rare during the Great Depression, or that the racial violence of the 60s escalated after the Civil Rights Bill was passed, or that the 1992 LA riots had nothing to do with suffering?)
"The civility we need will not come from watching our tongues. It will come from valuing our differences." Oh, please. He made it abundantly clear that people whose views differ from his own are "bigots."
We must "embrace diversity." Yes, but that's been tried, hasn't it, and look how it works out in most people's lives: apply for a job or admission to an elite school, then wonder if your actual qualifications matter in the slightest, because diversity replaced merit as the important thing. Voters aren't all idiots, and they're aware that turning the abstraction Diversity into a god has caused all kind of mischief. The fact that the mass of people resent this just makes the pseudo-intellectuals feel good about their superiority to the masses.
"Writing this book has rejuvenated me." That is wishful thinking, unless what he means is that writing the book made him feel all gooey about his younger days. A resume doesn't always reveal much about a person, but in some cases you can reconstruct a person just from a few bits of data. Palmer was in his 20s in the 1960s; he graduated from UC Berkeley; he's a Quaker; he lives in Madison, Wisconsin. Those four factoids say not just "liberal" but "liberal with a vengeance" and "never got over the 60s and never will." If you are of that generation, or think the 60s were some kind of golden age of compassion, you might love this book. However, if you think clearly and see the 60s as the golden age of ugly clothes, ugly hair, no-strings sex, pot, and in-your-face self-righteousness, the book might at least give you some chuckles. Turn it into a game: keep track of how many times "heart" is used.
This isn't a bad book, just an impractical and unnecessary one, intended to make the reader sigh once per page, feel good about himself, and look down on those who are less vocal about how compassionate they are in their own fantasies.
Comment| 13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
5.0 out of 5 stars
Illuminating the Vision of What Can Be
ByTracy Marks
VINE VOICEon October 17, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
The first few chapters of HEALING THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY are inspiring, articulate and often eloquent. Parker Palmer speaks of the "politics of the brokenhearted", giving voice to those of us who have not only suffered personally, but who have also become disenchanted with politics, and grieve because many U.S. policies today betray the values in which we believe.
Palmer calls upon us to transform our grief and despair into compassion and active citizenship, to listen to our hearts and allow the pain we experience to lead to deeper engagement and community. "What happens next in you and the world around you depends upon HOW your heart breaks," he tells us. "If it breaks APART into a thousand pieces, the result may be anger, depression and disengagement. If it breaks OPEN into greater capacities to hold the complexities and contradictions of human experience, the result may be new life."
We must realize that we are all in this together, Palmer points out. In order to revitalize our democratic ideals, we must extend ourselves beyond our narrow circles of family, friends and neighbors, listening receptively to the experiences and beliefs of the strangers in our midst, appreciating the value of "otherness."
Challenging lifestyles based upon immediate gratification and sharing of information via tweets and soundbites, Palmer urges us to develop a long-term perspective. He encourages us to "cultivate the ability to hold tension in life-giving ways" so that together we may eventually forge solutions to our problems that respond to the needs of the many, rather than the few.
The second half of HEALING THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY elaborates upon the first chapters. Palmer discusses national myths about America, and delves into such issues as reclaiming space for public life, classrooms and congregations, and the opportunities and limitations of relating via cyberspace.
Some readers may find Palmer's vision to be unrealistic, denying the realities of human self-interest, the power of corporate media and the resistance of long-standing institutions. To a large extent, I agree. But at the same time, I honor Palmer's message. He speaks to our grief, which when not fully acknowledged leads to paralysis, cynicism and despair. He helps us to articulate our most deeply held values, and to reaffirm them - strengthening our center of gravity so that we are less at the mercy of the media and peer pressure. He lights many candles which may not fully illuminate the darkening days, but which at least provide flickers of hope and reveal intimations of a better tomorrow.
Due to years of listening to my own "felt sense" and learning to differentiate internal messages from the heart, center, gut and mind, I do have difficulty relating to Palmer's definition of HEART as "where we integrate the intellect with the rest of our faculties, such as emotion, imagination and intuition." I experience the heart as the inner space where both tender and painful feelings emerge, not as a place of accessing the intellect. My inclination would be to speak of our "center" or "source" as the inner space where our minds, feelings and intuition function as a unified, coherent whole.
But the major issue I have with the book is not what Palmer says but what he doesn't say. He addresses WHAT needs to happen rather than the HOW. I am not referring here to HOW to motivate people to listen to opinions different from their own or attend more public meetings. Those who are reading this book and connect with the values Palmer expresses are already halfway there. A larger and at least as significant issue is how the millions of American who are not connected to their hearts or centers or spiritual sources, who act primarily from self-interest, and who have little concern for people beyond their own narrow circle - as well as those who due to necessity are motivated entirely by the pressures of sheer survival - how they can CARE enough, be informed enough, be motivated enough and be empowered enough to live the lifestyle that Palmer presents.
In conclusion, although I find HEALING THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY to be incomplete and to raise as many questions as it answers, I am rating it five stars because of the importance and clarity of Palmer's message and because of the passages in which he truly, lucidly and lyrically illuminates the path ahead:
"If we want to reclaim our democracy, we need to do the challenging heart-work of examining our myths, seeing how far they are from the reality of our national life, and then reclaiming the visions embedded in them, and doing the hard work necessary to bring reality closer to them." The exact nature of that "hard work" is for each of us, in our own way, to discover and elucidate.
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
5.0 out of 5 stars
Democracy, the Heart, and All Things Healing
ByKevin L. Nenstiel
VINE VOICETOP 1000 REVIEWERon September 25, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
Parker J. Palmer starts from the idea that democracy remains an ideal worth striving after. He doesn't sugar-coat his opinion, or pretend America hasn't frequently failed to uphold "the better angels of our nature," according to the Abraham Lincoln quote that lives so close to his heart. He's forthright that we have miles to go. But we also have a goal worth pursuing, and a people more than ready for the pursuit.
In the wake of the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, our ongoing overseas fighting, and two polarizing presidential elections, many Americans feel disillusioned with politics altogether. Not Palmer. Like you and me, Palmer sees parties who ignore the electorate, office holders who talk past each other, and media figures who sell advertising by ginning up partisan rancor. But he sees this not as failure, but as unprecedented opportunity.
Palmer believes democracy depends vitally on certain "habits of the heart" among its citizens. Too often, we permit our elected, business, and media leaders to behave unchecked, secure in the illusion that, if they do anything wrong, we can vote them out, move our money, or change channels. But recent history proves that such passivity permits the unscrupulous to run society unchallenged. It's time free people stepped up.
It starts by recognizing that we all have a stake in the public sphere. Palmer emphasizes that the "public" sphere is where citizens meet as equals and build meaningful relationships that flow freely; don't confuse the public with the political sphere, which is hierarchical and power-based. We can never meet as equals in the political sphere. But work, commerce, religion, and other places of adult equality form democracy's true beating heart.
Unfortunately, we permit "leaders" of questionable merit to devalue the public sphere, until the private sphere squeezes it out. We no longer go to marketplaces where goods, ideas, and relationships flow freely across economic and cultural barriers. Our air-conditioned, privately held malls take that place. Dissent gets squelched, both by ownership of public space, and by permitting strident partisan propaganda to replace frank discussion.
Public life happens most in three venues: school, worship, and work. Sadly, leaders who don't have our best interests at heart suborn all three venues. School has become hierarchical and encourages passivity rather than engagement. Worship works best when it rewards an outsider's perspective that seldom gets past the gatekeepers. And as long as workers and managers maintain an adversarial attitude, work remains a diminished public space.
Parker J. Palmer's vision of how to remedy these inequities will not come easily. Despite his eloquent explanations throughout his book, he acknowledges that we will face resistance. Those who benefit from the current state of affairs will push back actively, while those who could gain from democratic renewal will offer only inertia--at least at first. To succeed, Palmer says, we need to invest for years, even generations.
Democracy has suffered recently because we think we have achieved our Founders' goals once for all. Palmer reminds us that democracy is not a state of being; it is a process. And if we want to pass a free and peaceful society onto the next generation, we need to take a guiding hand in maintaining that peace, and those freedoms, right now, and every day to come.
---
Comment| 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
==================================================
----------
0 out of 5 starsSheer fantasy (2.5*s)
ByJ. GrattanVINE VOICEon October 6, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
While this book is obviously heartfelt, it is a dream; it is fantasy. The author has this notion - wishes for is more accurate - that people operating from their hearts can and will resurrect democracy in the US, with of course outcomes that just so happen to correspond with his ideals about America. The author is hardly ignorant of the actual nature of our society and its institutions, yet is scarcely deterred by the endemic isolation and huge resource differentials that practically guarantee that democracy in the US cannot work beyond the formalities of voting.
Operating from the heart involves intellect, but of more importance to the author are emotions, imagination, initiative, humility, compassion, and the like. He is almost Biblical in his call for the acceptance of strangers, of diversity, which reflects his religious roots and is necessary for democracy. For him, church settings are ideal for nurturing democratic instincts. However, he does not quite connect the togetherness that he finds in a small black church in Americus, GA with what is needed in a society of a few hundred million people.
The author is most assuredly correct to suggest that democracy requires practice on a small scale. Yet our major institutions, schools, churches, and workplaces, are rigidly hierarchical with virtually no chances to assert democratic initiatives. Beyond those places, the urban neighborhoods and small towns that facilitated face-to-face contact have largely disappeared. Sterile, tightly controlled malls have replaced main streets, automobiles are needed to drive from suburbs to shopping areas, and television and now the Internet with their highly packaged content have replaced the untidiness of the county fair and the raucous political rally.
Beyond a very few, short-lived examples there are no venues for wide-ranging discussion about issues in the US. The substitute is wildly inflammatory, distorting rhetoric that is usually privately received, misrepresents realities, and demonizes anyone not on board with the message. Invariably powerful, rich interests are behind those efforts to control thinking; it is essentially propaganda. The last thing that is wanted is open discussion of the issues.
The demonization of government, of the political realm, is especially interesting. The ancients, that is, the Greeks, considered those who remained in the private realm to be idiots. It was the responsibility of adults - only males in those days - to participate in the public realm, which directly under laid the political structure and gave them much control over the direction that their society would take. That is so in contrast to the modern political sphere. The only public/political role envisioned for most people in the US is to be bombarded by simplistic, obscuring sound bites for months on-end via various media outlets with no real way to respond, and after voting for a media-created person, leave governing to a distant bureaucracy that is largely infiltrated by powerful interests. Of course, they do not want day-to-day citizen oversight as done in a Greek democracy.
