The Citizenry Versus The Government: Civil Liberties, Freedom of Religion & Wielding Political Power By Tomi Michel

The Citizenry Versus The Government: Civil Liberties, Freedom of Religion & Wielding Political Power

By Tomi Michel

 

“Born as I was the citizen of a free state, and a member of its sovereign body, the very right to vote imposes on me the duty to instruct myself in public affairs, however little influence my voice may have in them.”

Jean-Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract

 

“We cannot see the radio waves that our cell phones emit to keep us in communication with one another. We cannot see the magnetic fields of magnets, yet we can see them pushing and pulling metals around with force. We cannot see the cells of our bodies without a microscope, but we understand them to be the smallest biological units that form our arms and legs. We cannot see the force of gravity, yet we know it’s there, keeping us from floating away into outer space. We cannot see the full spectrum of visible light, but when it is diffracted, we can see it made out of seven colors.” 

The above excerpts from a sermon I wrote to preach at MANNA’s ministry at the Cathedral Church of St. Paul, titled “The Different Shades of Faith.” It was my second time preaching for this group and my second time preaching ever. Lately, I have felt an utter need to communicate with large audiences, though I am unsure why. Yet, as Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler discuss in Connected, “Economists say markets are driven by supply and demand, but where does demand come from? In part, it comes from the inherent value of an object.” Much like the unseen forces around us, this inherent value is perceived through its effects and significance. What is the unseen force pushing me? Is there a need? What value is it bringing to the community? I wonder.

The ministry provides services every Monday inside the church that leads the Episcopalian district of Massachusetts, concluding with a short Mass service and a Holy Eucharist ceremony. “Hey Tomi, be mindful that we are a diverse group. Many of us here were brought up with different faiths and denominations. We respect that. Proselytism is not something that we do. And keep it simple.” These were the words of the reverend in charge of the operation while she tried to guide me to do a good job. I was not surprised to hear such a warning from her after hearing her constantly say every Monday, “…In this space, we respect everybody’s dignity…” enforcing, promoting, and influencing a culture of individual integrity into a flock of humans. I could not help but think — that is how the guarantee of freedom of religion feels, as if “maintaining protection of personal privacy and freedom is critical to the success of any society,” as Alex Pentland would write in Social Physics.

 

Since the beginning of documented history, it has been endemic to human nature for one group to seek to assert dominance over another. Whether out of self-preservation or survival, even at someone else’s expense. Wanting to gain access to a beneficial territory or food resources. Sometimes, with more strategic and long-term objectives, such as the growth and expansion of a domain. Many tools and approaches have been utilized to accomplish such missions, ranging from outright violence in more “primitive civilizations” to gaining the consensus of the majority within a group. Similar to the convening needed in a district to get elected to a public seat in the government. Hence, “networked resources that you do not own, but which you have access through your friends and acquaintances, are called ‘social capital,'” as Charles Kadushin comments in Understanding Social Networks. Hence, the endeavors above require a coordinated effort to be successful. The underlying implication is the nature of an individual’s relationship with society and the connection the human unit has with its web.

Politics has traditionally been defined as the art of governing, but I outright disagree. It is a more appropriate definition for public administration and the government’s affairs in administering the governed. I have redefined politics as pursuing the power that arises from achieving consensus. Therefore, political power comes from the ability to wield the force of the numbers to influence outcomes in our reality. The capacity that comes as a result of having the goodwill of a group of people. Hence, political power gives one strength, and its source is the support of the many. But political power is just one kind of many. Power does not have a single source; it can be accessed through several.

As I continue to develop my spiritual life and faith, I have realized that as one stands at a church’s podium, whether to read the gospel or preach a sermon to a congregation, one’s political power increases due to this action. The more one addresses an audience of parishioners, others know the more one, and the more one is seen by others, and listened to by others, the more one increases one’s visibility, creates new human connections, and therefore amasses more influence that can be utilitarianly used towards goals. As one communicates messages that seek to comfort or uphold others in a congregation, this act of service increases the goodwill of others for oneself. This force can be wielded as a sword. 

What is interesting about being a leader who wields the consensus that comes from religious circles to achieve goals is that such is not found in logos, a concept known as logic, reasoning, science, research, or verifiable facts and truth. Instead, it is more based on the concept of pathos and its visceral origin. “I believe with certainty and unwavering conviction, even if I am unable to see it; to the point that I move and walk and have it as a given; putting it into action, despite my logic failing me… with faith, I have the assurance—that he is here with me. I have faith that God is here with us —guiding our lives to better things and better times.” That was how I closed my sermon. My audience, who needed spiritual support, found it compelling.

Yet, I thought about how spirituality has been used to apply psychological pressure rather than healing. Violence and manipulation create systems with different components, procedures, and agents. Religion and structural spirituality have been tools that have proven throughout civilization to be more potent and convenient, especially in a world where physical violence has become frowned upon to control bodies. Religion has come to participate as a tool that creates a philosophy that controls the mind that commands such bodies. “God told me so!” Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, the selling of indulgences.

The entitlement of Religious freedom the people of the United States enjoy in the Constitution First Amendment is, therefore, the sister of the separation of church and state. No government body should be siding its operations with any faith in its nature of being a public institution.

Yes, Martin Luther King Jr. wielded political power, attained from consensus, in his religious platform as a reverend to influence the law with the civil rights movement. Mahatma Gandhi led the Indian independent movement against the British Colonial rule. Neither was an elected official; They were not men of the state. Yet the British monarchs are both the head of church and state. There is a reason why the American system is repugnant to the British and many of its concepts. There is an inherent irrationality that comes from religions that can be weaponized toward goals against humanity. That enthusiasm and conviction can bring destruction to the lives of the innocent if misused on a significant scale.

 

Tomi Michel is a Rumbo Columnist. He can be reached at tomi@michelpublicrelations.com.