The Fords and Daniel Dale

Two: If I do take legal action, the Star’s got nothing to do with it. In fact, if I were a businessman or teacher or anything other than a Toronto Star reporter, I would have served Ford with a libel notice already. I’m cautious because I don’t like being or staying the centre of attention, because I like my life the way it is, because it would be tiresome to listen to Ford’s claims of a vendetta, and because it seems like it would probably be unpleasant to find yourself in a long public spat with a wealthy and generally unrepentant person with good lawyers and a big megaphone.

It's not an easy position Daniel Dale has been put in.

For doing his job, professionally, he's been threatened, insulted and now, accused of being a paedophile.  As Dale himself states, that's the sort of over-the-top association that does not go away; it's like calling a teenage girl a whore.

The Fords can play the victim card all they want, but it is clear who the aggressors are, here - Doug and Rob.  There's no surprise in this; they have an established record of being bullies.  When they get caught or called out for it, they will deny the act of bullying, suggest it was deserved or exaggerated and always try to spin blame away from themselves and towards the person they bullied.

And then they plan revenge.

She made me do it, said Oscar Pistorius.

Dale had it coming, said Rob Ford.

I don't like bullies.  

I have been on the receiving end of bullying in different forms all my life; schoolyard thugs who would physically assault me, passive-aggressive bosses who would find ways to blame me for their oversights and of course, the large swath of political players for whom intimidation is a legitimate technique for forcing actions.

Here are some lessons I've learned about bullying over the years:

1) When you're on the receiving end, it can feel like the bully is functionally fixed on making you and only you miserable.  That's rarely the case.  As we see with the Fords, bullies treat any number of people in the same, demeaning way.  

Bullies act in an entitled, aggressive manner; the world is their sandbox and anything within it is theirs by right.  They're the Alpha Male (or female) - they get to eat the whole cake, it's you who should have learned how to bake.  There's something distinctly colonial about bullies in the way they assert themselves, whether it's in a schoolyard or at City Council.  We all know how colonialism turns out.

2) Bullies feel validated by fear.  It's a sad truism that bullies in one setting are often victims in another, possibly the home; they will bully in turn as a way to feel bigger than someone, because someone else makes them feel so small.  They want you to be afraid, they want that power trip that comes from seeing people cower when they walk by.

3) Bullying is intellectual laziness.  This ties in to the fear thing.  If you can't win an argument, if you don't have the capacity to go toe-to-toe in the realm of ideas or if you you're even weak at activities like, say, pro-social interaction or doing your homework (or reading your briefing material), getting aggressive is a way to change the channel and ignore your own failings.  

The Fords have a lot of failings they're actively choosing not to address - they get more aggressive the more these sins of action and omission pile up.  The more time and energy you put in to marginalizing and stigmatizing your opponents, the less faith you have in the strength of your argument.

4) Sympathy doesn't result in action.  This is one of those counter-intuitive things that is frustrating in the extreme, but true none the less.  People feel bad for victims of bullying, but particularly when they're peers, it takes a monumental cognitive leap to go from willing spectator (because we all naturally want to be on the winning side) to disturbed witness to advocate to interventionist.  Playing the sympathy card is the emotionally correct step to take and, frankly, should be the socially correct card to play, but we're limbic animals first and social creatures second - catalyzing action has to appeal to more reactive instincts.

5) The best way to stop a bully is to stop being a victim. This is one of those easy tropes people fall into - just fight back, and the problem goes away.  That's not always the case and not everyone is able to fight back.  Of course, you don't always need to fight fire with fire - in fact, fighting fire with water is a much more effective strategy (and causes less collateral damage, too).

I am not, by nature, an aggressive person; I enjoy solving problems, not picking fights (which has led to some interesting observations about politics, but that's a different topic altogether).  But bullying is about survival of the fittest; the point is to prove one's dominance by showing how tough one can be (with an easy target) and simply outlasting the competition.  

The worst bullying I ever experienced in my life was from this kid in highschool who was built like a rhino; he wasn't particularly smart, but he was massive and used his size to his advantage.  In retrospect, I think he had a very difficult life, and in some was as much trouble fitting in at school as I had.  At the time, though, what mattered was that whenever he would see me, this kid would slam my head into a locker, punch me from behind or generally verbally abuse and gesture aggressively at me - in much the same was as the Fords do with Dale.

People who know me well will tell you I have an enormous capacity for patience and what often seems like an endless well of endurance, but in truth I have my limits.  I remember clearly the day that the big bully on the block pushed me past mine; I was walking in to science class and he'd said something offencive and threatening.  In a black mood and feeling an urge to be the winner, for once, I said something smart and sarcastic back.  I turned to go in the door, but was nearly floored by a massive round-house punch to the side of my head, from behind.