The author goes on endlessly about the genius of the creation of the US political system, which ignores the fact the founders, for the most part, were interested in curtailing the raucous democratic actions that had sprung up in several states after the War. Notwithstanding the fact that most democracies in the world have avoided incorporating the roadblocks of the US Constitution, in theory, the US system could be bent to the will of the people. But that is precisely the problem. There is no intelligent, coherent will of the people, because there is no public realm that has produced a governing philosophy. All that exists is the aggregation of private opinions that have been molded by outside authorities, whether it is through sterile curriculums of school systems or the more obvious propaganda of political campaigns.
The good thing about this book is that the author realizes that we do not have a functioning democracy. Beyond that, the book is simply wishful. He wishes that schools, churches, and workplaces facilitated democracy. He wishes that we were not isolated in our little rooms with our TVs and computers. He wishes that we actually have political discussion in public settings. He wishes for no less than personality changes in people, which is what his call for a heart-based approach really is. He really does not address what practical changes are needed in government or who should be in government. When fat cats are elected to Congress, how could it possibly be expected that the policies of the US government would address the needs of most Americans?
Ultimately, the book is totally frustrating. The author, a PhD social scientist, seems to think that his life as a sometimes activist translates into most Americans going down a similar trail of enlightenment. That is total fantasy. He really ignores the polarization and propaganda that permeates US society. He totally underestimates the lack of opportunities for significant democratic action in places that occupy most of our time each day. The actual fact is that, given our modern technological, isolated world, we may be further away from effective democratic action than at any time in our history and believing that there can be a democratic transformation based on a vague notion of heart-based actions seems almost ridiculous.
43 comments| 60 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
--------------
Comment
Showing 10 comments
Sort by:
Newest
Oldest
J. Grattan6 years ago (Edited)
Report abuse
At this pt, this is the only review that is less than 4 stars - actually 90% are 5 stars. I fully expect to be neggied vociferuosly. What I'm wondering is will comments be made that actually address points made in the review.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson6 years ago (Edited)
Report abuse
I think you have struck at the heart of the book and at the major deficiencies of the American political system. Although I have not read the book and probably won't have time to work it in, I see no urgency in doing so after reading your review and several of the five star reviews. I suspect that I would be as frustrated by it as you are. Your comment
He really ignores the polarization and propaganda that permeates US society. He totally underestimates the lack of opportunities for significant democratic action in places that occupy most of our time each day. The actual fact is that, given our modern technological, isolated world, we may be further away from effective democratic action than at any time in our history and believing that there can be a democratic transformation based on a vague notion of heart-based actions seems almost ridiculous
accurately describes the problems with American democracy.
Wishing for change will not, as you suggest, create change. The five star reviews I read are just as fantastical as you describe the book. We have no grasp of democracy or democratic action and would not long support politicians who act in the public interest.
You point out that the founders "were interested in curtailing the raucous democratic actions that had sprung up in several states after the War," but you fail to point out that many of them believed that a disinterested aristocracy would serve the best interests of the nation and that the Senate was originally designed to provide dispassionate oversight. Democracy is messy, and we forget that, involved as we are in the chaos and the messiness. We also forget that human nature is dualistic and that our hearts are not pure -- one part of us is altruistic, the other totally selfish -- and the balance changes constantly even within the individual. Because of our dualistic nature, demagogues can easily and effectively control us by placing our selfish natures in the ascendency. Politicians like George Bush, Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, and Herman Cain demonstrate clearly how easy it is for demagogues to rule us by claiming selfishness is beneficial, even when our selfish behavior will probably benefit only the few.
I would suggest that the technological isolation of our society makes it no easier for a skilled speaker to sway an audience through powerful appeals to the emotions than standing on a stump. Public intercourse could help our political system make better decisions, but I doubt it. We have too little interest in the public good and too much interest in what most benefits us. Our politicians are well aware of that and would be successful on a stump or in a televised debate.
As you suggest, Palmer and the five star reviewers totally overlook human nature.
Excellent review.
Leave a reply
Paul O'Connor6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
I agree you. I also just finished reading the book through the Vine program and wish I had written something half as eloquent as you. I was greatly moved by Palmer's dream but found myself totally disconnected and a bit frustrated by the lack of anything resembling a reasonable plan.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago (Edited)In reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Paul, thanks for comment. Your review was more heartfelt. Me - I'm always the technocrat. I don't have any trouble writing about democracy. I know what it is, and we don't have it. We talk the talk, but don't do the walk.
I don't think most people really know what democracy is. They get told such horror stories as imagine 100 million people in a meeting to decide something. That's ridiculous. Of course, there would have to be layers and representation, just not representation by plutocrats for plutocrats. But it is much more than merely voting. Democracy is hard work; it does require involved citizens.
I personally think that democracy should start in our workplaces. Usually they are small enough where a voice can be heard, and they are where most adults go every day. The idea that my economic destiny should totally be in the hands of some manager is ridiculous. We should all have meaningful voices at work. German Works Councils are a start. They are not unions. They are worker controlled organizations mandated by law.
Many democratic actions in the US in the past are very connected to work and/or the econonmy: the Knights of Labor, the Populists, the Socialists, the IWW, the CIO, etc. One thing is common among all of them - they had to battle the forces of reaction, often suffering greatly. That is missing from this book. There are many people who have made huge sacrifices to fight power.
Leave a reply
Don Morgan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
It totally frustrates me when people comment on books they have not read or in this case have no intention of reading. I would suggest that Amazon delete reviews like this. Short of that, of course, I don't have to read them, which I won't.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
D. Morgan - please, what are you speaking of?
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Mr. Morgan,
Just a desire to create dispute?
R. S. Wilkerson
Leave a reply
Elizabeth in WI6 years ago
Report abuse
I disagree with this review. Although I read your review prior to borrowing my copy from the library, I am enjoying it and feel that it is magnificently rational and practical.
Your arguments are mostly personal grievances about the same social issues Palmer is working with but does not waste the reader's time or intelligence to spell them out. Interestingly, the posted grievances use language to evoke a negative emotional response to the book. Ironically, one of Palmer's contentions with the current voting public is the power that emotions have over it, and the power of those emotions to quickly disable even the most basic intellectual argument.
As a PhD social scientist, I believe the author is sufficiently, if not more than aptly suited for this work.
It may be offensive to some that Palmer's appeal for heart has spiritual nuances. Admittedly, in a capitalist society in rapid decline, tender words for "the other" may smack of a human interest story or charity appeal. It is important that we agree that the implications are spiritual, not religious, not dogmatic. He speaks honestly from his Christian experience but never proselytizes. As a result, "the other consciousness" advocated here is accessible to most, if not all of the practicing faiths in America. Adapting Palmer's philosophy of the heart and the examples of what that may look like are, within the context of this America, foreign and perhaps archaic. Far more significant than these, the philosophy is timeless and nearly invincible when applied, even on a small scale.
I invite you to reread this book from the perspective of a young adult who does not have the time or experience to contrast a then and now socio-political experience. The men who signed the Constitution were well aware of their humanity and their propensity for counter-democratic concerns and decisions. Palmer stresses over and over again the critical strength necessary for a healthy democracy, that being the ability to hold tension and meet challenges with creativity, instead of emotionally provoked or special interest-directed decision making.
The heart-based notions are anything but vague. Palmer draws on the intellect and emotional fuel of President Lincoln, Alexis de Tocqueville, and Terry Tempest Williams for examples of heart-based notions in concert with a variety of intellectual perspectives.
I am confident you will find that my comments actually address points made in your review.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
E. Burgert,
Actually, I would say that your comment in no way addresses the points that I made in my review. We are a very non-political, socially isolated, propagandized people. We claim to be religious, but that has not translated into the kind of society that the author desires, hence, my suggestion that the author is operating in fantasy land. He wishes that a spiritual, heartfelt approach would result in a different society from the one that we have, but it is what it is.
Of course, he can point to isolated examples where small communities, often churches, adopt a helping mode. But that hardly constitutes a wide-ranging change in society.
Any sober look at American society over the last decade finds a society of increasing inequality with tens of millions living in various degrees of poverty. It is unconscionable that a society of our wealth has not the wherewithal to insure that all kids are well fed and housed. It is easy to point fingers and say that the parents are irresponsible. That is the point. That is what we do. We blame instead of trying to create a basic floor below which no one is allowed to fall. I rest my case: there is virtually no evidence of a society that is heart-driven as the author desires.
Americans continually vote for those who support the society-crushing actions of financial elites and CEOs in search of every dime of profit. Free trade deals have decimated our jobs base, as well Visa programs that give our jobs to foreigners. Wall St and the mortgage industry nearly single-handedly brought this country to its knees. This is the reality that the author practically ignores. The idea that a Romney, Gingrich, et al could even show their face in a public forum discussing how to turn our society around is a sick joke. These people are nothing but fat cats. They and their rich supporters are the problem. Democratically oriented candidates absolutely cannot get a hearing in America. So much for concern for your fellow man.
So, no, my review of this book was quite realistic. There is absolutely no evidence of some sort of spiritual awakening in America. In fact, quite the opposite. It is you, E. Burgert, who needs to reassess the realities of American society and not be taken in by feel-good fantasies.
Leave a reply
Don Morgan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Your review is thoughtful one. My comment was a reply to R.S. Wilkerson who praised your review without having read the book. It seems to me that a reviewer should have read a book before reviewing it.
Leave a reply
---------
Don Morgan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
I would agree with you that a post made just to create a dispute is not useful. I stand by my comment that a reviewer should have read a book before reviewing it. It's clear that you agree with the ideas well expressed in Mr. Grattan's review. What you can't know for sure is whether the review is fair to Parker Palmer.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
D. Morgan,
Thanks for the clarification. I think that RS was commenting on the nature of society as he sees it far more than on the book, per se, and this book and this review is an opportunity for the comment.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson6 years ago (Edited)In reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Mr Morgan,
I didn't read the book, so I could not review it. I addressed Mr. Grattan's comments directly. I've read a lot of his reviews and find them consistently reliable and conspicuously fair to the book. He did such a good job of reviewing this book, as I pointed out to him, that I see no need to read it. Don't you read reviews to determine if you want to read a book? I do. Mr. Grattan's are always helpful. I took the opportunity to tell him that he was influential in my decision not to read it. I also tell him when he gives me good reason to read a book. You will note that I praised him for his thought-provoking comments and that I didn't address the book. I always enjoy conversing with him about his comments; sometimes that's even more informative than the review. This particular one was excellent.
