When was the last time we tackled a major problem?

This past Sunday in The New York Times, Frank Rich wrote a column called “The State of the Union is Comatose”. He cited historian Alan Brinkley’s observation “that we will soon enter the fourth decade in which Congress — and therefore government as a whole — has failed to deal with any major national problem, from infrastructure to education.” This statement really jarred me, and has me thinking that it’s not just government that has failed to deal with any major national problem in a proactive manner, its our whole society.

I have been spending the past few months working with colleagues at William Penn House and Washington Quaker Workcamps on ways to move Workcamps into the 21st century. In doing this, I have been doing some reading about the history of Quaker Workcamps and Service Learning. The origins of both of these can be traced back to the early 1900’s, and both grew out of the pacifist movement. At the time, given the new technologies of transportation and communication (as well as of warfare), they were very innovative. But now, a century later we continue to experience wars, environmental and economic violence and injustice that include poverty, hunger, homelessness, and preventable disease.

At the same time, I have been continuing my efforts to being a part of stopping the spread of HIV. This week has been interesting on this front as well. There was an article in the Wall Street Journal last week about the pace of funding for HIV-treatment in Africa is falling far behind the needs. In Illinois, the word has come down that prevention programs are being eliminated so that current dollars can be allocated to treatment programs. I have continued to be a part of a consulting group for the CDC and NIH to develop protocols for community-wide test-and-treat of HIV, and continue to be amazed at the slow pace of implementation as HIV enters, ironically, its 4th decade as well. Meanwhile, waiting lists are starting to emerge for treatment.

Meanwhile, the earthquake in Haiti has awakened the general public to the fact that there is this poor nation with a history of corruption and neglect in our hemisphere of the world. As we have seen with tsunamis, AIDS, and hurricanes, these events are not what seem to shock us, but the devastation these things have on the poor that really wake us up. In general, this is where Workcamps and many Service Learning programs, as well as faith –based mission trips, tend to go – places where the devastation is clear, and there are some quick fixes that require short-term sacrifices, but not transformative changes in how one lives his/her life. They have the potential to ingrain in people that we should always be chasing the devastation, not doing the hard work to minimize the harm of the next one – whether it is disease prevention, or addressing the despair and injustices that are the fertile ground for natural and man-made disasters to do their worst.

The big question I have with all of this rattling around the brain is: when was the last time social services/social justice movements have tackled anything new or tackled things in new, innovative ways. We for the most part have become a society that works at the margins – we will rise somewhat to the occasion when people have been devastated by a disaster, and we will advocate/blame the government for doing the rest (such as not giving enough money). These are just tweaking the societal system that needs a major overhaul. If ever there were a wake-up call for community action that is responsibility-driven, it is now. But I think the harsh reality is that social services has become an industrial complex as much as the military has, and we have become too complacent and dependent on these institutions to do our work. How else to explain that people cannot fathom spending $10 for an HIV-test as part of a “greater good” effort.

No doubt that technological advances have carried their weight. We have cars that are lighter, get more miles per gallon than ever. We have communication systems that make connecting easier than ever. We have had advances in medical testing and treatment. Unfortunately we often use these technologies to make our life easier and more of the same. When was the last time you heard someone talk about how their hybrid car has made them more conscious about driving, and they are actually driving less and walking more?

Another reality is that I am not sure Workcamps/Service Learning has had a new, innovative idea to breaking the cycles of violence and injustice. But with a century of being under our belts, perhaps it’s time; in fact, there is no better time than now. We have the means to connect with others, to share ideas, and to have voices heard far more than ever before. I know that here at William Penn House, and in conversations with folks in the community, we have started to really consider what this might look like, including that service is much more than physical labor; it’s community-building in a way that the health of the community comes before the needs of the individual, and is accomplished with community members as equal partners, not volunteers/recipients.

I can say the same for HIV/AIDS services: outside of technological advances, when was the last innovative thing created? The same funding boxes for the most part are there, and there is an institutional rigidity to maintain turf. But with the cuts in prevention, all of a sudden we in the community are going to need to step up. AIDS organizations will inevitably say we need to advocate for more dollars: I’m not so sure. I think we need to stop advocating so much, and start doing more. I also think that some of the basic testimonies of Quakerism can help lead the way, if we can only get the institutions out of our way.

Are we going to lose the fight against HIV?