Everyone around me expected tears, running away, something other than what happened next.

I turned around with what has since become known as my "angry face" on and looked the kid square in the eye.  I have a rather intense gaze, and it was turned squarely on those two beady eyes buried in the fleshy face of my aggressor.

"You're going to wish you hadn't done that," I said.

With an angry yet controlled voice, I continued into the classroom and told the teacher, in a voice loud enough to be heard by everyone in the room, that I had just been assaulted from behind by a coward and would be proceeding to the principal's office to make damned sure justice was served.  It was not what anyone expected - it was instantly clear that despite where the strength lay, despite the culture of teachers putting the class first, the kids second, I was in control of the situation and would not be denied.

As I left the room, the bully tried to apologize, said it was a mistake, he didn't mean it.  He was, suddenly, afraid of consequence.  This was the kind of thing Rob Ford has said when he's been called out for misbehaviour.  Again, I looked the bully in the eye and spoke with a hardened voice: "a little late for that now, isn't it?"

The kid got suspended, which wasn't unusual - it was not a punishment to him.  The thing that changed his behaviour was a clear understanding that he'd crossed my line and that there was no longer anything he could do, not even a sneak-attack from behind, that would make me cower.  He'd lost, I'd won. 

From that point on he never bullied me, nor would dare to bully anyone else if he thought I'd learn about it - for he knew there was someone out there who was smaller but stronger than he was, unafraid to take him down in the name of justice.

Which brings us back around to point #1 - bullies have many victims; the victims will come and go, be it in the schoolyard or in the political arena.  It's the bullies that have staying power, unless someone without power finds the strength to take them down.  When they do so, though, these newly-christened advocates for social justice find themselves mighty; they gain both the power and the responsibility to stop the victimization of others.

It's a David and Goliath kind of thing, or perhaps the Devil and Daniel Webster.  Someone has to take the risk and champion the cause but when they do, they'll find that's just what people have been waiting for someone to do and will join in.

See, much of Ford Nation feels like they've been bullied and neglected by the System themselves - and they're not entirely wrong.  In their minds, Rob Ford is indeed sticking up for the little guy, walking among them, taking them seriously.  The Mayor, stripped of his power by mean-spirited elites is still on their side, and that's what matters.

And it's why Rob Ford could very easily become Mayor again.  Using bully-tactics and insulting his base, throwing schoolyard insults at the man himself will only reinforce the loyalty of Ford Nation to their advocate.

If you think Ford's behaviour is over-the-top now, what do you think it'll be like if and when he has a fresh mandate from a majority of voters?  At this point in the game, who do you think he'll recruit to work on his campaign?  What tactics will he use to get Council to support his ill-conceived approaches to complex societal problems?

I completely respect Daniel Dale's position - he has no interest in the limelight, he has a job t do and just wants to do it well.  The chest-thumping and public performance side isn't his thing; if he sues the Fords, he's simply feeding their egos and giving them more fuel for their fire of social indignation.  He ends up being a focal point, which he doesn't want.

But he's not the only victim here, and many of those who are on the receiving end of Ford's abuse don't have the voice that he does.  There is no one on the landscape right now better positioned to put those bullies in their place and that if Dale doesn't do it, the Fords might not be stopped until it's too late.

He's in the spotlight already, with all sorts of unwarranted baggage slung around his neck.  People looking to validate Ford may very well see Dale as the embodiment of their villain.  But look at some of Ford's core support; these are people who have been abused by the System, seen gangs threaten their communities and pressure their children into destructive lifestyles.  How many parents want their children to grow up to be the kinds of crooks Ford enjoys the company of?  How many kids aspire to be shot to death because the only push and pull in their lives is towards violence and crime?

They don't like bullies, either.  Part of the reason they like Ford is that he's bullying the bullies.  Like many, they aren't spending time thinking about the inherent danger in this.

Ford is not their champion, he's part of their problem.  Unfortunately there's no one else for them to turn to.

But it doesn't have to be that way.  The only way the cycle gets broken is for someone to break it - that takes leadership.

The choice is yours, Daniel Dale - yours alone.

Bullying: A Genetic Problem with a Social Solution

Photo: Facebook

Are we going to tell our children to stand up and do the right thing, or to watch in silence?

How do we have a hope against bullying if so many of us are complicit bystanders?

CFN – There’s lots of talk about bullying these days.  While it appears there is broad consensus that bullying is bad, we’re not quite sure how to deal with or even how to define it.  Is bullying uniquely a youth thing, because adults have more emotional maturity to handle aggression/not take harassment personally?  Does social media/violent TV contribute to bullying behaviour?  Is micromanagement a form of bullying?  How do we discourage bullies – and is it possible to inoculate people against the emotional stains bullying causes?  