R.S. Wilkerson
Leave a reply
Jill Gerard6 years ago
Report abuse
Change happens one person at a time. If each of us decides to take positive action, then what be deemed "fantasy" becomes more possible. This is of course not easy. It is simpler to give up, to stay in our cars, to say we can't change things for the better. Parker Palmer asks us to act with courage -- to reach out, to question, to connect with one and another -- and to connect with our selves (and I separate our and selves on purpose). Start a real conversation with a small group of people -- with guidelines on how the discussion will happen. Small groups start movements. Then, change follows.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
Jill,
Obviously anything is possible. But there have been and are thousands of groups in this country that try to fill in the gaps. They are to be commended. However, it still is a drop in the bucket with minimal widespread influence. I don't want the author to leave the impression that we are on the verge of some sort of societal transformation to healing hearts. We aren't. There are some isolated individuals who do good work. That is about it. Over all it is a very cruel world and right here in righteous USA.
Leave a reply
Show more comments
Cre8tive Clyde6 years ago
Report abuse
Excellent critique, prevented me from wasting my money on a 'wish list'.
Leave a reply
Cre8tive Clyde6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
J. Grattan: You might want to visit Jim Rough's site on using the Wisdom Council approach to solve problems in a democracy. He and I have been having a long, multi-year debate about whether or not it would truly work in our power-oriented society. If I could leave here and get back I'd provide a URL but if you Google Wisdom Council or, I think, Wise Democracy, it should come up.
Sincerely, Paul Everett
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
I'll take a look. Thanks, JG
Leave a reply
Philip from Minneapolis5 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
J. Grattan, two comments for you--first, it seems from your review that you are a "Glass half-empty" ratherr than a "glass half-full" kind of person.
Second, I appreciate your thoughts about trying to begin true democracy in the workplace. If you are serious about this, look at the co-operative type of business organization and the cooperative movement as one which has very real democratic roots and functioning.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan5 years ago
Report abuse
PBB, Not sure the "half" comment applies well to me, because I'm most definite about where we stand in regards to democracy and helping in the US. We are most empty.
Most workplace participation and cooperative schemes are "pseudo" at best. Most are top-driven and depend totally on the good-will of upper management. In other words, it is participation on their terms. Those who differ, even rationally, find out rather quickly where they stand. There are usually no formal structures with any kind of rights associated, as in German Works Councils. Unions have made a few attempts at cooperation but that is not their preferred mode of operation, which is adversarial.
America is definitely a land of conflicting understandings. Democracy puzzles most Americans and if it doesn't, it should.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson5 years ago (Edited)In reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Mr. Grattan,
You state "Democracy puzzles most Americans and if it doesn't, it should." Very good observation.
Leave a reply
Cre8tive Clyde5 years ago
Report abuse
Probably everyone should check out the website on 'Wise Democracy', which you'll have to Google. Or, google 'Jim Rough' and check out his writings. He has what he calls the Wisdom Council approach to creating the Democracy we all imagine we may want.
Leave a reply
rash5 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Wilkerson clearly says he has not read nor intends to read this book based on this review.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan5 years ago
Report abuse
Rash,
It is okay for those who have not read a book to engage in the comment sections, which can be an exchange of ideas connected to the book but not necessarily about the book, per se. What is your comment about any points being made by a commenter other than whether they read the book? JG.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson5 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Rash,
I didn't read the book, so I could not review it. I addressed Mr. Grattan's comments directly. I've read a lot of his reviews and find them consistently reliable and conspicuously fair to the book. He did such a good job of reviewing this book, as I pointed out to him, that I see no need to read it. Don't you read reviews to determine if you want to read a book? I do. Mr. Grattan's are always helpful. I took the opportunity to tell him that he was influential in my decision not to read it. I also tell him when he gives me good reason to read a book. You will note that I praised him for his thought-provoking comments and that I didn't address the book. I always enjoy conversing with him about his comments; sometimes that's even more informative than the review. This particular one was excellent. I don't need to read the book to recognize the excellence of a review.
R.S. Wilkerson
Leave a reply
Leave a reply
Editorial Reviews
Review
"He bravely takes on the current political climate, and this book provides therapy for the American body politic. His insights are heart-deep: America gains by living with tension and differences; we can help reclaim public life by actions as simple as walking down the street instead of driving. Hope's hardly cheap, but history is made up of what Palmer calls 'a million invisible acts of courage and the incremental gains that came with them.' This beautifully written book deserves a wide audience that will benefit from discussing it." (A "Starred Review" from Publishers Weekly, 8 August 2011)“Healing the Heart of Democracy is a hopeful book that lifts up and hallows the heart as a source of inner sight. Inspired by the efforts to understand and undergird democracy by Abraham Lincoln, Alexis de Tocqueville, Rosa Parks, and others; the author sends us on our way rejoicing with the small portion of hope that he has planted in our minds and souls.”
—Spirituality & Practice (http://www.spiritualityandpractice.com/books/books.php?id=21525)
“There is a deep and disturbing cloud hanging over the United States. It is a malaise that is leading to cynicism and self-centeredness. The antidote is to be found in the healing of the heart of our democracy, so that we might emerge from this private focus to a public one, which recognizes our interdependence. I know of no better guide to discerning the problem and the solutions, than this book by Parker Palmer. It is a prophetic book, one that needs to be taken with all due seriousness, if we are to emerge from our malaise stronger and healthier than before.” (Englewood Review of Books , 2011)
From the Author
* A Starred Review from Publishers Weekly * Palmer's...newest was six years in the making. He bravely takes on the current political climate, with its atrophy of citizen participation, the ascendance of an oligarchy that shapes politics, and the substitution of vituperation for thoughtful public discussion. It's a tall order that became even taller because Palmer had to climb out of a pit of depression -- his constitutional proclivity -- to do so. But wrestling with essential questions of public life became therapeutic, and this book provides therapy for the American body politic. Palmer's use of acute 19th-century observers of American life and character -- Tocqueville, Lincoln -- as well as his use of anecdotes and lessons from his own long career provide context and tonic. His insights are heart-deep: America gains by living with tension and differences; we can help reclaim public life by actions as simple as walking down the street instead of driving. Hope's hardly cheap, but history is made up of what Palmer calls "a million invisible acts of courage and the incremental gains that came with them." This beautifully written book deserves a wide audience that will benefit from discussing it. -- August 8, 2011
~ ENDORSEMENTS ~
* We have been trying to bridge the great divides in this great country for a long time. In this book, Parker J. Palmer urges us to "keep on walking, keep on talking"--just as we did in the civil rights movement--until we cross those bridges together. -- U.S. Congressman John Lewis, recipient of the Martin Luther King Jr. Nonviolent Peace Prize and the Presidential Medal of Freedom
* The book we need for recovering the heart, the very core, of our selves and our democracy. -- Krista Tippett, host of public radio's On Being and recipient of a 2013 National Humanities Medal
* A master work by a master, a clear and uplifting resource that keeps shining light in all the dark places. Palmer is that rare, deep seer who is at home in the streets, a teacher by example who has the courage to stand openly and honestly in the public square. -- Mark Nepo, author of The Book of Awakening and As Far As the Heart Can See
* Can we keep our sights on the vision of what we aspire to be while working constructively to transform realities that do not yet fulfill that vision? How do we remain "open hearted" so that we can engage creatively with citizens who hold different views of the challenges we face?Healing the Heart of Democracy asks these necessary questions and inspires us to answer. -- Joan Blades, co-founder of MoveOn.org and Living Room Conversations
* A book born for this moment. Wise, evocative, and pragmatic at its core, this dream for a new politics is grounded in dignity and liberty for all. -- Terry Tempest Williams, author of The Open Space of Democracy
* In this inspiring book, I find encouragement that all of us, citizens and elected officials alike, can learn to bridge the divides that keep us from genuinely respecting one another. By sharing his own life's struggles, Palmer reveals the common struggles we all endure. He provides us with a way forward, a way forward with hope. -- U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin
* A gracefully written anthem to democracy [that] breaks new ground in marrying the capacity of the human heart with the tensions inherent in politics [and] breathes new life into what it means to be a citizen--accountable, compassionate, fiercely realistic. -- Peter Block and John McKnight, coauthors of The Abundant Community
* A "must read" for everyone who is concerned about the state of our democracy and has ever despaired about what can be done. Palmer's stories, plainspoken analysis, and penetrating insights will inspire you to claim your full human capacities and to take part in healing democracy "from the inside out." -- Martha L. McCoy, Executive Director, Everyday Democracy
* A book born for this moment. Wise, evocative, and pragmatic at its core, this dream for a new politics is grounded in dignity and liberty for all. -- Terry Tempest Williams, author of The Open Space of Democracy
* In this inspiring book, I find encouragement that all of us, citizens and elected officials alike, can learn to bridge the divides that keep us from genuinely respecting one another. By sharing his own life's struggles, Palmer reveals the common struggles we all endure. He provides us with a way forward, a way forward with hope. -- U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin
* A gracefully written anthem to democracy [that] breaks new ground in marrying the capacity of the human heart with the tensions inherent in politics [and] breathes new life into what it means to be a citizen--accountable, compassionate, fiercely realistic. -- Peter Block and John McKnight, coauthors of The Abundant Community
* A "must read" for everyone who is concerned about the state of our democracy and has ever despaired about what can be done. Palmer's stories, plainspoken analysis, and penetrating insights will inspire you to claim your full human capacities and to take part in healing democracy "from the inside out." -- Martha L. McCoy, Executive Director, Everyday Democracy
* The most important manifesto in generations for breaking through the divisiveness that has paralyzed our democracy. -- Bill Shore, founder of Share Our Strength, author of The Imaginations of Unreasonable Men
* All who harbor concerns about American politics will find in this book a wise and kindred spirit who reminds us of choices we can make to help "reweave the tattered fabric of our civic life." You will close this book appreciating how much you can do, and how much depends on you. -- Diana Chapman Walsh, President Emerita of Wellesley College
* A courageous work that is honest and true, human and humble, glitteringly intelligent and unabashedly hopeful. Palmer gives us constructive language, historical context and a practical vision for how we as individuals and communities can get to the real heart of the matter. -- Carrie Newcomer, activist and singer-songwriter, The Geography of Light and Before and After
* Could not be more timely and needed. As one who has been guided through a time of personal reflection with Parker Palmer, I invite you to join in a journey through these chapters. -- U.S. Congresswoman Lois Capps, grandmother, mother, nurse, and seeker after democracy
* A brave and visionary book. Palmer re-imagines our political lives as a deeply personal process within which all Americans--especially those of us inheriting this broken polity--have a chance to be heard, heal, and get on with the eternal work of perfecting this nation. -- Courtney E. Martin, author of Do It Anyway: The New Generation of Activists
* Palmer has been our mentor as we've weathered the rough and tumble of political life. In this compelling new book, he challenges us to recognize that a more vital democracy begins within each of us, as we learn to hold the tensions inherent in community life and no longer fear to tread that most difficult terrain--the broken places in our own hearts. -- Kathy Gille served for twenty years as a senior congressional aide. -- Doug Tanner, her husband, is a founder and former president of The Faith and Politics Institute.