It was with sadness and disappointment, but not surprise, to read the Wall Street Journal article published January 30 titled “War on AIDS Hangs in Balance as U.S. Curbs Help for Africa”. The gist of the article is this: “Seven years after the U.S. launched its widely hailed program to fight AIDS in the developing world, the battle is reaching a critical turning point. The growth in U.S. funding, which underwrites nearly half the world's AIDS relief, has slowed dramatically. At the same time, the number of people requiring treatment has skyrocketed.” The article goes on to point out that the global effort to prevent new infections has suffered some reversals due to a combination of factors such as complacency because of effective treatments, abstinence-only education, and testing that continues to suffer from the oppressive burdens of prejudice and homophobia.

As I sit and write this, it is a quiet Sunday afternoon and I am reflecting on, among other things:
• The radio program presently airing about being gay in Africa (in Namibia in particular), and how policies that outlaw homosexuality devastate HIV-prevention efforts. American Family Association radio host here in the US also thinks gays should be put in prison.
• The sermon at the National Cathedral this morning that talked about how Love, not our love, but God’s Love, is everywhere
• The Sunday forum at the Cathedral, with Congressman Tom Perriello (D-VA) talking about faith and politics. He mentioned how the financial bailout rewarded failure, and it had me thinking that when huge dollars are given to the big players in HIV/AIDS work (“AIDS, Inc”), are we not doing the same thing?
• In 2003, I pitched the idea to Senator Durbin that Illinois be the first state in the country to commit to getting all residents tested as part of the effort to get ahead of the HIV-transmission curve. He said “we can’t afford to do that”.
• This Wall Street Journal article, while certainly ringing an alarm that we all need to pay attention to, also perpetuates the misconception that “global HIV” is “Africa-only”. We are starting to see waiting lists for HIV-treatment in this country. If we cannot offer people who test positive some treatment options, we have lost a major selling point for testing. This is not an African truth, it’s a global truth that exists here as well.
• The two written comments to the WSj article include these comments: “This is a classic case of trying to fix problems in a retarded society using modern technology…AIDS isn’t the problem, it’s only one of the many symptoms…Until a people decide they want to join civilization, no amount of money will save them…” and “maybe what we are seeing is nature (gods) way of population control?”. Gotta love the compassion of ethno-centric Americans.

The nice thing about blogs vs. publications is that there is wiggle-room for venting, and that’s what the combination of the above drives me to. Are there no adults anywhere that can sit people down and say, ok, let’s be serious here: this is a deadly disease that is very treatable, preventable not curable, costly to treat, and the sooner we contain it, the cheaper the collective treatment costs will be. I’m not a public health expert, theologist, politician, financial whiz, prophet etc, but it just seems increasingly clear to me that we are a society that is trying to tinker with a system that needs a major overhaul. HIV/AIDS is both an example of this in action and an opportunity to learn what it takes to make a major overhaul. Funny thing is that this overhaul is not one of bricks and mortar, but of mindset. The image that comes to mind of our current state is this: the best mechanics in the world have been asked to work on the engine of an old car. They are all looking at the parts of the engine, talking about a new air filter, an oil change, perhaps some spark plugs. Then a kid walks by and points out to them that the car has rust, torn seats, no tires, smashed trunk, broken windows, and is basically beyond repair. By focusing on the engine, they did not see the big picture. That’s what we seem to have with HIV/AIDS work; no one in a position of authority seems to be willing to connect the dots. For example:
• The need for treatment will go up no matter what we do. Ideally, if we can quickly implement community-wide, compassionate, non-judgmental HIV-testing, the need will spike dramatically as we quickly decrease the collective “undiagnosed”, and then the needs for testing and will decrease over time. Under the current testing system, however, that tries to “cherry-pick” the most at-risk from society (basically the approach of the last 30 years), we will stay on the same course of ever-increasing needs for treatment.
• We cannot effectively stop the spread by saying everyone should be tested, and then focus on “them”.
• It is not possible to encourage the openness needed to have everyone know their status while condemning and judging the people most at-risk.

I could go on, and have for years. The point is, this WSJ article should be our wake-up call. I remember saying to a friend in Wheaton, IL, perhaps 4 years ago that the reason we were so insistent on community-wide testing in Wheaton is that’s where we were, we have to start where we are, and if we can’t do it here, is it realistic to expect places like Africa to take the lead? Most importantly, I felt then that if we do not implement a program like this locally, regionally, nationally, and internationally, we will see HIV become worse. I fear that that day has now come. We humans think we are so smart, but this simple virus has exposed a dark side of us that we need to overcome: greedy, arrogant, judgmental, afraid, and very short-sighted.