The latest conversation has been kicked off by the heart-breaking suicide of Amanda Todd, a victim of the all-pervasive kind of bullying that has only become possible thanks to social media.  Before her it was Jamie Hubley, another high-profile youth who killed himself after merciless torment; prior to that there was Greg Doucette.  Each of these deaths shocked us into conversation and a retributive mood.  While these specific bullying-induced suicides grab the nation’s attention, they’re a bit like the Attawapiskat crisis; individual, visible examples of a pervasive, systematic issue.

One in five students in Canada says they have been bullied.  Between Canada, Australia, the US and the UK there have been 41 cyber-bullying attributed deaths since 2003.  Youth suicides are just one indicator of the social impact of bullying – in Canada, one in six employees reports they have been bullied.  This pervasive, society-wide harassment has a hugely detrimental impact on individual mental health, the economy, our health care system, families – it goes on and on.  The problem is so significant that Political Parties from across the system are trying to find ways to legislate against it. 

If bullying is such a recognized problem, you’d think we would have a clear definition for it.  Public Safety Canada tells us bullying “is characterized by acts of intentional harm, repeated over-time, in a relationship where an imbalance of power exists.  It includes physical actions (punching, kicking, biting), verbal actions (threats, name calling, insults, racial or sexual comments) and social exclusion (spreading rumours, ignoring, gossiping, excluding)”.  The “balance of power” reference is key to our understanding of bullying; without that caveat, you could easily include everything from heckling in the Legislature to the Obama Birther movement as harassment.

How then do we define “balance of power”?  The man accused of kicking off the bullycide campaign against Amanda Todd clearly had power over her, in terms of the harmful video he’d conned her into providing.  The tables turned, though, when Anonymous outted this man, shifting the balance of power against him; the bully became the bullied.  Was it bullying when the Conservative Party of Canada spread rumours suggesting Irwin Cotler was going to retire?  Heck, aren’t allattack ads a form of bullying?

Most would say no – because politics is expected to be a blood sport.  Politicians should expect to be attacked and be prepared to fight back.   It’s through the cut-and-thrust of Question Period, election campaigns and increasingly, every political interaction in between that the public can determine not only which ideas stand up to scrutiny, but which representatives/leaders are tough enough to do the job of governing.  Somewhere in here is an unspoken notion that the balance of power doesn’t apply to politics, due to individual agency and public accountability of each elected official.  This notion doesn’t hold up to scrutiny itself, though; as politics becomes increasingly aggressive, Political Parties are becoming increasingly tribal.  How can you not label as bullying the dogged targeting of individuals by entire political packs?

What about micro-managing employers?  They have power over their employees; does abuse of the employer/employee relationship count as bullying?  Again, there are those who would argue against this, suggesting that individuals always have power over their own fates and are therefore equals in the labour market. If employees are really bothered by the treatment of a boss, they can speak to them about it and if that doesn’t work, they can quit and move to another job.  If they don’t do that, they’re just playing the “victim” card.  If this were really the case, though, would we be facing an unheralded business crisis in Canada?

For me, these aren’t academic questions.  I know what it’s like to be bullied.  A December baby, I was always the youngest in my classes.  Added to this, I have Attention Deficit Disorder, a “disability” which went undiagnosed until I was well into my teens.  Being the smallest and a bit different in how I interacted with the world, I was a natural target for those on the lookout for someone to diminish as a way of aggrandizing themselves.  From about Grade 1 all the way into high school, I was on the receiving end of vicious taunts, torment and physical abuse. 

Decades later, I still have clear memories of being chased home by older kids waving baseball bats (Grade 2).  It made them feel powerful to instill terror in a runt like me.  Then there was the time I was tied to a flag post in winter and left outside after all the other kids went back to class, laughing at me (Grade 4).  It got so bad that my parents eventually moved me to a different school, but by then the damage was done.  I had become a fearful child, mistrustful of people and afraid to speak up, knowing that whatever I said would be used against me.  This hesitation morphed into a stutter, which became just one more opportunity for my peers to mock me.

When bullying is that pervasive, there is no escape.  Even when your tormentors are gone, the anxiety remains, riddling your thoughts with disquiet and doubt.  Ihated going to school.  I didn’t like interacting with others, period.  I dreaded every waking moment, never knowing exactly what sort of private hell it would bring me.  The ADHD only magnified the pain, as I could never shut down the soundtrack of doubt and self-loathing playing non-stop in my head.  Self-harm became a way out; if the pain was sharp enough, it would cleanse my mind of the pervasive anguish that nestled there like a splinter.  Of course, the relief was temporary, and the fact that I was cracking my head against my desk hard enough to leave welts simply put another arrow in my bullies’ quiver.  Suicide was definitely something I contemplated – there just didn’t seem to be any other way out.