* A book that should be read and talked about in every family, book club, classroom, boardroom, congregation and hall of government in our country. Palmer writes with clarity, good sense, balance, honesty, humor and humility, focusing on the essence of what is needed from each of us for the survival of our democracy. -- Thomas F. Beech, President Emeritus, the Fetzer Institute
* All who harbor concerns about American politics will find in this book a wise and kindred spirit who reminds us of choices we can make to help "reweave the tattered fabric of our civic life." You will close this book appreciating how much you can do, and how much depends on you. -- Diana Chapman Walsh, President Emerita of Wellesley College
* A courageous work that is honest and true, human and humble, glitteringly intelligent and unabashedly hopeful. Palmer gives us constructive language, historical context and a practical vision for how we as individuals and communities can get to the real heart of the matter. -- Carrie Newcomer, activist and singer-songwriter, The Geography of Light and Before and After
* Could not be more timely and needed. As one who has been guided through a time of personal reflection with Parker Palmer, I invite you to join in a journey through these chapters. -- U.S. Congresswoman Lois Capps, grandmother, mother, nurse, and seeker after democracy
* A brave and visionary book. Palmer re-imagines our political lives as a deeply personal process within which all Americans--especially those of us inheriting this broken polity--have a chance to be heard, heal, and get on with the eternal work of perfecting this nation. -- Courtney E. Martin, author of Do It Anyway: The New Generation of Activists
* Palmer has been our mentor as we've weathered the rough and tumble of political life. In this compelling new book, he challenges us to recognize that a more vital democracy begins within each of us, as we learn to hold the tensions inherent in community life and no longer fear to tread that most difficult terrain--the broken places in our own hearts. -- Kathy Gille served for twenty years as a senior congressional aide. -- Doug Tanner, her husband, is a founder and former president of The Faith and Politics Institute.
* A book that should be read and talked about in every family, book club, classroom, boardroom, congregation and hall of government in our country. Palmer writes with clarity, good sense, balance, honesty, humor and humility, focusing on the essence of what is needed from each of us for the survival of our democracy. -- Thomas F. Beech, President Emeritus, the Fetzer Institute
Product details
- File Size: 1714 KB
- Print Length: 263 pages
- Publisher: Jossey-Bass; 1 edition (July 31, 2014)
- Publication Date: July 31, 2014
- Sold by: Amazon Digital Services LLC
- Language: English
- ASIN: B018ZXYXCO
- Text-to-Speech: Enabled
All reviewersAll starsAll formatsText, image, video
3.0 out of 5 starsSheer fantasy (2.5*s)
ByJ. Grattan
VINE VOICEon October 6, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
While this book is obviously heartfelt, it is a dream; it is fantasy. The author has this notion - wishes for is more accurate - that people operating from their hearts can and will resurrect democracy in the US, with of course outcomes that just so happen to correspond with his ideals about America. The author is hardly ignorant of the actual nature of our society and its institutions, yet is scarcely deterred by the endemic isolation and huge resource differentials that practically guarantee that democracy in the US cannot work beyond the formalities of voting.
Operating from the heart involves intellect, but of more importance to the author are emotions, imagination, initiative, humility, compassion, and the like. He is almost Biblical in his call for the acceptance of strangers, of diversity, which reflects his religious roots and is necessary for democracy. For him, church settings are ideal for nurturing democratic instincts. However, he does not quite connect the togetherness that he finds in a small black church in Americus, GA with what is needed in a society of a few hundred million people.
The author is most assuredly correct to suggest that democracy requires practice on a small scale. Yet our major institutions, schools, churches, and workplaces, are rigidly hierarchical with virtually no chances to assert democratic initiatives. Beyond those places, the urban neighborhoods and small towns that facilitated face-to-face contact have largely disappeared. Sterile, tightly controlled malls have replaced main streets, automobiles are needed to drive from suburbs to shopping areas, and television and now the Internet with their highly packaged content have replaced the untidiness of the county fair and the raucous political rally.
Beyond a very few, short-lived examples there are no venues for wide-ranging discussion about issues in the US. The substitute is wildly inflammatory, distorting rhetoric that is usually privately received, misrepresents realities, and demonizes anyone not on board with the message. Invariably powerful, rich interests are behind those efforts to control thinking; it is essentially propaganda. The last thing that is wanted is open discussion of the issues.
The demonization of government, of the political realm, is especially interesting. The ancients, that is, the Greeks, considered those who remained in the private realm to be idiots. It was the responsibility of adults - only males in those days - to participate in the public realm, which directly under laid the political structure and gave them much control over the direction that their society would take. That is so in contrast to the modern political sphere. The only public/political role envisioned for most people in the US is to be bombarded by simplistic, obscuring sound bites for months on-end via various media outlets with no real way to respond, and after voting for a media-created person, leave governing to a distant bureaucracy that is largely infiltrated by powerful interests. Of course, they do not want day-to-day citizen oversight as done in a Greek democracy.
The author goes on endlessly about the genius of the creation of the US political system, which ignores the fact the founders, for the most part, were interested in curtailing the raucous democratic actions that had sprung up in several states after the War. Notwithstanding the fact that most democracies in the world have avoided incorporating the roadblocks of the US Constitution, in theory, the US system could be bent to the will of the people. But that is precisely the problem. There is no intelligent, coherent will of the people, because there is no public realm that has produced a governing philosophy. All that exists is the aggregation of private opinions that have been molded by outside authorities, whether it is through sterile curriculums of school systems or the more obvious propaganda of political campaigns.
The good thing about this book is that the author realizes that we do not have a functioning democracy. Beyond that, the book is simply wishful. He wishes that schools, churches, and workplaces facilitated democracy. He wishes that we were not isolated in our little rooms with our TVs and computers. He wishes that we actually have political discussion in public settings. He wishes for no less than personality changes in people, which is what his call for a heart-based approach really is. He really does not address what practical changes are needed in government or who should be in government. When fat cats are elected to Congress, how could it possibly be expected that the policies of the US government would address the needs of most Americans?
Ultimately, the book is totally frustrating. The author, a PhD social scientist, seems to think that his life as a sometimes activist translates into most Americans going down a similar trail of enlightenment. That is total fantasy. He really ignores the polarization and propaganda that permeates US society. He totally underestimates the lack of opportunities for significant democratic action in places that occupy most of our time each day. The actual fact is that, given our modern technological, isolated world, we may be further away from effective democratic action than at any time in our history and believing that there can be a democratic transformation based on a vague notion of heart-based actions seems almost ridiculous.
---
43 comments| 60 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----
4.0 out of 5 starsRejuvenating Our System of Self-government
ByPaul Froehlichon September 29, 2012
Format: Hardcover
Our nation was inspired by JFK's most famous words, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." But that was in 1961. It's doubtful that the nation today would find those words so inspirational, given our weakened sense of community and impaired concern for the common good.
Mitt Romney's disparaging comments about the 47% of Americans supposedly dependent on government is a striking example of how polarized politics have become.
Like most Americans, Parker J. Palmer knows that political polarization is a threat to our democratic republic. Some 95 percent of Americans believe civility in politics is important for a healthy democracy. Palmer understands that compromise is indispensable in our political system -- as opposed to a Parliamentary democracy -but that requires approaching conflict with civility and creativity.
In Healing the Heart of Democracy, Palmer proposes how to reweave the tattered civic fabric that gives rise to poisonous rhetoric and political gridlock. Palmer became a Quaker as an adult, attracted to a faith that has long encouraged cooperation in public affairs, and that appreciates human diversity.
Diversity can undermine community if we let it. "The benefits of diversity," writes Palmer, "can be ours only if we hold our differences with respect, patience, openness, and hope." Palmer prescribes creative tension holding, building trust, and valuing - not just tolerating - differences.
Palmer repeatedly invokes Lincoln's phrase about "the better angels of our nature," and Tocqueville's analysis that American democracy depended upon developing what he called "habits of the heart."
The heart must be open, Palmer writes, to vitality & engagement, transcending the tendency to think in terms of us and them, in order to learn from differences. We must cultivate the ability to hold tension in life-giving ways, to hold creatively contradictions and disagreements. When we are disappointed - heartbroken -- about the direction of our country, we should resist the urge to withdraw into cynicism and anger.
Sharp disagreements, when dealt with by open hearts, can lead to democratic renewal. If we cannot or will not recover the sense of unity among strangers, then debates degenerate, distrust grows, and people are driven from the public square.
America needs a rejuvenation of public life, which refers to community involvement, to voluntary associations, which Lincoln said builds "the bond of social and political union among us." Tocqueville also identified a vigorous public life among Americans as the critical layer of democracy's infrastructure.
People who have the least contact with strangers tend to have the most fear of them and to assume the worst.
Palmer describes ways to encourage people to come out of isolation for a while to enjoy each other's company, developing a stronger sense of civic community in the process.
"If we aim to be `one nation, indivisible,' the capacity to imagine ourselves as members of one another, despite all that separates us, is essential."
Schools and congregations can and should play a vital role in not only teaching the habits of the heart but in practicing them. Students who have never had practice in collective decision-making won't suddenly become active citizens at age 18. Breaking bread together is one of the best ways to create community, both within a congregation and with folks in the larger community.
