Greenleaf writes: Conformity has become a nasty word. …The problem is to know conformity for what it is: a completely external adjustment to the group norm of behavior in the interest of group cohesiveness and effectiveness. …always keep it in rational focus as a conscious adjustment in the interest of an effective society. Keep it external, never let it become part of you. Hold it firmly on the outside.
The great danger is that one will lose one’s identity in the act of conformity, not knowing which is the essential person and which is the conforming act…
Greenleaf wrote these words more than forty-five years ago. He was addressing college students at a time when ‘conformity’ – especially for them – was indeed a ‘nasty word.’ It was clearly a ‘nasty word’ for me when I was an undergraduate in the mid-60s. For some today it continues to be so.
What are some words today that a number of folks would label as ‘nasty’? For conservatives on the ‘right’ (not the moderate conservatives) the word ‘compromise’ is a very nasty word. As a result, our congress continues to be more of a do-nothing congress; as a consequence we the people continue to suffer because of the refusal of our elected officials to seek compromise (of course, the responsibility for this rests with ‘We’ the citizens for we continue to elect these folks). Our Founding Fathers knew well that the success of democracy was rooted in ‘compromise.’
Another nasty duo is: ‘Political Correctness.’ In a democracy it is crucial that we citizens support political correctness once we the people have determined what it means to be so. We citizens determine this via cultural consensus or via ‘law.’ In both cases, the ‘voice of the people’ is believed to determine what is politically correct. There are exceptions. Currently 70% of the citizens in our country support more effective ‘gun control laws.’ A minority does not and yet the minority has such political influence that our elected officials bend to the will of the minority (it appears that it is more important for them to be re-elected than to do the will of the people – that is, to act rooted in political correctness). The minority uses the term ‘Political Correctness’ in a way that moves the term from being ‘correct’ to being ‘nasty.’
‘Nasty words’ move from simply being ‘out there’ to becoming ‘in here.’ For example, ‘compromise’ is not an activity that supports the idea that each party will gain something and each party will have to let go of something (a rational approach); compromise, for those who deem the word to be ‘nasty,’ has been integrated into the identity of the conservative who resides on the ‘right wing’ of the conservative movement: ‘If I compromise I will be compromising my identity – who wants to do that?’
We all internalize certain words/concepts so they become part of our identity. And, as Greenleaf notes, when we do this the potential for conflict (if not destruction) is always close by. Our Founding Fathers demonstrated a way out of this trap for us: Critical Thinking. They intuitively knew that if democracy, as they envisioned it, were to survive and thrive then we citizens would have to be ‘educated’ (thus they supported ‘free education for all’) and we would have to become educated in ‘critical thinking’ (not criticism or cynicism) and we would have to ‘compromise’ and once a decision was made by the citizens (via their elected representatives, for example or by cultural consensus) we would freely choose to conform (support the political correctness of the decision). We forget that we are a young country and we have much to learn about being a democracy. Too often, in our arrogance, we believe that we have ‘arrived.’
We also forget, or in our arrogance deny, that so far in recorded history no democracy has survived all have been ‘destroyed’ from within. We might well be at a cross-roads ourselves. If we are, which path will we choose these next few years? Or, have we already chosen one?
Servant As Leader 