That was then.  Today, I am a confident, positive person that has a reputation for finding the silver lining around any cloud.  There’s nothing life can throw at me that I can’t handle.  Why is that?  Why is it that my name now appears in a byline rather than having featured in a headline like Todd, Hubley and Doucette?  When moving schools didn’t solve the problem, my parents decided to try an alternative solution; fight might prevail where flight did not.  They enrolled me in a Karate class led by a tough-as-nails Sensei with the hope that learning how to fight back might help.  It did, but not in the way they intended.

My Sensei was tough, but always fair and never judgmental.  He never criticized mistakes – instead, he corrected them.  The senior students who helped lead the lessons were the same way; they pushed the class but were always, always supportive.  They taught me how to fight back, which I eventually did.  The supportive attitude of the teachers carried over to the students; we were all in the same quest for perfection of technique, together.  Although I hated the class at first, it eventually became my community.  For the first time I could recall, there was a place I felt safe and respected, plus a group that included me as one of their own.

This element of belonging made a huge difference, but Karate provided me with even more.  The strict physical discipline and quick reaction times required by martial arts nurtured in me a level of focus and confidence that bled over into every aspect of my life.  My stutter began to fade; I became more and more comfortable in asserting myself.  At the same time, the experience of having been bullied combined with the positive experience of the class shaped my understanding that individual strength is nurtured within supportive communities. 

I tell this tale not to gain your sympathy or to toot my own horn but to show that it can get better when we address the underpinnings of bullying proactively and cooperatively.  The importance of collective morale and promoting individual resilience is understood within our military, if not those who command it.  The idea of fostering social-emotional learning and positive relationships with teachers and peers is equally a key component of Ontario’s Full Day Kindergarten program.  The entire field of positive psychology is dedicated to the development of cognitive grit the way exercise builds physical strength.  There is no reason these principles can’t be applied more broadly, especially in the places where bullying is most prevalent – schools and the workplace.

The other lesson to draw from experiences like mine is that the tools for developing resiliency aren’t instinctive.  As Colin Powell points out in It Worked For Me, social functioning is learned behaviour; this is as true for the human animal as it is in all social species.  Left to our own devices, we tend to fight, flee or circle the wagons and avoid – it’s just how natural selection works.  There’s really not much difference between the playground, Question Period or an episode of Animal Kingdom.  It takes moderators – an elder, a teacher, the Speaker, etc. – to referee social interactions, foster respect and maintain order. 

It also takes leaders to set examples and develop the kind of work or school cultures that manage down this bullying instinct. Former Ontario Premier Mike Harris famously fostered a competitive culture within the Progressive Conservative Party, believing that ambitious people would produce the best results.  Instead, the internal fighting became so toxic to the Party that Harris had to lay down the law for his cabinet ministers.  It’s the exact seem scenario that’s being fueled by the heightened, competitive rancor in Queen’s Park now.  Somewhere along the way, our political leaders have forgotten that it’s possible to be in total disagreement with someone without denigrating them as a consequence.

If we, as a society, want to have a hyper-oppositional culture that fosters survival of the fittest competition, that’s fine – but we’ll also have to accept that victimization and its consequences are part of the package, including the lost productivity, the health care costs and the youth suicides.  If we’re really serious about addressing bullying, we have to realize the only way to do so is proactively – by providing universal resiliency and social-emotional training on the one end and using programs like restorative justice to stifle bullying behaviour on the other.  The most important thing we can do to end bullying, though, is lead by example. 

Progressive Conservative MPP Jim Wilson Stands Up Against Heckling

 

 

"My point of privilege is based upon the simple fact that members of the legislative assembly of Ontario should be free from any attempts at intimidation, especially the Speaker," said PC house leader Jim Wilson.

 

Any attempts at intimidation. 

 

It's a brave thing the Member from Simcoe Grey is doing, taking a stand against bullying in the Legislative Assembly.  Question Period, after all, is the mother of intimidation games - the heckling, the taunts, the over-the-top accusations put any schoolyard to shame.  Despite the cross-partisan recognition of bullying as harmful and a commitment to do something about it, there's still this thing about politics being a blood sport - politicians tell themselves (and sell the message to us) that you have to be tough and legislate with your elbows up, that the rules legislators say are necessary everywhere else simply don't apply to them.

 

For MPP Wilson to take a strong stance against any attempt of intimidation, including heckling, is to risk being called weak by his colleagues.  Good for him, sticking by his beliefs regardless.