What I Did During the State of the Union Address

While President Obama started his first State of Union address last night, about 100 volunteers and I were gathering at the United Planning Office (UPO) to go out in teams for the Point in Time census to count the number of people sleeping on the DC streets. Even though we were only two miles away from where the President was speaking, I felt like I was a lot farther away and in many respects, I was.

As I started out on the census with another volunteer, I saw President Obama speaking on many TVs as I walked around a nearby neighborhood. As I saw him speaking on TV, I wondered if he would mention homelessness once in his speech, but I found out later that he didn't and I wasn't surprised. This year alone, according to National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty, three million people will experience some kind of homelessness, whether it is sleeping on a friend's couch after an eviction for a couple days or a prolonged period of homelessness.

The topic of homelessness has been on my mind constantly for a couple weeks, after I decided to volunteer for this census. In between signing up and last night, a fellow Quaker brought to my attention an article in Street Sense, a publication by homeless advocates, about violence on homeless people by other homeless people and made the point that the homeless are not always innocent victims.

I already knew this from my own personal experience. Once several years ago, in Chicago, two homeless men accosted me as I was walking around downtown and I had escaped by walking frantically into a nearby store. Also during the past two years in my job as a coordinator of a service learning program, I have heard about numerous people speak about their experiences being homeless. I have heard stories of drug/alcohol abuse, depression, and health issues as causes of chronic homelessness.

Just because someone isn't entirely innocent of the situation they are in, does that mean we shouldn't help? But is that really an issue: Their innocence? They need help. No one is really benefiting from people sleeping on the streets. When a natural disaster or a fire hit, does the Red Cross not help people who didn't have any insurance?

I have done several risky things in my life that could have easily led me to be homeless, like moving to an unfamiliar city with no job prospects, passing up good paying jobs in the hope of a better job opportunity, and spending money that I don't have by using my credit card. But I have always been lucky to have a bed to sleep on and food to eat, because I have a strong support net and a family and many friends who loves me unconditionally. Every time I messed up, I knew I had a fallback plan. For many people who experience homelessness, they don't usually have that kind of support net, like Joe, who I met last night.

My volunteer partner and I encountered Joe outside a pharmacy panhandling. He was reluctant to admit that he was homeless. As he was telling his story, he told about his mother, who told him constantly that he wouldn't amount to anything. In contrast to my life, where each time I messed up, my parents were there to encourage me to try again and not give up. I know that there are stories of people who grow up fine with messed up parents, but there are still a lot of stories, like Joe. When the budget gets cut, social services to help people get off the streets are usually the first ones to go, not salaries of elected officials or the military budget. For example, here in Washington DC, people rallied together to save potential budget cuts to social services in order to save vital programs that help the homeless and low income people from becoming homeless.

Obama's theme last night was about how America needs to move forward together to build a better economy. As we work towards that goal, we need to see how as a community we can better meet the needs of the most vulnerable in our midst, instead of just continuing to turn a blind eye to them.


PS: Point in Time Surveys happen all over the United States during late January. Check with your local social services if you are interested in volunteering in your community.

Two Wolves

An elder Cherokee Native American was teaching his Grandchildren about life. He said to them, “A fight is going on inside me… it is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves.

“One wolf represents fear, anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego.

“The other stands for joy, peace, love, hope, sharing, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, friendship, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith.

“This same fight is going on inside you, and inside every other person, too.”
They thought about it for a minute and then one child asked his grandfather, “Which wolf will win?”

The old Cherokee simply replied, “The one you feed.”

This parable was part of the sermon yesterday morning at the National Cathedral, where I started my day. It has resonated with me for the past 24 hours. I think it speaks to many aspects of not only my own life, but also the times in which we live. For much of my work at William Penn House and with The Mosaic Initiative, what I hope we are doing is not just educating people about social justice issues, but feeding the latter wolf in this parable. It is a challenge these days in our media-driven partisan world. Media, almost by definition (at least the 24-hour news networks and many of the Olberman/Maddow/Limbaugh/O’Reilly/Beck/Palin world) succeed by feeding the first wolf in the parable. The “Tea Party” movement is definitely a product of this first wolf. I have a friend on facebook who claims to speak for the “vast middle” of America, and claims to look at things not optimistically, but realistically. What I suspect he doesn’t get is that we are both looking at things realistically – our differences are which wolf is being fed. I don’t know that he is conscious of his own internal mechanisms.