There's no question that American democracy needs healing. Palmer offers a hopeful pathway to do so. ###
1 comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
2.0 out of 5 starsA Major Disappointment
ByMichael W. Kruseon February 13, 2012
Format: Hardcover|Verified Purchase
I have really appreciated Parker Palmer's books over the years but this book is a profound disappointment. I quit reading at the halfway point. If you are a liberal/progressive, then I suspect you may enjoy the book. It plays very well into the meme that at core of the discord in our country are conservatives. I can't help but feel that Palmer missed an opportunity.
I know he is a Quaker pacifist. I've suspected his political views were to the left based on other writing I've seen. I have no problem with that. But his topic is "Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit." Every few pages he trots out examples of the values and misbehavior that are contrary to his aims and they are invariably those of conservative citizens (without him ever explicitly saying this.) The outrageous values and misbehavior of the left are not on his radar. And that is the problem.
We each see our opponents actions as threatening and crazy but we feel justified in our threatening and crazy behavior because we know our opponents wrong. That is how Tea Party rallies (where some park service people report that participants left venues as clean or better than when they came) can be dubbed terrible hate-filled racist mob, while the Occupy Movement with its illegal occupation of property, vandalism, defecating and urinating on police vehicles and passersby, is heralded as a wonderful expression in Democracy. (I actually think both movements are hopeful signs of our democracy, that both have their excesses.) That is how there can be obsessive anger at activists talking about death panels, while be oblivious to the President calling Congress terrorists and hostage takers, as well as the VP and leading Democrats talking about Republican desires to kill people.
The first step in restoring democracy is to resolve not to use other people's bad behavior as excuse for your own. I don't think Palmer is there. I will continue to give his "Let Your Life Speak" book to others as gifts. I still think his "The Active Life" book is one of the best books I've read. But this book simply isn't worth my time.
1 comment| 34 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
4.0 out of 5 stars
America's Spiritual Cardiologist SPEAKS!! So....Listen & Act
ByWilliam DahlVINE VOICEon November 16, 2011
Format: Hardcover
In Healing the Heart of Democracy - The Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit, one of my favorite authors, Parker J. Palmer, pours his heart out, integrating the myriad of dimensions of why this effort is so essential, your role in it, and the realistic possibilities/opportunities for the outcomes he so vigorously advocates for.
In one sense this book is about you, the American citizen. It's a call to come off the couch and assume a new posture of chutzpah and humility. Chutzpah to speak your mind or your heart about issues in America. Humility to do so in a civil and respectful way - holding the same tolerance and courtesy toward those whose views are contrary to your own.
Consider the following:
"But as long as distrust and contempt keep "We the People" from having a generative conversation, our will cannot be known let alone voiced."(p.16).
Just as the central thesis of much of Palmer's writing is about the human heart - it is a subject this book cannot escape. "The heart is where we integrate the intellect with the rest of our faculties, such as emotion, imagination, and intuition. It is where we can learn how to "rethink the world together," not apart, and find the courage to act on what we know." (p.18).
The book is filled with prescient observations:
"in the absence of an engaged public, democracy begins to die, and some form of oligarchy emerges to take it's place." (p.25).
"We must develop habits that allow our hearts to break open and embrace diversity rather than break down and further divide us." p. 36.
"Democracy demands that we become engaged with "the other."p.38
Palmer goes on to illuminate Five Habits of the Heart required by the American citizenry to respond to 21st century realities:
1. We're all in this together
2. The need to develop an appreciation for the value of "otherness."
3. The ability to hold tension in life-giving ways.
4. Generate a sense of personal voice and agency.
5. Strengthen our capacity to create community.
Palmer's life's work can be summarized in what he writes on page 60: "there is an eternal mystery about how the shattered soul becomes whole again." He suggests we are now at a place in time within the evolution of the "idea of American democracy" whereby: "We are now at such a place as a nation: we must restore the wholeness of our civic community or watch democracy wither."p. 60. Again, he goes to the reality of the heartbreak that permeates the American landscape as the source of opportunity to "heal the heart of democracy." He suggests that "We the People" must become "a vital reality rather than a philosophical abstraction." (p.99).
Palmer also highlights the penchant for focusing on short-term tasks that promise instant , visible results - yet, maintain paralysis on the larger challenges facing the broader society.
The works of Parker J. Palmer are both numerous and noteworthy. As a point of forthright, full disclosure, they populate my personal library. Palmer can be considered, in my opinion, a legitimate spiritual cardiologist, who has spent a lifetime exploring the mysteries and miracles of the human heart.
As I read Healing The Heart of Democracy, I recognized not only his acumen with matters of the human heart, but an authentic concern with the heart and soul of America - in all its various dimensions - government, principles, representatives, sources of power and influence, citizens, processes, humility, the silent, the overlooked, the marginalized, freedom, hope, innovation, and creativity.
You can't write a book like this unless:
a. You are deeply concerned over the state and trajectory of America.
b. You possess the courage and strength to publicly share your concerns.
c. You have both the wisdom and experience with the "matters of the heart" to define legitimate, well thought out approaches to healing the maladies that currently threaten our collective health.
Read this book. Get three and share it with others. Intentionally gather to talk about it's call to action. This isn't a book filled with words and catchy phrases - it's a behavioral prescription for healing...our hearts - and that of our nation...
Both of which Parker J. Palmer deeply cares about...
If your cardiologist looked you in the eye and gave you specific instructions to "change your lifestyle or else!" What would you do? This is the question and posture that Parker Palmer leaves us with. You have the cardiologist's instructions - now it's up to you!
1 comment| 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Politics of the Brokenhearted
ByRobin FriedmanVINE VOICEon August 15, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
In times of national difficulty, it is both tempting and desirable to step back, reflect upon the situation, and see what might be done to make things better. The process might carry its own danger in the rush to either easy or impracticable answers. I took the opportunity offered by the Amazon Vine program to read Parker J. Palmer's new book "Healing the Heart of Democracy: the Courage to Create a Politics Worthy of the Human Spirit" for the insight it might have on our national situation as witnessed by the recent budget and debt-ceiling deliberations and their aftermath. Palmer wrote his book before these events occured, but they make his examination all the more timely. Palmer (b.1939) received his PhD in Sociology from the University of California at Berkeley in 1970. This book was my first exposure to his work, but he is a noted writer on educational and social issues with a focus on spirituality.
I liked a good deal of this book especially its personal tone. Palmer tries to combine events and feelings in his life, and the way in which he reflects upon them, with our national experience as Americans. He uses throughout the figure of the "habits of the heart", the title of a book by Robert Beulah which derives from de Tocqueville's "Democracy in America". Palmer discusses his own experiences of loss, disappointment and "brokenheartedness" in his life. When these experiences occur, the spirit, or the heart can be shattered. The better course is to put the pieces together, use disappointment creatively, integrate conflicting feelings and move ahead from weakness to strength. So it is, for Palmer, in a democracy.
Palmer offers some inspiring stories to illustrate what he means. He describes meeting with members of a small African American church in rural Georgia in 1974 who showed the strength and discipline to carry on in hard times. He describes meeting a New York City cabdriver who, while navigating the city streets, explained that the attraction of his job was that it allowed him to hear and consider the varied opinions of the many different types of people who rode in his cab. He praises openness to difficulty and a willingness to accept tensions -- in the form of divergent opinions -- and work through them. Palmer also makes excellent use of historical figures. Abraham Lincoln emerges as the hero of the book for his ability to overcome his own demon of depression and for his attempt to reconcile tensions in a crisis as shown by both his First and Second Inaugural Addresses. Alexis de Tocqueville, for his diagnosis of the strengths and weakness of American democracy also receives valuable discussion. Palmer explains his own conclusions in a few words: "We must be able to say in unison: It is in the common good to hold our political differences and the conflicts they create in a way that does not unravel the civic community on which democracy depends."
There is an excellent focus in the book on commonality and civic life, as witnessed in the use of public streets, bookstores, pubs, libraries and other places where people of different backgrounds and persuasions can meet and get to understand one another. I am writing this review, as I generally do, in a public library, largely because I share Palmer's commitment to the use of public space. Palmer also emphasizes the value of people explaining to one another the reasons why the believe what they do on important, controversial matters, based upon their own experiences without attempting to demonize someone who thinks differently. I tried to follow this good advice after reading the book, as I exchanged lengthy emails with a close friend who holds an opinion different from mine on same sex marriage. Perhaps it helped to air the reasons for one's belief and to understand those of another person.
I liked aspects of this book less well. Palmer does not always handle well his own project of openness to ideas with which he disagrees. He frequently translates his project into support for his own distinct agenda and tends to belittle those who think differently. In a passage early in the book Palmer shows awareness that he does this as he comes close to demonizing his political opponents, perhaps by reducing them to straw men ("Get me going on politicians who distort my faith tradition to win votes or on racial bigots and homophobes who want to translate their personal shadows into public policy, and this nice Quaker boy from the Midwest does a passable imitation of the Incredible Hulk") before half-heartedly catching himself and falling back. There is a good deal of cliche and half-formed ideas in this book intertwined with much that is insightful. I found, for example, Palmer all--too--quick in his uncompromising discussion and rejection of "consumerism". Although Palmer has much good to say about the need to both develop and hold one's opinions and to have a degree of modesty and humility in thinking about the opinions of others, his use of the overused term "chutzpah" distorts and distracts from his point. His discussion of American public education, I thought, made a variety of points, some good, some questionable. In places, I thought Palmer was expecting too much from ordinary citizens. Democracy, and the American political process, was made to accomodate a degree of human weakness. And some of the thinking in the book I thought wooly and undeveloped.
This is a worthwhile book to read and to think through. It has many insights but it is not a panacea, in my view, for understanding the current condition of American democracy. Like much other writing, the book deserves to be read but read critically and with skepticism.
Robin Friedman
1 comment| 11 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Route to Healing Our Ruptured Democracy
ByNick Nicholas, MSWon March 9, 2017
Format: Paperback|Verified Purchase
If more people were to read and heed Parker Palmer's Healing the Heart of Democracy, it would go a long way towards lessening the coarseness and hostility of contemporary political discourse. He presents an appealingly calm and rational approach to resolving political differences by first examining what those who stand in political opposition have in common and then proceeding from there. However, with the temper of political difference being what it is these days, the advice offered by the author seems naive. Politics are so polarized that even efforts to find common ground are likely to be rejected.