 

Of course, politicians are no different than anyone else - in fact, as we're seeing with Rob Ford, we kinda like politicians who are average Janes and Joes.  Well, average folk don't perform so well under the kinds of stress intimidation - be it bullying in the schoolyard, belittlement in the workplace or heckling in the Legislature - that politicians expose themselves to every time they stand and speak on behalf of their constituents.

 

We've seen what the heckling gets us - tribal partisanship, circled wagons, a great deal of time and energy dedicated to thrust and parry rather than actual legislation. 

 

Wilson's got my support on this; I hope he has yours as well.  I look forward to his leading by example when the House resumes September 9th. 

Role Models For Cyberbullying

The same goes for heckling in Legislatures.  Sure, it makes for great theatre and yeah, it throws off your opponents, but so do taunts on the schoolyard.  

We elect leaders to set the example.  The standard they must judge themselves by is "would I want to see anyone I represent act in the same way I do?"

Deflect all you want, hide behind "politics is a blood sport" all you want, but remember this - leaders don't make excuses.

Politics is Hazing and Why It's Time to Put Away the Attack Ad Horses and Bayonets

 

The research suggests that people may hold extreme policy positions because they are under an illusion of understanding — attempting to explain the nuts and bolts of how a policy works forces them to acknowledge that they don’t know as much about the policy as they initially thought.

 

One of my favourite topics, this, because it's so important to social function (or dysfunction, as the case may be).

 

Political operatives tell each other that politics is a blood sport and therefore, one must be tough and aggressive to win.  The ability to take the heat is supposed to prove fitness for governance, or some such.

 

Do we put prospective CEOs or Board Members through personal insults and public humiliation in an effort to prove their leadership value?  Would anyone even think that would be a useful exercise?

 

Do we encourage hazing in university, because the trial-by-fire approach builds team spirit and reminds participants they're part of the tribe?  No - we have categorically decided that hazing is detrimental and at its worst, incredibly harmful.

 

Do we put newlyweds through shivarees to remind them not to get too caught up in their wedded bliss, because they're still part of the tribe?  No - that would be invasive and offensive.

 

Do we encourage bullying in schools as a way to foster thick skin among students?  No, because that leads to mental illness and suicide.  Unless of course, you're Christie Blatchford.

 

There are only two human endeavours where it is considered acceptable to dehumanize and bully/haze/harass/abuse opponents - war and politics.  The desired outcome of war is to beat the other guy, not to build a cohesive society that builds strength through diversity.  Politics is the same thing - tribal warfare that uses different tactics to accomplish essentially the same goal.

In war, who's right and who's dead depends on who reacts faster.  The same holds true of politics.  Reaction is a limbic action that is pre-programmed and happens instantaneously, meaning you don't consciously think about it - you shoot first and ask questions never.  You have to be reactive, because if you're not, you're dead.  If a member of the tribe is acting up, you beat them down to maintain traditional order.

 

Which is exactly what happens with extreme policy positions.  Strength and aggressiveness is synonymous with right - the other guy can't be right, because if they are, then you're dead.  But pistols at dawn doesn't work in a dense social framework; it leads to reactive blood feuds like you see in Afghanistan.  And, as we're seeing with the very predictable revolt against Harper, you can't beat down your tribe forever; not even the threat of violence is enough to accomplish that any more.

 

The very reason why people have developed the capacity to commit sociology and think rationally in the first place is because society depends on it.  As tempting as it is to view the world through binary lenses of good and evil, society is a complex system; you can't change or remove one cog without consequences for the whole machine.

 

This is why education, communication, social-emotional learning and structure are so crucial to social functioning; our schools understand this and our private sector is beginning to wrap its head around the consequences of doing this poorly.  Politics, maddeningly, keeps heading in the opposite direction.

 

Slowly, painfully we are pulling back the curtain on our own ignorance and expanding our ability to see around the corner; politics, that aggressive hold out with its ancient institutions poorly suited to modern realities, is a laggard, holding out.

 

Social evolution works the same way biological evolution does - that which fails to adapt doesn't survive.  Which is why it's time for our political people to put away their horses and bayonets and start committing a bit more sociology.  

 

Give up the illusion, folks, and stop boxing at shadows.  The real world is dying for you to catch up.

 

Harpernian Governocracy: Do as I Say, Not Do as I Do

 

When teenagers assess role models, they have an unfailing ability to call out adults for telling them not to do something those same adults do. Why should teens believe a political leader who says it’s wrong to gang up on someone and attack him publicly for, say, inexperience, when that leader and the back-room strategists are rubbing their hands in glee over the next round of attack ads?

