By Leo Kim
Guest Blogger
What
happens when you learn that you’re a hypocrite?
That was
the thought bouncing around my head as I fumbled around a row of black trash
bags lining the street, dealing with the aftermath of a sudden eviction.
A few
hours earlier, I had been at my desk at Justice Policy Institute’s office
working when I got a call. “You need to get here right away,” a panicked
neighbor told me. “The guy you’re subletting from is being evicted and the
marshals are taking out everything.”
First, I
thought it was a joke. There’s no way, I thought. It was too ironic. After all,
I had only recently finished helping with research for JPI on the intersection
of homelessness and the criminal justice system in Maryland.
Thirty
minutes later, when I got to the apartment and saw my entire life in D.C.
tossed indiscriminately into trash bags on the side of the street, I knew it
was no joke. I had received no word of the eviction. No forewarning. But there
it was.
It was
quite a scene and on a busy Georgetown afternoon; I stuck out.
Most
passersby tried to avoid eye contact. Some talked amongst themselves about what
could have happened. A select few actually came up and asked me themselves,
leaving with words that, while comforting, amounted to little more than “I’m
sorry, I wish I could help.”
It was
at that point that a man of about 50 approached me. Despite looking worn and
tired, he told me that he wanted to help. He told me that something similar had
happened to him, and he understood. If I needed anything, I should come get
him— he’d be across the street.
This
man, homeless, was the only stranger to offer me help that day.
All this
started to get me thinking. What would I have done had I been one of the people
walking by? After all, I should have known how swift and terrible something
like this could be. I had spent the better part of a summer specifically researching it, and I knew
that for most people, the same event would have been far worse than I could
ever hope to comprehend. I knew from my research that homelessness could have
devastating impacts and often lead to involvement in the justice system.
I, who
could rattle off dozens of facts about the worst parts of homelessness,
wouldn’t have offered substantial help. And while I’m sure there are better
souls out there, I think most people would do the same— they did do the same.
So where
does this leave me?
The
thing is, I’m a little bit of a dork. But not just any kind of dork, I’m a
philosophy dork. So naturally, that’s where my mind went.
There’s
a theory in philosophy that essentially says that your beliefs are intimately
linked to your actions. If you believe something, you’ll act in
accordance with that belief. If you act in a way seemingly contradictory, we
can say that you never believed that thing in the first place. After all, it
makes sense to say a person who acts bigoted doesn’t believe in equality, even
if they explicitly say they do.
Plus, if
beliefs don’t cause action, then why would we bother teaching correct
information? What’s the purpose of teaching people about global warming if we
don’t think it’ll lead to positive change, to something happening?
So how
would someone who believed in the inequity surrounding homelessness have acted
in that situation? The obvious answer seems to be that they would have helped.
But, contrary to my belief that people who are homeless need more than a few
meaningless words, that’s exactly what I would’ve done, like so many did that
day.
What
conclusion did I have? I was a hypocrite.
I
thought I had done all the right things to help myself become more
understanding of the world around me— to become more understanding of the
privilege I have that so many lack, of the obligation we all have towards one
another. I had researched, written, and learned about the relevant issues. I
had taken classes on ethics and waxed philosophical.
But at
the end of the day, this intellectual education wasn’t enough to ensure that my
beliefs translated into actions consistent with those beliefs. I didn’t have
the right beliefs in the sense that we want them, beliefs in the sense that
they matter in a tangible way. There was still a vast chasm separating my
intellectual knowledge, and this visceral, acting knowledge.
It’s
probably safe to assume that many reading this, like me, are interested in
reform and have a genuine desire to—pardon the hackneyed expression— “be the
change that they wish to see in the world.”
Yet,
this isn’t something that can be achieved in a purely academic setting, as so
many of my university peers may think. Rather, there needs to be something
connecting you to the people the problem affects; it needs to be human, not
solely intellectual.
Fighting
this abstraction through personal involvement is important. With it, the divide
between the two kinds of knowledge can start to inch closer and closer
together.
When I
came to my internship at JPI, I was told that my primary job was to “learn.” By
the end of my internship, I realized that the most valuable kind of learning I
did was unlike the academic kind I had become so accustomed to in the past 15
years of my life.
Getting
a chance to meet those that the problem affected and
becoming more personally conscientious of the issues at hand gave me something
I could have never taken away from a report or a classroom. And this is
precisely what we need if we are to become more like the person we all want to be, rather than the ones we so
often are.
Leo Kim is a student at Yale where he studies
philosophy and writes for the Opinion Section of the Yale Daily News. He is
also a former JPI Research Intern.
No comments:
Post a Comment