Monday Afternoon
"You own your lies. Even if it takes a while, every lie you tell will eventually catch up to you. So try very hard to tell the truth. That is what I think. It's better to tell the truth." -- Onondaga Chief Paul Waterman; November, 1994.
I watched reports of Kevin McCarthy lying about what he said about Trump and the January 6 insurrection, followed by a tape of his saying exactly what he was denying. Then I watched Marjorie Taylor Greene lie faster than a cheetah can run on the witness stand. My cousin and I spoke several times on the telephone during the Greene testimony, each of us having other chores to do, neither of us able to walk away from the television until it was over.
On my walk to the pond to think about these lying liars, I thought of Gandhi's saying that "Truth is God." He explained the distinction between that and "God is truth." As my boot got stuck in some mud in the swamp before my pond, I asked myself -- if Gandhi is correct, then what is the logical deduction regarding McCarthy and Greene's lying? For I understand "evil" only in the human context. I have yet to see "evil" as anything but a 100% human product. Hence, for example, I frequently cite Michael Stone's 2009 book, "The Anatomy of Evil," in which the professor of clinical psychiatry documents levels of evil one encounters in forensic work.
At the pond's edge, while the dog went wading, I saw more than a dozen salamanders floating in the warm water. Pollywogs scurried about, hiding under rocks or in the mud. A school of tiny minnows caugt th dog's attention, before a number of fish -- including the two giant koi -- came to be fed. One of the koi likes to swim through the dog's legs, a habit sure to get her back on land.
As the dog was busy sniffing a variety of odors, I thought back to the first interview I did with Paul, almost 28 years ago. That is where the above quote comes from. What a difference in what is considered "leadership." Paul sat on the Onondaga Council of Chiefs, and the Iroquois Grand Council of Chiefs. A person like McCarthy or Greene would never e considered worthy of a leadership position in a traditional society. For they would be recognized as liars.
Next, I thought of the theories of Jean Piaget, Lawrence Kohlberg, and Erik Erikson. It's important, from the giddy-up, to recognize that while some of Kphlberg's studies had flaws -- h focused on males exclusively -- these theories have some value. Each of the three wrote about levels of human development in a manner that we might view as a staircase. Tiny infants recognize themselves as the center of their universe. Toddlers through about 5 years old have fascinating concepts of right and wrong, and the truth versus lies. It is largely rooted in the behaviors of their parents, and so for the sake of this discussion, I will be speaking of those children raised by nurturing adults. And I recognize that there are no "perfect" parents.
If we consider that first step, from infant to age 5, to be the pollywog stage of deveopment -- for we are, after all, at the pond's edge -- the next step up is akin to when a pollywog stretches out and sprouts hind legs. It is generally from ages 6 to 11. They encounter the society we call school, with expanded rules of right and wrong behavior. If these are consistent with those of the child's home, things go smoothly. There may be an issue with telling the truth from time to time. Among those frequently encountered at this stage is the infamous, "Well, what about _______?" It is essential to refocus that child with "I am only talking about you behavior now." Failure to do so often leads to adults who attempt that same weak tactic of trying to change the subject.
Note: it is not a coincidence that Russian military intelligence has inserted this exact tactic into the modern republican party.
The next step up comes roughly between the ages of 12 and 17. It is here that youth begin to explore the rules and guidelines in the larger society, with more expansive rules regarding right versus wrong, and truth versus lies. There are young people at the far ends of the spectrum, from those who rigidly follow every rule, and tend to point fingers at everyone else, to those who have zero respect for any and every social norm, and swing fists at others. But most of us fell somewhere in the middle. When confronted with wrong-doings, because they have a restricted ability to consider the consequences of their behaviors, nature has provided teens the ability to produce the most stupid, unbelievable of lies at the drop of a hat. Patience is necessary in teaching them that lying does not work to their advantage -- unless one had parents like mine, who were easily fooled. Yet, exactly as Paul said, those lies provide only the illusion of working, and eventually catch up. More than once, the NYS Police came up our driveway, lights flashing, regarding my brothers and/or my behaviors.
The next step is from 18 to about 24. In the "old days," this was recognized as adulthood. In the late 1960s and early '70s, especially in regard to college students, this step often became an extended form of "youth." But we weren't swallowing goldfish or cramming into a phone booth. There were, obviously, many people our age that did not have this luxury, and indeed behaved like adults. But many of us inhabited the margins between right and wrong, believing we were uncovering a higher form of truth. We recognized that non-white males who were falsely accused of a crime faced severe punishment if they told the truth. We wanted to believe Carlos Castaneda's series of books were true.
Today, of course, the environment has changed for those at this step, perhaps most importantly with the internet. Cell phones allow instant access to things that are indeed true, some that are a mixture of truth and lies, and the Trump cult's shared delusional lies.
The next step generally takes place between 25 and 45, obviously representing a longer expanse of years compared to any previous step. One gets a job, maybe gets married, might have children, and usually respects most of society's rules. This may include some violations, such as exceeding the speed limit on an open highway. Some of us can admit that we likely had too much to drink and still got behind the wheel. A very few may have even smoked pot in our homes after the kids went to bed, even before our state government determined it was okay to do. This, despite the fact that today's product is a wee-bit stronger than it was decades ago.
The final step, which not everyone takes, is found in those with mature social consciousness. This includes the recognition that some laws change for the better when attention is paid to a situation. More, there are what Martin Luther King, Jr. called "unjust laws," which in his time involved the "legal" oppression of non-white people. This was, of course, similar to Gandhi's social experiments in India, fighting similar unjust laws. It should never be confused with signing a petition on the internet, of being dazzled by a meme. No, this step requires one's being at one with those suffering from injustice, specifically the pain caused by the lies of a McCarthy or a Greene. When these individuals break a law, they do so openly, and tell the truth when they accept the consequences. It is essential that we understand that this requires more than an inividual Gandhi or King -- for both harnessed the Truth of thousands of people who's names are forgotten. (This is why, when "Trout Unlimited" asked Chief Waterman and I to join them on a project, Paul said that he and I were "Minnows Unlimited."
Now, I've said all this to make a point. In my experience with forensic social work -- just like your experiences in life -- I found that some adults lacked the capacity to ever tell the truth when confronted with their behaviors. For some, like McCarthy, lying as a tactic to get temporary relief is an entrenched habit. They go from one lie today, to another tomorrow. A few are more like Greene, who take delight in lying to your face, fully aware that you know they are lying. Different degrees of toxicity.
Among most criminals, lies follow a certain pattern. It always involves taking a step down from the level they are at, to one or more from previous stages. It starts with the simple, "No, not me." When confronted with, "Yes, you," they attempt to distract with, "But I'm usually a very good person, who has done good things." When again confronted with their bad behavior, they take an even lower step down, which includes how they are a victim of circumstance, and it is really other people's fault. (Note: when I worked at the mental health clinic, I sat in once when federal investigators accused a sociopath of stealing from Medicaid. For the lone time in the decade I knew her, she was honest, explaining that money paid for a heck of a lot of cocaine. She wasn't upset in the least with facing prison time, telling us she would take full advantage of the opportunity to have sex with numerous other inmate. I shall never forget that afternoon, eith for the impressive interrogation techniques, or her honest answers.)
There tends to be discomfort when one is around an adult who has the habit of stepping down a level to lie to avoid responsibility. It is grotesque when elected representatives do so. It makes me wonder why people prefer an elected representative, at any level, who's being is defined by lying, when there is the option of men and women who recognize that Paul was correct in saying it is better to tell the truth.
= new reply since forum marked as read