 

In the long run, these ads degrade the party that creates them, give credence to all-too-popular sentiment that politicians (most of whom spend long hours trying to help constituents) are a shady lot, reduce political debate to who can afford the best attack-ad agency and weaken democracy by robbing Canadians of a chance to assess up-and-coming political leaders on their merits.

 

 

Team Harper aren't the only ones who play the "do as I say, not do as I do" game.  Politicians of all stripes and at all levels will decry bullying even as they engage in the very essence of bullying behaviour, except directed at their opponents.

 

That's okay, though - you have to be tough to be in the blood sport of politics.  Right?

 

Wrong.  Bully politicians provide terrible role models - and not just for youth.  As Political Machines break rules, lie, misrepresent the facts, throw staffers under the bus and occasionally, hire them back when nobody is looking, they're setting the standard for everyone else - the private sector, students, moms and dads at home. 

 

The message is this - anything you can get away with, goes.  If you get caught misbehaving, just be extra belligerent and hit someone else to change the focus.

 

If you truly believe that the ends justify the means, then you're essentially saying poverty, war, street violence, homelessness and that $50 billion mental health crisis don't matter.  It's all just collateral damage on the way to power and the deconstruction of society.

 

That's fine, if you want to live in a Game of Thrones feudalistic society.  That, essentially, has been the internal model for Political Parties for ages - and that top-down, my-way-or-the-street approach has trickled down to politics in general.  We fundamentally don't live in a democracy any more - we live in a governocracy, where whoever is in charge feels they can shape the rules and even the laws of political nature.

 

It's all an illusion, though - the non-leaders like Harper are rubbing salt in the nation's wounds and inflaming our social problems.  They say they're doing this to strengthen the economy, but even that's not happening.  There's a reason for this - "the economy" is the political equivalent of the golden calf; you don't strengthen the financial viability of a nation by cutting off or abandoning its people.  The people are the foundation of the economy, not vice-versa.

 

The single best thing the Harper government has done so far is the creation of a Psychological Safe Workplace initiative.  Watch this video and learn - by devaluing people at the expense of the economy, by trying to bully people into behaviour Team Harper feels works best for the economy, they are fuelling the very problem they're trying to solve.  They've come to a point where the attempt to engineer a conservative society is negatively impacting the Canadian people.

 

That's not leadership.  That's a blatant disregard of responsibility for selfish gain that encourages others to do the same.

 

There's only one way to lead - and that's by example.  If that example includes casting stones, expect the people to follow.

 

The Role of Government

 

This begs a second question, since when is young boys taking a picture of a rape of a 15-year-old girl and then distributing it considered an issue for the community to handle?

 

Call me naive, but isn't the role of a democratically elected government to represent the voice of the community - and ensure every voice gets reflected in decision making?  Through justice services, aren't governments supposed to put a floor on acceptable behaviour and provide mechanisms for restoration, reconciliation and rehabilitation?

 

We have a consumer-based culture that's all about individual rights, individual access, etc - but we've left out the social accountability piece.

 

We need the social accountability piece.

 

Ayn Rand was wrong, folks - society is a system of which we're all a part.  When we work against each other, constantly, ignoring things we don't think matter, problems arise that impact all parts of the whole, like an illness.  The role of government is to serve as brain, responding to the needs of the parts and coordinating operation against them. 

 

Oh - and when the elected mechanism of government fails to do its job, others step up to fill that space that aren't accountable to the public.  That's how revolutions happen.

 

It's time the institutions we're meant to rely on step up to the plate.

 

 

Jer's Vision a Great Example of Social Entrepreneurship

 

Those kids stood up for someone who wasn’t in a position to stand up for himself. They could not have any idea what they started. This past year 8.1 million kids around the world wore pink on the International Day of Pink to send the same message. The Day of Pink, like the zipper, is a Canadian success story. Someone should get these kids the Order of Canada.

There are those who think that the only real solution to bullying is for kids to learn to stand up for themselves, knock the bully in the nose and be done with it.  It's really really hoping that people empower themselves but doing nothing to nurture the process.  Others believe in the corrective carrot method - punishing bad behaviour is the best way to eliminate it.

 

The same crowd that frowns on thug-hugging tend to be think the entrepreneurial spirit is the best economic engine; all government has to do is get out of the way and reduce impediments to entrepreneurs and they'll emerge on their own, fully-formed and ready to take on the world with their dedication, ideas and salesmanship.

 

So what happens when the entrepreneurial spirit is embodied by proactive youth who create a world phenomenon with an initiative designed to actively support bullied peers?  That's what Jer's Vision is.  A group of kids were motivated by the loss of a friend, a loss that could have been prevented if someone had reached out a hand or lent a shoulder earlier.  It's a powerful message that resonates, globally.