Palmer focuses his attention on the notion of the heart broken *open* so that it can contain a creative tension for the resolution of political difference as opposed the the heart broken *apart*, the heart shattered. He frequently turns to the figure of Abraham Lincoln who urged an appeal to the "better angels" of human nature following the conclusion of the Civil War. Unfortunately, the polarization of contemporary politics may make such an appeal to "better angels" impossible.
Palmer admits that he is a Quaker, and the quiet approach of Quakerism informs the approach advocated in this book. It is a very appealing approach, but its applicability in the times of Donald Trump's presidency is doubtful. Nevertheless, it is an approach worth trying with those who are less radicalized, either on the right or the left. It is an approach that would be attractive to those who are open to having their minds changed, but it is doubtful Palmer's method would be effective with those whose hearts are defiantly hardened.
Nevertheless, this is a book well-worth reading, if only to begin the necessary healing process of our ruptured democracy. Our polarized nation cannot be sustained without substantial damage to the fabric of our nation, and Palmer offers a route for beginning that road to healing.
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
5.0 out of 5 stars
A Gift of Great Value - Finding Our True Voice
ByMarianna Cacciatoreon September 10, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Verified Purchase
Parker Palmer is one of the few people I know who can write about the heart and politics in the same sentence and not diminish either but, in fact, deepen our understanding of both. He does not offer a schmaltzy version of the heart. Rather, a very hardy and honest description that includes atrocities driven by emotions. He goes to the core when he writes of heartbreak and asks what we can do "so that it yields life, not death?"
In these cynical times we think of politics as mostly the purview of powerful politicians. For me, Parker dispelled that idea by offering page after page of thoughtful insight, historical information, and practical ideas that got me thinking of ways I can actively contribute to strengthening this gift of democracy I was born into.
"The impulses that make democracy possible--and those that threaten it--originate in the heart, with its complex mix of heedless self-interest and yearning for community. From there, these impulses move out into our relations with each other in families, neighborhoods, workplaces, voluntary associations, and the various settings of public life...these are the places where we can make a difference, too, once we free ourselves from the illusion that we are at the mercy of forces beyond our control." (from pages 22 & 23)
He goes on to write about holding the tension of opposites--with true-life "political" stories to illustrate this ideal and skill; "habits of the heart" that help us live a democratic life; and interesting ways to widen the scope of community to include those beyond our family and chosen friends. All in service of We the People finding our voice and using a combination of "Chutzpah and Humility" to take our rightful place in the creation of the life we share.
If I could have one wish it would be that everyone, upon reading this book, becomes inspired to take personal actions to strengthen the democratic life most of us take for granted. This book has the power to do just that. I close this review with a passage at the core of the book's teaching:
"Heart...is a word that reaches far beyond our feelings. It points to a larger way of knowing--of receiving and reflecting on our experience--that goes deeper than the mind alone can take us. The heart is where we integrate the intellect with the rest of our faculties, such as emotion, imagination, and intuition. It is where we can learn how to "think the world together," not apart, and find the courage to act on what we know." (pgs. 17 & 18)
Parker Palmer has given us a gift of great value. Everyone should know it exists.
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
2.0 out of 5 stars
No country for old men
ByNamyriahon May 28, 2013
Format: Hardcover
This book is written in the "Something must be done!" mode. Apparently the "something" is the usual liberal panacea: stew in your feelings and throw a lot of emotion-laden words around to prove you are the good Samaritan on steroids. If the author had a dollar for ever occurrence of "heart" in the book, he wouldn't need the royalties. Yeah, I know it sounds mean (rather, "coldhearted") to diss a book that has its hearts in the right place (every other sentence). But as I made my way through this "heart"-filled book, I wondered if the author had kept playing that tedious 60s anthem: "Smile on your brother, everybody get together, try to love one another right now." Nice sentiments (written by a convicted druggie, btw), but not much of a political platform, especially when politicians get all huggy-kissy with their fellow travelers, then go out and give a speech where they thoroughly trash the other side. In the word of Jesus, "even the pagans" love their friends, but loving the enemy is difficult, and even if we love the enemy, we don't have to love his stupid and toxic ideology or sit by and see it imposed on the citizens, do we?
And speaking of love of enemies, consider this lovely sentiment: "Get me going on politicians who distort my faith tradition to win votes or on racial bigots or homophobes who want to translate their personal shadows into public policy, and this nice Quaker boy from the Midwest does a passable imitation of the Incredible Hulk." In your dreams, author. Aside from creating a very comical visual image, the sentence is utterly irrational: "bigots" and "homophobes" are liberalspeak for "people who oppose racial preferences because they are unfair" and "people who side with several thousand years of human tradition which limit marriage to male and female" - but obviously words like "bigots" and "homophobes" will get a rise out of the reader. After going on page after page about valuing "the other" and "differences," here the author shows the typical liberal pleasure in proclaiming himself superior to "the other." Does he really think the Incredible Hulk ought to be beating up sane and decent people who believe "equal opportunity" ought to mean "equal opportunity" not "white males go to the end of the employment line"?
I give him credit for understanding that democracy isn't just messy, it's SUPPOSED to be messy. It always was, and Jefferson, Adams, and the big "saints" in our history were notorious for backstabbing and slandering. Palmer, like too many people today, thinks things have gotten worse in recent times. The record says otherwise. The real difference is that our ancestors, lucky dogs, had to get their political nastiness in the form of a daily or weekly newspaper, not 24/7 news feeds. There isn't more political malice today, just more opportunities to express it.
But despite all the rancor, the author is optimist - and could never be mistaken for a realist:
"We can learn how to rethink the world together."
"Violence is what we get when we do not know what else to do with our suffering." (Is he aware that violence was relatively rare during the Great Depression, or that the racial violence of the 60s escalated after the Civil Rights Bill was passed, or that the 1992 LA riots had nothing to do with suffering?)
"The civility we need will not come from watching our tongues. It will come from valuing our differences." Oh, please. He made it abundantly clear that people whose views differ from his own are "bigots."
We must "embrace diversity." Yes, but that's been tried, hasn't it, and look how it works out in most people's lives: apply for a job or admission to an elite school, then wonder if your actual qualifications matter in the slightest, because diversity replaced merit as the important thing. Voters aren't all idiots, and they're aware that turning the abstraction Diversity into a god has caused all kind of mischief. The fact that the mass of people resent this just makes the pseudo-intellectuals feel good about their superiority to the masses.
"Writing this book has rejuvenated me." That is wishful thinking, unless what he means is that writing the book made him feel all gooey about his younger days. A resume doesn't always reveal much about a person, but in some cases you can reconstruct a person just from a few bits of data. Palmer was in his 20s in the 1960s; he graduated from UC Berkeley; he's a Quaker; he lives in Madison, Wisconsin. Those four factoids say not just "liberal" but "liberal with a vengeance" and "never got over the 60s and never will." If you are of that generation, or think the 60s were some kind of golden age of compassion, you might love this book. However, if you think clearly and see the 60s as the golden age of ugly clothes, ugly hair, no-strings sex, pot, and in-your-face self-righteousness, the book might at least give you some chuckles. Turn it into a game: keep track of how many times "heart" is used.
This isn't a bad book, just an impractical and unnecessary one, intended to make the reader sigh once per page, feel good about himself, and look down on those who are less vocal about how compassionate they are in their own fantasies.
Comment| 13 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
5.0 out of 5 stars
Illuminating the Vision of What Can Be
ByTracy Marks
VINE VOICEon October 17, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
The first few chapters of HEALING THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY are inspiring, articulate and often eloquent. Parker Palmer speaks of the "politics of the brokenhearted", giving voice to those of us who have not only suffered personally, but who have also become disenchanted with politics, and grieve because many U.S. policies today betray the values in which we believe.
Palmer calls upon us to transform our grief and despair into compassion and active citizenship, to listen to our hearts and allow the pain we experience to lead to deeper engagement and community. "What happens next in you and the world around you depends upon HOW your heart breaks," he tells us. "If it breaks APART into a thousand pieces, the result may be anger, depression and disengagement. If it breaks OPEN into greater capacities to hold the complexities and contradictions of human experience, the result may be new life."
We must realize that we are all in this together, Palmer points out. In order to revitalize our democratic ideals, we must extend ourselves beyond our narrow circles of family, friends and neighbors, listening receptively to the experiences and beliefs of the strangers in our midst, appreciating the value of "otherness."
Challenging lifestyles based upon immediate gratification and sharing of information via tweets and soundbites, Palmer urges us to develop a long-term perspective. He encourages us to "cultivate the ability to hold tension in life-giving ways" so that together we may eventually forge solutions to our problems that respond to the needs of the many, rather than the few.
The second half of HEALING THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY elaborates upon the first chapters. Palmer discusses national myths about America, and delves into such issues as reclaiming space for public life, classrooms and congregations, and the opportunities and limitations of relating via cyberspace.
Some readers may find Palmer's vision to be unrealistic, denying the realities of human self-interest, the power of corporate media and the resistance of long-standing institutions. To a large extent, I agree. But at the same time, I honor Palmer's message. He speaks to our grief, which when not fully acknowledged leads to paralysis, cynicism and despair. He helps us to articulate our most deeply held values, and to reaffirm them - strengthening our center of gravity so that we are less at the mercy of the media and peer pressure. He lights many candles which may not fully illuminate the darkening days, but which at least provide flickers of hope and reveal intimations of a better tomorrow.
Due to years of listening to my own "felt sense" and learning to differentiate internal messages from the heart, center, gut and mind, I do have difficulty relating to Palmer's definition of HEART as "where we integrate the intellect with the rest of our faculties, such as emotion, imagination and intuition." I experience the heart as the inner space where both tender and painful feelings emerge, not as a place of accessing the intellect. My inclination would be to speak of our "center" or "source" as the inner space where our minds, feelings and intuition function as a unified, coherent whole.
But the major issue I have with the book is not what Palmer says but what he doesn't say. He addresses WHAT needs to happen rather than the HOW. I am not referring here to HOW to motivate people to listen to opinions different from their own or attend more public meetings. Those who are reading this book and connect with the values Palmer expresses are already halfway there. A larger and at least as significant issue is how the millions of American who are not connected to their hearts or centers or spiritual sources, who act primarily from self-interest, and who have little concern for people beyond their own narrow circle - as well as those who due to necessity are motivated entirely by the pressures of sheer survival - how they can CARE enough, be informed enough, be motivated enough and be empowered enough to live the lifestyle that Palmer presents.
