Heros: Stetson Kennedy

One person can make a difference, and in the case of Kennedy, a remarkable one in changing the course of history and the fate of a nation.

Creating positive change takes courage, imagination, and determination, and what we’ve learned from Kennedy, is to be undaunted by the size of the job. While the mission for change may seem insurmountable, and we too small to tackle it, we must remember all the examples of history that have proven how much difference one person can make. How often the whistle-blower, the sole individual with courage to speak up among a sea of participants who further enabled that which they knew to be wrong, that one intrepid person of integrity and character, unraveled a tangled plot of deliberate, intentional, and destructive misconduct. Conversely, one self-serving individual, one man consumed with pursuing the desires of his inflated ego unchecked causes irreparable damage.

Information and disclosure are the tools that protect us. Often the answer to change can be as “simple” as revealing that which the power structure wants to remain hidden, that which happens behind closed doors, or as in the case of the Klan, the cowardly and ugly that lay hidden beneath their bed linens.

The Klan’s source of power came from their secrecy. When Stetson revealed the Klan’s secret codes and passwords, he removed all their allure and power. We have too many examples from recent years showing us the harm that is done by secret societies. Politics, Enrons in the stock market, a war, the pharmaceutical industry, sub-prime loans. Too many examples of a few profiting at the cost of many. We should regard authority with the same eye as the hippies of the 60s. It is not disrespectful to question. It is disrespectful and, yes, immoral, for those in positions of authority to introduce red herrings that cut-off dialogue with distracting arguments about patriotism. (We are fools for falling for it.) Those who have nothing to hide are not afraid of discussions and disclosure.

Even in our personal lives, we see the negative effects of secrecy. Our employers threaten disciplinary action if we disclose our salary to a coworker. Who profits? We, as employees? No, we stab in the dark when we timidly ask for a raise, not knowing how much the person in the next cube with a similar, or inferior, skill set is making. The lack of information about salary ranges leaves us on shaky ground, never knowing for sure if we’re being fairly compensated. Our employer is completely at his own discretion to make things equitable, with a whole arsenal of rationalizations about shareholders and “the good of the company” to allay any self-doubt, protected as he is from ever owning up to any unfairness, encouraged to give as little as possible.

To some extent our economy is built upon a foundation of secrecy. We have a cultural taboo about speaking too directly about money. We don’t feel comfortable sharing our salary or bank balance. We solve this by consuming lots of things so that we can say through them that we’re doing “okay,” okay always defined as and measured by our material possessions, not by our charitable acts, volunteerism, leisure activities, vacation time, or how happy we are. If we’re keeping up with the Joneses, no one has to know the staggering, crushing debt we’ve accumulated. Sales are made by tightly guarding the amount of profit made on the good or service. Whether it be a negotiation for a car or a consulting service, the person in power is the one who has the most information.

Information and disclosure keep our democracy intact and people safe. As Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner state in their book, “Freakonomics,” those who control the flow of information control everything.

Read Levitt and Dubner’s account of Stetson Kennedy here and more about Freakonomics in my next post.

This entry was posted on May 17, 2008 at 8:32 pm and is filed under Ponderings/Musings, Heroes, Books. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site.

| Print