 

Its also a youth-driven initiative that uses the power of community to address a problem that targets individuals but has broader, social impact.  Left to their own devices by people who really, really wanted them to succeed on their own, these kids banded together and provided a positive solution that focuses on education, resilience-building and empathy - not punishment.

 

The children shall lead, indeed - question is, are some adults too set in their ways to follow?

CFN - Bullying: A Genetic Problem with a Social Solution

Bullying: A Genetic Problem with a Social Solution

Are we going to tell our children to stand up and do the right thing, or to watch in silence?

How do we have a hope against bullying if so many of us are complicit bystanders?

There’s lots of talk about bullying these days.  While it appears there is broad consensus that bullying is bad, we’re not quite sure how to deal with or even how to define it.  Is bullying uniquely a youth thing, because adults have more emotional maturity to handle aggression/not take harassment personally?  Does social media/violent TV contribute to bullying behaviour?  Is micromanagement a form of bullying?  How do we discourage bullies – and is it possible to inoculate people against the emotional stains bullying causes?  

The latest conversation has been kicked off by the heart-breaking suicide of Amanda Todd, a victim of the all-pervasive kind of bullying that has only become possible thanks to social media.  Before her it was Jamie Hubley, another high-profile youth who killed himself after merciless torment; prior to that there was Greg Doucette.  Each of these deaths shocked us into conversation and a retributive mood.  While these specific bullying-induced suicides grab the nation’s attention, they’re a bit like the Attawapiskat crisis; individual, visible examples of a pervasive, systematic issue.

One in five students in Canada says they have been bullied.  Between Canada, Australia, the US and the UK there have been 41 cyber-bullying attributed deaths since 2003.  Youth suicides are just one indicator of the social impact of bullying – in Canada, one in six employees reports they have been bullied.  This pervasive, society-wide harassment has a hugely detrimental impact on individual mental health, the economy, our health care system, families – it goes on and on.  The problem is so significant that Political Parties from across the system are trying to find ways to legislate against it. 

If bullying is such a recognized problem, you’d think we would have a clear definition for it.  Public Safety Canada tells us bullying “is characterized by acts of intentional harm, repeated over-time, in a relationship where an imbalance of power exists.  It includes physical actions (punching, kicking, biting), verbal actions (threats, name calling, insults, racial or sexual comments) and social exclusion (spreading rumours, ignoring, gossiping, excluding)”.  The “balance of power” reference is key to our understanding of bullying; without that caveat, you could easily include everything from heckling in the Legislature to the Obama Birther movement as harassment.

How then do we define “balance of power”?  The man accused of kicking off the bullycide campaign against Amanda Todd clearly had power over her, in terms of the harmful video he’d conned her into providing.  The tables turned, though, when Anonymous outted this man, shifting the balance of power against him; the bully became the bullied.  Was it bullying when the Conservative Party of Canada spread rumours suggesting Irwin Cotler was going to retire?  Heck, aren’t all attack ads a form of bullying?

Most would say no – because politics is expected to be a blood sport.  Politicians should expect to be attacked and be prepared to fight back.   It’s through the cut-and-thrust of Question Period, election campaigns and increasingly, every political interaction in between that the public can determine not only which ideas stand up to scrutiny, but which representatives/leaders are tough enough to do the job of governing.  Somewhere in here is an unspoken notion that the balance of power doesn’t apply to politics, due to individual agency and public accountability of each elected official.  This notion doesn’t hold up to scrutiny itself, though; as politics becomes increasingly aggressive, Political Parties are becoming increasingly tribal.  How can you not label as bullying the dogged targeting of individuals by entire political packs?

What about micro-managing employers?  They have power over their employees; does abuse of the employer/employee relationship count as bullying?  Again, there are those who would argue against this, suggesting that individuals always have power over their own fates and are therefore equals in the labour market. If employees are really bothered by the treatment of a boss, they can speak to them about it and if that doesn’t work, they can quit and move to another job.  If they don’t do that, they’re just playing the “victim” card.  If this were really the case, though, would we be facing an unheralded business crisis in Canada?

For me, these aren’t academic questions.  I know what it’s like to be bullied.  A December baby, I was always the youngest in my classes.  Added to this, I have Attention Deficit Disorder, a “disability” which went undiagnosed until I was well into my teens.  Being the smallest and a bit different in how I interacted with the world, I was a natural target for those on the lookout for someone to diminish as a way of aggrandizing themselves.  From about Grade 1 all the way into high school, I was on the receiving end of vicious taunts, torment and physical abuse. 