In conclusion, although I find HEALING THE HEART OF DEMOCRACY to be incomplete and to raise as many questions as it answers, I am rating it five stars because of the importance and clarity of Palmer's message and because of the passages in which he truly, lucidly and lyrically illuminates the path ahead:
"If we want to reclaim our democracy, we need to do the challenging heart-work of examining our myths, seeing how far they are from the reality of our national life, and then reclaiming the visions embedded in them, and doing the hard work necessary to bring reality closer to them." The exact nature of that "hard work" is for each of us, in our own way, to discover and elucidate.
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
---
5.0 out of 5 stars
Democracy, the Heart, and All Things Healing
ByKevin L. Nenstiel
VINE VOICETOP 1000 REVIEWERon September 25, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
Parker J. Palmer starts from the idea that democracy remains an ideal worth striving after. He doesn't sugar-coat his opinion, or pretend America hasn't frequently failed to uphold "the better angels of our nature," according to the Abraham Lincoln quote that lives so close to his heart. He's forthright that we have miles to go. But we also have a goal worth pursuing, and a people more than ready for the pursuit.
In the wake of the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, our ongoing overseas fighting, and two polarizing presidential elections, many Americans feel disillusioned with politics altogether. Not Palmer. Like you and me, Palmer sees parties who ignore the electorate, office holders who talk past each other, and media figures who sell advertising by ginning up partisan rancor. But he sees this not as failure, but as unprecedented opportunity.
Palmer believes democracy depends vitally on certain "habits of the heart" among its citizens. Too often, we permit our elected, business, and media leaders to behave unchecked, secure in the illusion that, if they do anything wrong, we can vote them out, move our money, or change channels. But recent history proves that such passivity permits the unscrupulous to run society unchallenged. It's time free people stepped up.
It starts by recognizing that we all have a stake in the public sphere. Palmer emphasizes that the "public" sphere is where citizens meet as equals and build meaningful relationships that flow freely; don't confuse the public with the political sphere, which is hierarchical and power-based. We can never meet as equals in the political sphere. But work, commerce, religion, and other places of adult equality form democracy's true beating heart.
Unfortunately, we permit "leaders" of questionable merit to devalue the public sphere, until the private sphere squeezes it out. We no longer go to marketplaces where goods, ideas, and relationships flow freely across economic and cultural barriers. Our air-conditioned, privately held malls take that place. Dissent gets squelched, both by ownership of public space, and by permitting strident partisan propaganda to replace frank discussion.
Public life happens most in three venues: school, worship, and work. Sadly, leaders who don't have our best interests at heart suborn all three venues. School has become hierarchical and encourages passivity rather than engagement. Worship works best when it rewards an outsider's perspective that seldom gets past the gatekeepers. And as long as workers and managers maintain an adversarial attitude, work remains a diminished public space.
Parker J. Palmer's vision of how to remedy these inequities will not come easily. Despite his eloquent explanations throughout his book, he acknowledges that we will face resistance. Those who benefit from the current state of affairs will push back actively, while those who could gain from democratic renewal will offer only inertia--at least at first. To succeed, Palmer says, we need to invest for years, even generations.
Democracy has suffered recently because we think we have achieved our Founders' goals once for all. Palmer reminds us that democracy is not a state of being; it is a process. And if we want to pass a free and peaceful society onto the next generation, we need to take a guiding hand in maintaining that peace, and those freedoms, right now, and every day to come.
---
Comment| 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
==================================================
----------
0 out of 5 starsSheer fantasy (2.5*s)
ByJ. GrattanVINE VOICEon October 6, 2011
Format: Hardcover|Vine Customer Review of Free Product( What's this? )
While this book is obviously heartfelt, it is a dream; it is fantasy. The author has this notion - wishes for is more accurate - that people operating from their hearts can and will resurrect democracy in the US, with of course outcomes that just so happen to correspond with his ideals about America. The author is hardly ignorant of the actual nature of our society and its institutions, yet is scarcely deterred by the endemic isolation and huge resource differentials that practically guarantee that democracy in the US cannot work beyond the formalities of voting.
Operating from the heart involves intellect, but of more importance to the author are emotions, imagination, initiative, humility, compassion, and the like. He is almost Biblical in his call for the acceptance of strangers, of diversity, which reflects his religious roots and is necessary for democracy. For him, church settings are ideal for nurturing democratic instincts. However, he does not quite connect the togetherness that he finds in a small black church in Americus, GA with what is needed in a society of a few hundred million people.
The author is most assuredly correct to suggest that democracy requires practice on a small scale. Yet our major institutions, schools, churches, and workplaces, are rigidly hierarchical with virtually no chances to assert democratic initiatives. Beyond those places, the urban neighborhoods and small towns that facilitated face-to-face contact have largely disappeared. Sterile, tightly controlled malls have replaced main streets, automobiles are needed to drive from suburbs to shopping areas, and television and now the Internet with their highly packaged content have replaced the untidiness of the county fair and the raucous political rally.
Beyond a very few, short-lived examples there are no venues for wide-ranging discussion about issues in the US. The substitute is wildly inflammatory, distorting rhetoric that is usually privately received, misrepresents realities, and demonizes anyone not on board with the message. Invariably powerful, rich interests are behind those efforts to control thinking; it is essentially propaganda. The last thing that is wanted is open discussion of the issues.
The demonization of government, of the political realm, is especially interesting. The ancients, that is, the Greeks, considered those who remained in the private realm to be idiots. It was the responsibility of adults - only males in those days - to participate in the public realm, which directly under laid the political structure and gave them much control over the direction that their society would take. That is so in contrast to the modern political sphere. The only public/political role envisioned for most people in the US is to be bombarded by simplistic, obscuring sound bites for months on-end via various media outlets with no real way to respond, and after voting for a media-created person, leave governing to a distant bureaucracy that is largely infiltrated by powerful interests. Of course, they do not want day-to-day citizen oversight as done in a Greek democracy.
The author goes on endlessly about the genius of the creation of the US political system, which ignores the fact the founders, for the most part, were interested in curtailing the raucous democratic actions that had sprung up in several states after the War. Notwithstanding the fact that most democracies in the world have avoided incorporating the roadblocks of the US Constitution, in theory, the US system could be bent to the will of the people. But that is precisely the problem. There is no intelligent, coherent will of the people, because there is no public realm that has produced a governing philosophy. All that exists is the aggregation of private opinions that have been molded by outside authorities, whether it is through sterile curriculums of school systems or the more obvious propaganda of political campaigns.
The good thing about this book is that the author realizes that we do not have a functioning democracy. Beyond that, the book is simply wishful. He wishes that schools, churches, and workplaces facilitated democracy. He wishes that we were not isolated in our little rooms with our TVs and computers. He wishes that we actually have political discussion in public settings. He wishes for no less than personality changes in people, which is what his call for a heart-based approach really is. He really does not address what practical changes are needed in government or who should be in government. When fat cats are elected to Congress, how could it possibly be expected that the policies of the US government would address the needs of most Americans?
Ultimately, the book is totally frustrating. The author, a PhD social scientist, seems to think that his life as a sometimes activist translates into most Americans going down a similar trail of enlightenment. That is total fantasy. He really ignores the polarization and propaganda that permeates US society. He totally underestimates the lack of opportunities for significant democratic action in places that occupy most of our time each day. The actual fact is that, given our modern technological, isolated world, we may be further away from effective democratic action than at any time in our history and believing that there can be a democratic transformation based on a vague notion of heart-based actions seems almost ridiculous.
43 comments| 60 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
--------------
Comment
Showing 10 comments
Sort by:
Newest
Oldest
J. Grattan6 years ago (Edited)
Report abuse
At this pt, this is the only review that is less than 4 stars - actually 90% are 5 stars. I fully expect to be neggied vociferuosly. What I'm wondering is will comments be made that actually address points made in the review.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson6 years ago (Edited)
Report abuse
I think you have struck at the heart of the book and at the major deficiencies of the American political system. Although I have not read the book and probably won't have time to work it in, I see no urgency in doing so after reading your review and several of the five star reviews. I suspect that I would be as frustrated by it as you are. Your comment
He really ignores the polarization and propaganda that permeates US society. He totally underestimates the lack of opportunities for significant democratic action in places that occupy most of our time each day. The actual fact is that, given our modern technological, isolated world, we may be further away from effective democratic action than at any time in our history and believing that there can be a democratic transformation based on a vague notion of heart-based actions seems almost ridiculous
accurately describes the problems with American democracy.
Wishing for change will not, as you suggest, create change. The five star reviews I read are just as fantastical as you describe the book. We have no grasp of democracy or democratic action and would not long support politicians who act in the public interest.
You point out that the founders "were interested in curtailing the raucous democratic actions that had sprung up in several states after the War," but you fail to point out that many of them believed that a disinterested aristocracy would serve the best interests of the nation and that the Senate was originally designed to provide dispassionate oversight. Democracy is messy, and we forget that, involved as we are in the chaos and the messiness. We also forget that human nature is dualistic and that our hearts are not pure -- one part of us is altruistic, the other totally selfish -- and the balance changes constantly even within the individual. Because of our dualistic nature, demagogues can easily and effectively control us by placing our selfish natures in the ascendency. Politicians like George Bush, Rick Perry, Sarah Palin, and Herman Cain demonstrate clearly how easy it is for demagogues to rule us by claiming selfishness is beneficial, even when our selfish behavior will probably benefit only the few.
I would suggest that the technological isolation of our society makes it no easier for a skilled speaker to sway an audience through powerful appeals to the emotions than standing on a stump. Public intercourse could help our political system make better decisions, but I doubt it. We have too little interest in the public good and too much interest in what most benefits us. Our politicians are well aware of that and would be successful on a stump or in a televised debate.
As you suggest, Palmer and the five star reviewers totally overlook human nature.
Excellent review.
Leave a reply
Paul O'Connor6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
I agree you. I also just finished reading the book through the Vine program and wish I had written something half as eloquent as you. I was greatly moved by Palmer's dream but found myself totally disconnected and a bit frustrated by the lack of anything resembling a reasonable plan.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago (Edited)In reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Paul, thanks for comment. Your review was more heartfelt. Me - I'm always the technocrat. I don't have any trouble writing about democracy. I know what it is, and we don't have it. We talk the talk, but don't do the walk.
