When economic distress hits a country human compassion begins to pour out more slowly like cold molasses; there is the tendency to hoard more and give less. Those with money are worried that their treasure trove will dwindle down almost to nothing. They are frightened. Those who are unemployed whose savings have almost run out are also frightened. They frightfully see themselves homeless in only a matter of time being at the mercy of the streets which can be quite brutal.
Human compassion is not free from faults or automatic. But unused, we are made worse. In this respect, the lack of compassion becomes more visible as economic distress increases. As we reflect upon this matter it seems to us that when times are good; where prosperity seems to be in blossom, human compassion flourishes, too. But this compassion is fair weather compassion—it cannot stand the hard and cold winters. Still, history does show us that we are more compassionate than our ancestors. We tend to overlook this. But as the Buddha's great compassion flows more and more into this world of ours, we are less and less tolerant of suffering. And this is a good thing. We can not longer brook the excuses of our leaders who, for various reasons, refuse to extend the hand of compassion to those who suffer.
To give a historical example of what I mean, during the U.S. depression of 1837 that lasted for six years, which came shortly after President Van Buren (D) gave his inaugural address, the hand of human compassion that we today expect to come from the seat of government was withdrawn. During this period there was a great deal of suffering. Prosperity turned into bankruptcies, wide spread unemployment and, yes, even starvation.
A pious man, President Van Buren blamed the depression naturally on those who suffered from it the most. It was their follies, most particular their greed, that landed them into impoverishment. Speaking on behalf of the government President Van Buren took no responsibility for the suffering of the people. He said:
"All communities are apt to look to government for too much. Even in our own country, where its powers and duties are so strictly limited, we are prone to do so, especially at a period of sudden embarrassment and distress. This out not to be. The framers of our excellent Constitution and the people who approved it with calm and sagacious deliberation acted at the time on a sounder principle. They wisely judged that the less government interferes with private pursuits the better for the general prosperity" (Beard, America in Midpassage, p. 88).
Remarkably, the government's hand of compassion, if there ever was one, was restrained by a malevolent ethos. President Van Buren firmly believed that the Constitution gave no sanction to the government to lift the burden of the depression even though the preamble of the Constitution contains the phrase "promote the general Welfare."
During subsequent depressions this malevolent ethos was in force all the way to President Hoover when the Great Depression, which affected the world, began in the autumn of 1929. President Hoover was not averse to helping those at the top of the economic ladder. Perhaps he thought they were God's chosen ones. After all they were the driving force of the economy. It was up to them with their wealth to "trickle it down" (a term coined by Treasury Secretary Andrew W. Mellon) to the bottom rungs of the economic ladder. But such trickles are not human compassion. It is really a veiled form of schadenfreude which is opposite to compassion.
President Hoover was against any form of government aid, direct or indirect, even though people were literally starving to death. Notably, he was against unemployment insurance, killing it with a pocket veto. He tried to block funds from Congress going to the Red Cross. Also a victim of this malevolent ethos the chairman of the Red Cross even refused to distribute the funds. President Hoover was merciless to the so-called "bonus army" that had marched on Washington D.C., comprised of poor and hungry Army veterans from the First World War. He deployed federal troops against them to disperse them. Some were killed by the actions of federal troops.
Ironic in all of this, is the fact that while the general population of the United States thought of itself as Christian, its more prosperous and powerful adherents did not believe it valuable to practice human compassion or Christian giving when it was needed the most, especially during depressions like the Great Depression under President Hoover. They had made their fortunes by exploitation. What, therefore, was to be gained by being compassionate to those whose labor they exploited?
Today we look back to these depressions and the malevolent ethos that withheld the hand of compassion with astonishment. How can people be so cold and mean spirited we wonder? But we are not out of the dark wood in our own time. The malevolent ethos that guided President Van Buren and subsequent Presidents who followed him, is still active. Rationalizations for discarding Social Security, Medicare, unemployment insurance, etc., still find sympathy with lesser minds who seem more guided by the hand of schadenfreude than compassion.
It lies within the scope of Buddhism and Buddhist practice that all Buddhists should never cease generating the thought of compassion, extending it to all creatures human or otherwise. Indeed, in the human mind the thought of being compassionate or not first arises. The more Buddhists can energize the thought of compassion, being continually engaged with it, the greater will be its force thus to tip the scales in favor of extending the hand of compassion to all sentient beings who live upon this planet. Our work is before us to change minds so human thought will be compassionate; not malevolent; not delighting in schadenfreude.
A well timed piece aiming right at the hearts of all men, but particularly those with the means to truly help others, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu or what have you.
Posted by: steelwater | September 22, 2010 at 09:08 PM