Decades later, I still have clear memories of being chased home by older kids waving baseball bats (Grade 2).  It made them feel powerful to instill terror in a runt like me.  Then there was the time I was tied to a flag post in winter and left outside after all the other kids went back to class, laughing at me (Grade 4).  It got so bad that my parents eventually moved me to a different school, but by then the damage was done.  I had become a fearful child, mistrustful of people and afraid to speak up, knowing that whatever I said would be used against me.  This hesitation morphed into a stutter, which became just one more opportunity for my peers to mock me.

When bullying is that pervasive, there is no escape.  Even when your tormentors are gone, the anxiety remains, riddling your thoughts with disquiet and doubt.  I hated going to school.  I didn’t like interacting with others, period.  I dreaded every waking moment, never knowing exactly what sort of private hell it would bring me.  The ADHD only magnified the pain, as I could never shut down the soundtrack of doubt and self-loathing playing non-stop in my head.  Self-harm became a way out; if the pain was sharp enough, it would cleanse my mind of the pervasive anguish that nestled there like a splinter.  Of course, the relief was temporary, and the fact that I was cracking my head against my desk hard enough to leave welts simply put another arrow in my bullies’ quiver.  Suicide was definitely something I contemplated – there just didn’t seem to be any other way out.

That was then.  Today, I am a confident, positive person that has a reputation for finding the silver lining around any cloud.  There’s nothing life can throw at me that I can’t handle.  Why is that?  Why is it that my name now appears in a byline rather than having featured in a headline like Todd, Hubley and Doucette?  When moving schools didn’t solve the problem, my parents decided to try an alternative solution; fight might prevail where flight did not.  They enrolled me in a Karate class led by a tough-as-nails Sensei with the hope that learning how to fight back might help.  It did, but not in the way they intended.

My Sensei was tough, but always fair and never judgmental.  He never criticized mistakes – instead, he corrected them.  The senior students who helped lead the lessons were the same way; they pushed the class but were always, always supportive.  They taught me how to fight back, which I eventually did.  The supportive attitude of the teachers carried over to the students; we were all in the same quest for perfection of technique, together.  Although I hated the class at first, it eventually became my community.  For the first time I could recall, there was a place I felt safe and respected, plus a group that included me as one of their own.

This element of belonging made a huge difference, but Karate provided me with even more.  The strict physical discipline and quick reaction times required by martial arts nurtured in me a level of focus and confidence that bled over into every aspect of my life.  My stutter began to fade; I became more and more comfortable in asserting myself.  At the same time, the experience of having been bullied combined with the positive experience of the class shaped my understanding that individual strength is nurtured within supportive communities. 

I tell this tale not to gain your sympathy or to toot my own horn but to show that it can get better when we address the underpinnings of bullying proactively and cooperatively.  The importance of collective morale and promoting individual resilience is understood within our military, if not those who command it.  The idea of fostering social-emotional learning and positive relationships with teachers and peers is equally a key component of Ontario’s Full Day Kindergarten program.  The entire field of positive psychology is dedicated to the development of cognitive grit the way exercise builds physical strength.  There is no reason these principles can’t be applied more broadly, especially in the places where bullying is most prevalent – schools and the workplace.

The other lesson to draw from experiences like mine is that the tools for developing resiliency aren’t instinctive.  As Colin Powell points out in It Worked For Me, social functioning is learned behaviour; this is as true for the human animal as it is in all social species.  Left to our own devices, we tend to fight, flee or circle the wagons and avoid – it’s just how natural selection works.  There’s really not much difference between the playground, Question Period or an episode of Animal Kingdom.  It takes moderators – an elder, a teacher, the Speaker, etc. – to referee social interactions, foster respect and maintain order. 

It also takes leaders to set examples and develop the kind of work or school cultures that manage down this bullying instinct. Former Ontario Premier Mike Harris famously fostered a competitive culture within the Progressive Conservative Party, believing that ambitious people would produce the best results.  Instead, the internal fighting became so toxic to the Party that Harris had to lay down the law for his cabinet ministers.  It’s the exact seem scenario that’s being fueled by the heightened, competitive rancor in Queen’s Park now.  Somewhere along the way, our political leaders have forgotten that it’s possible to be in total disagreement with someone without denigrating them as a consequence.

If we, as a society, want to have a hyper-oppositional culture that fosters survival of the fittest competition, that’s fine – but we’ll also have to accept that victimization and its consequences are part of the package, including the lost productivity, the health care costs and the youth suicides.  If we’re really serious about addressing bullying, we have to realize the only way to do so is proactively – by providing universal resiliency and social-emotional training on the one end and using programs like restorative justice to stifle bullying behaviour on the other.  The most important thing we can do to end bullying, though, is lead by example.