I don't think most people really know what democracy is. They get told such horror stories as imagine 100 million people in a meeting to decide something. That's ridiculous. Of course, there would have to be layers and representation, just not representation by plutocrats for plutocrats. But it is much more than merely voting. Democracy is hard work; it does require involved citizens.
I personally think that democracy should start in our workplaces. Usually they are small enough where a voice can be heard, and they are where most adults go every day. The idea that my economic destiny should totally be in the hands of some manager is ridiculous. We should all have meaningful voices at work. German Works Councils are a start. They are not unions. They are worker controlled organizations mandated by law.
Many democratic actions in the US in the past are very connected to work and/or the econonmy: the Knights of Labor, the Populists, the Socialists, the IWW, the CIO, etc. One thing is common among all of them - they had to battle the forces of reaction, often suffering greatly. That is missing from this book. There are many people who have made huge sacrifices to fight power.
Leave a reply
Don Morgan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
It totally frustrates me when people comment on books they have not read or in this case have no intention of reading. I would suggest that Amazon delete reviews like this. Short of that, of course, I don't have to read them, which I won't.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
D. Morgan - please, what are you speaking of?
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Mr. Morgan,
Just a desire to create dispute?
R. S. Wilkerson
Leave a reply
Elizabeth in WI6 years ago
Report abuse
I disagree with this review. Although I read your review prior to borrowing my copy from the library, I am enjoying it and feel that it is magnificently rational and practical.
Your arguments are mostly personal grievances about the same social issues Palmer is working with but does not waste the reader's time or intelligence to spell them out. Interestingly, the posted grievances use language to evoke a negative emotional response to the book. Ironically, one of Palmer's contentions with the current voting public is the power that emotions have over it, and the power of those emotions to quickly disable even the most basic intellectual argument.
As a PhD social scientist, I believe the author is sufficiently, if not more than aptly suited for this work.
It may be offensive to some that Palmer's appeal for heart has spiritual nuances. Admittedly, in a capitalist society in rapid decline, tender words for "the other" may smack of a human interest story or charity appeal. It is important that we agree that the implications are spiritual, not religious, not dogmatic. He speaks honestly from his Christian experience but never proselytizes. As a result, "the other consciousness" advocated here is accessible to most, if not all of the practicing faiths in America. Adapting Palmer's philosophy of the heart and the examples of what that may look like are, within the context of this America, foreign and perhaps archaic. Far more significant than these, the philosophy is timeless and nearly invincible when applied, even on a small scale.
I invite you to reread this book from the perspective of a young adult who does not have the time or experience to contrast a then and now socio-political experience. The men who signed the Constitution were well aware of their humanity and their propensity for counter-democratic concerns and decisions. Palmer stresses over and over again the critical strength necessary for a healthy democracy, that being the ability to hold tension and meet challenges with creativity, instead of emotionally provoked or special interest-directed decision making.
The heart-based notions are anything but vague. Palmer draws on the intellect and emotional fuel of President Lincoln, Alexis de Tocqueville, and Terry Tempest Williams for examples of heart-based notions in concert with a variety of intellectual perspectives.
I am confident you will find that my comments actually address points made in your review.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
E. Burgert,
Actually, I would say that your comment in no way addresses the points that I made in my review. We are a very non-political, socially isolated, propagandized people. We claim to be religious, but that has not translated into the kind of society that the author desires, hence, my suggestion that the author is operating in fantasy land. He wishes that a spiritual, heartfelt approach would result in a different society from the one that we have, but it is what it is.
Of course, he can point to isolated examples where small communities, often churches, adopt a helping mode. But that hardly constitutes a wide-ranging change in society.
Any sober look at American society over the last decade finds a society of increasing inequality with tens of millions living in various degrees of poverty. It is unconscionable that a society of our wealth has not the wherewithal to insure that all kids are well fed and housed. It is easy to point fingers and say that the parents are irresponsible. That is the point. That is what we do. We blame instead of trying to create a basic floor below which no one is allowed to fall. I rest my case: there is virtually no evidence of a society that is heart-driven as the author desires.
Americans continually vote for those who support the society-crushing actions of financial elites and CEOs in search of every dime of profit. Free trade deals have decimated our jobs base, as well Visa programs that give our jobs to foreigners. Wall St and the mortgage industry nearly single-handedly brought this country to its knees. This is the reality that the author practically ignores. The idea that a Romney, Gingrich, et al could even show their face in a public forum discussing how to turn our society around is a sick joke. These people are nothing but fat cats. They and their rich supporters are the problem. Democratically oriented candidates absolutely cannot get a hearing in America. So much for concern for your fellow man.
So, no, my review of this book was quite realistic. There is absolutely no evidence of some sort of spiritual awakening in America. In fact, quite the opposite. It is you, E. Burgert, who needs to reassess the realities of American society and not be taken in by feel-good fantasies.
Leave a reply
Don Morgan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Your review is thoughtful one. My comment was a reply to R.S. Wilkerson who praised your review without having read the book. It seems to me that a reviewer should have read a book before reviewing it.
Leave a reply
---------
Don Morgan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
I would agree with you that a post made just to create a dispute is not useful. I stand by my comment that a reviewer should have read a book before reviewing it. It's clear that you agree with the ideas well expressed in Mr. Grattan's review. What you can't know for sure is whether the review is fair to Parker Palmer.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
D. Morgan,
Thanks for the clarification. I think that RS was commenting on the nature of society as he sees it far more than on the book, per se, and this book and this review is an opportunity for the comment.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson6 years ago (Edited)In reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Mr Morgan,
I didn't read the book, so I could not review it. I addressed Mr. Grattan's comments directly. I've read a lot of his reviews and find them consistently reliable and conspicuously fair to the book. He did such a good job of reviewing this book, as I pointed out to him, that I see no need to read it. Don't you read reviews to determine if you want to read a book? I do. Mr. Grattan's are always helpful. I took the opportunity to tell him that he was influential in my decision not to read it. I also tell him when he gives me good reason to read a book. You will note that I praised him for his thought-provoking comments and that I didn't address the book. I always enjoy conversing with him about his comments; sometimes that's even more informative than the review. This particular one was excellent.
R.S. Wilkerson
Leave a reply
Jill Gerard6 years ago
Report abuse
Change happens one person at a time. If each of us decides to take positive action, then what be deemed "fantasy" becomes more possible. This is of course not easy. It is simpler to give up, to stay in our cars, to say we can't change things for the better. Parker Palmer asks us to act with courage -- to reach out, to question, to connect with one and another -- and to connect with our selves (and I separate our and selves on purpose). Start a real conversation with a small group of people -- with guidelines on how the discussion will happen. Small groups start movements. Then, change follows.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years ago
Report abuse
Jill,
Obviously anything is possible. But there have been and are thousands of groups in this country that try to fill in the gaps. They are to be commended. However, it still is a drop in the bucket with minimal widespread influence. I don't want the author to leave the impression that we are on the verge of some sort of societal transformation to healing hearts. We aren't. There are some isolated individuals who do good work. That is about it. Over all it is a very cruel world and right here in righteous USA.
Leave a reply
Show more comments
Cre8tive Clyde6 years ago
Report abuse
Excellent critique, prevented me from wasting my money on a 'wish list'.
Leave a reply
Cre8tive Clyde6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
J. Grattan: You might want to visit Jim Rough's site on using the Wisdom Council approach to solve problems in a democracy. He and I have been having a long, multi-year debate about whether or not it would truly work in our power-oriented society. If I could leave here and get back I'd provide a URL but if you Google Wisdom Council or, I think, Wise Democracy, it should come up.
Sincerely, Paul Everett
Leave a reply
J. Grattan6 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
I'll take a look. Thanks, JG
Leave a reply
Philip from Minneapolis5 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
J. Grattan, two comments for you--first, it seems from your review that you are a "Glass half-empty" ratherr than a "glass half-full" kind of person.
Second, I appreciate your thoughts about trying to begin true democracy in the workplace. If you are serious about this, look at the co-operative type of business organization and the cooperative movement as one which has very real democratic roots and functioning.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan5 years ago
Report abuse
PBB, Not sure the "half" comment applies well to me, because I'm most definite about where we stand in regards to democracy and helping in the US. We are most empty.
Most workplace participation and cooperative schemes are "pseudo" at best. Most are top-driven and depend totally on the good-will of upper management. In other words, it is participation on their terms. Those who differ, even rationally, find out rather quickly where they stand. There are usually no formal structures with any kind of rights associated, as in German Works Councils. Unions have made a few attempts at cooperation but that is not their preferred mode of operation, which is adversarial.
America is definitely a land of conflicting understandings. Democracy puzzles most Americans and if it doesn't, it should.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson5 years ago (Edited)In reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Mr. Grattan,
You state "Democracy puzzles most Americans and if it doesn't, it should." Very good observation.
Leave a reply
Cre8tive Clyde5 years ago
Report abuse
Probably everyone should check out the website on 'Wise Democracy', which you'll have to Google. Or, google 'Jim Rough' and check out his writings. He has what he calls the Wisdom Council approach to creating the Democracy we all imagine we may want.
Leave a reply
rash5 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Wilkerson clearly says he has not read nor intends to read this book based on this review.
Leave a reply
J. Grattan5 years ago
Report abuse
Rash,
It is okay for those who have not read a book to engage in the comment sections, which can be an exchange of ideas connected to the book but not necessarily about the book, per se. What is your comment about any points being made by a commenter other than whether they read the book? JG.
Leave a reply
R. S. Wilkerson5 years agoIn reply toan earlier post
Report abuse
Rash,
I didn't read the book, so I could not review it. I addressed Mr. Grattan's comments directly. I've read a lot of his reviews and find them consistently reliable and conspicuously fair to the book. He did such a good job of reviewing this book, as I pointed out to him, that I see no need to read it. Don't you read reviews to determine if you want to read a book? I do. Mr. Grattan's are always helpful. I took the opportunity to tell him that he was influential in my decision not to read it. I also tell him when he gives me good reason to read a book. You will note that I praised him for his thought-provoking comments and that I didn't address the book. I always enjoy conversing with him about his comments; sometimes that's even more informative than the review. This particular one was excellent. I don't need to read the book to recognize the excellence of a review.
R.S. Wilkerson
Leave a reply
Leave a reply