So I carried these thoughts with me through much of the day. I attended a kick-off celebration for an Arts and Cultural networking organization that is primarily a grassroots community group inspired by Kymone Freeman, a man of great passion and fire who clearly has both of these wolves fully energized within him. He sees the great injustices, has experienced them first hand, sees the waste and corruption of bureaucracy, but he pours the energy into the second wolf – dedicating his life to so much of what the second wolf represents. It is a life of service – he truly walks the walk.

As I was walking to the Metro to attend this event, I walked by a car parked on Nebraska Ave. near embassies and churches. On the back of this car were three bumper stickers. Two of the bumper stickers had the “O” symbol from the Obama campaign, but were the “O’s” in “Oshit”, and “Commie”. The third bumper sticker, playing on the campaign slogan “Got Hope”, said “Got Ammo” (calling for the assassination of Obama). Clearly, the owner of this car is feeding the wolf of anger, fear and lies, and wants to feed ours as well.

Herein lies the challenge: how do we respond? For me, I want to stand for joy, peace, love, hope, sharing, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, friendship, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith in the face of these things. But I am also human – I get angry when I see these things. I know that to respond in-kind is not helpful in bringing us together to deal with all the challenges of the world. I also know that if I react angrily, I am feeding the first wolf as well. Perhaps the best I can do is just be aware that both wolves reside within me, and that awareness alone can help me tame one side while feeding the other.

Recent Identity Crisis

While I was traveling in Mexico earlier this month, I lost my wallet. For the first few hours, I was devastated and angry with myself for not putting my wallet in my front pants pocket. My wallet contained about 700 pesos (around $55 US), credit cards, drivers license, ATM card, and health insurance cards. Luckily I had just put my passport and 1000 pesos in my money belt and I was traveling with a friend who spotted me money during the rest of the trip.

For a moment, I felt like I lost everything that said who I was, except for my passport. But after a short time, I developed a clearer thinking pattern and was able to cancel my credit cards and my ATM card. It seems amazing that the smallest object I was carrying on the trip, was the most head-aching thing to replace. During this time, I realized that my wallet doesn't define who I am. I do know who I am. I am Greg Woods, a son, a brother, a friend, a Quaker, a Follower of Jesus, an American, a resident of the District of Columbia, Coordinator of Washington Quaker Workcamps, Co-Coordinator of Project Lakota, a writer, a joke-teller and a traveler. These are the ways I connect with people across the world and how people know me. No wallet can or will ever be able to entirely hold all the aspects of my identity (Yes, I have cards that say I am an American and a DC resident, but these cards will never hold my experiences as an American and a DC resident.), because you cannot really ever quantify these parts. Actually none of my possessions define my identity. If I were to lose every material possession I own, I am still the same Greg Woods albeit a materially poorer Greg Woods. Surely some of the aspects of my identity will change over time, if I move or change jobs and also I hope to add some more aspects like husband and father, in the future.

The next weekend, I was talking with two non Quaker friends in La Casa de Los Amigos in Mexico City about what Quakers believe. I cited the peace testimony, the belief that God can speak directly to us without the need for an intermediary, having silence mediation in some form in many of the Friends meetings, among other things. While I was talking, I thought to myself this religion can sound very weird out loud, but I still want to be a Quaker and follow in the path of George Fox,Elizabeth Fry, and other early Quakers. This radical religion is still very much needed in a troubled, violent world. Even though my friends seem satisfied with my answers, I wasn't. The conversation opened up the question: What keeps me in Quakerism, beside the legacy? This question reminded me of the panic I felt a week earlier when I lost my wallet. Like am I tired of Quakers? Does Quakerism still inspire me?

The next day, during the meeting of worship with Mexico City Meeting, I continued praying about my connection with Quakers. Near the end of meeting, the clerk read queries about environmental stewardship from the Pacific Yearly Meeting Faith & Practice in connection with the ongoing climate change discussions in Copenhagen. While sitting with the queries about being conscious about individuals' impact on the environment, I realized again why I am Quaker.

Having growing up in the Friends tradition, I have become a conscientious person about how my actions affect the community around me, whether it is thinking about where I shop or whether I am being faithful to my leadings. For me, Quakerism isn't just a religion that is just practiced on First Day mornings, but a religion to be practiced in every part of my life everyday and this is expected of me by my fellow Friends.

For this reason, I am a Quaker.

Evangelizing Quakerism

As 2009 starts winding down, I have been reflecting on the events of the past year. I have had the amazingly good fortune to work at a place like William Penn House where we are given the opportunity to meet people from all walks of life - not only those who come through our doors, but the countless people we meet at Monthly and Yearly Meetings and other gatherings. 2009 in particular has been a good year to do this work, as it is a year of great change that has been running head-long into resistance to change, the natural reaction that most of us have to true transformative change. I think there is a huge opportunity for Quakerism to step forward and help our communities through this process, but I also think that for this to happen, Quakers may need to step out of the way.

Let me explain. I think that the greatest gift of Quakerism is not the stance we take on issues, but the process we go through (consensus, discernment). Unfortunately, to our detriment, we too often bring like-minded people together, discern what the "sense" of the meeting or gathering is, and then we roll out into the world in a righteous fashion, with a judgment of others (Republicans, conservatives, military). We hold gatherings where we talk about our concerns and how we can serve ourselves and get what we want. We have threshing sessions but not enough fact-finding sessions. It often feels to me like "navel-gazing".

If we could instead appreciate that it is not what we have reached consensus on that matters, but our ability to go into any arena with the skill of building consensus (or finding the sense of the group) that really matters. For example, if I, a liberal/progressive pacifist gay man, sit with a group of conservative military heterosexuals, the sense of our gathering is more to my liking simply because I am at the table. For me, it is trusting that there really is "that of God" in all, not just those with whom we agree. I have also been repeatedly and amazingly surprised to find goodness and agreement where I had been taught to least expect it.

I also believe that now, more than any time in our recent history, the world needs this kind of work. Many of the institutions and organizations that we have become dependent (co-dependent?) on are facing financial crises, and are bunkering down. Our political system is as divisive and partisan as ever. Despite what I believe are the good intentions of President Obama, the system itself is made up of a two-party system that seeks nothing but power - a power that can only be gained through a "divide and conquer" mentality. Even Quaker organizations, as they struggle financially, tend to reduce collective energy and spirit to less than the sum of its parts. What we need is to start turning to each other - not in our Meetings, but in the broader world - and finding the common ground ("sense") of our communities. We need each other, and most people want the same thing. We just have to open the space to allow for this to happen. This, I believe, is the real gift that Quakerism can bring to the world.

Listening and Dialog

What is the difference between listening to listen and listening as part of dialog? I had not given much thought to this, other than intuitively knowing there's a difference, until recently. At William Penn House a few weeks ago, we hosted two Navy Midshipmen. In announcing this event, it was stated that "these students will be here to talk about their dreams for the world, selection of service as a vehicle for pursuing this dream, and what it means to be of service. We look forward to this being an evening for pacifists and people committed to a world without war to listen with appreciative ears and to find common ground."

By referring to their commitment as "service", a listserve became energetically engaged in questioning why we were doing this event, that what these young men do is not "service" but "murder", and that we should give equal time to real service (neglecting to notice that just about all we do at William Penn House is service). It was interesting to see "pacifists" going after like-minded people, and to observe that, while these Navy Midshipmen were able to answer questions clearly about why they have made the commitments they have made and the struggles and dilemmas of these choices, the pacifists struggled with articulating their "hard" questions and making connections between what they/we are against and what we are for. I could go on about many things, but perhaps most simplistically, I have been pondering what it is to listen as an exercise vs. listening as part of a dialog.

Here are some thoughts:
Neurologically, listening/observing is what some call an "alpha" brain activity, where the rear hemisphere of the brain is engaged, but what is going on is just letting things enter. Imagine walking through the woods as part of a meditative exercise in noticing what is going on, vs. thinking about work, what is around the corner, or some other mental activity that takes one out of the moment. This is the alpha activity, whereas "beta" activity is that latter part - thinking of something next. To just be present, to listen, is really a discipline in being in the moment. It does not mean to not think, but to instead let information fully enter for discernment, rather than discern what is allowed in. The blocks to this are emotions - anger, fear, etc. - and too much thinking that looks for where the speaker is "wrong" (or a fear that I am wrong).

In dialog, I suspect that we are always listening with one foot in the moment, and the other in "what am I going to say next?", which interferes with being fully present to the other. This can be especially challenging when we have firmly held beliefs (in this case, about the military). Unfortunately, when we demonize things like the military, we tend to develop blindspots about many things, including that we might be complicit in the need for the military to protect us.

Are there things we can do to handle this better? In my experience, Appreciative Inquiry has been a good tool. Quite simply, to learn to listen fully, with appreciative ears, has been helpful. It does not mean that I simply accept all that is being said, but for the moment my job is to listen and to appreciate. I can later go back, more fully informed, and look at things more deeply, exploring where my own values lie on issues. I think it adds to integrity. It certainly beats "pacifists" creating conflict among like-minded people.