Tuesday, December 2, 2014

When "Closure" Becomes a Crass, Political Opening



It’s been over a week since the Grand Jury rendered a verdict in the Ferguson case. Looking at happenings in the area some evenings, you might think that it was never rendered at all. While the President and the Attorney General put on a late and unconvincing call for restraint, the usual suspects are making the circuit in talk shows and op-eds. Despite the findings of the Grand Jury, a vocal crowd insists that there should have been a trial. The fact that a Grand Jury convenes specifically to determine if the evidence warrants charges and a trial seems is met with blank stares or shouting, with an occasional helping of looting and tear gas on the side.

A number of justifications have been offered for the need of a trial. Some point to historic injustice in the area, as if the results of a show trial had the ability to change the past. Others hint that it will show the community that their cries had been heard, as though denying process to a lone police officer will somehow herald a better future. 

Perhaps the worst justification, or at least the one that I dislike the most hinges on the term “closure.” I was listening to Fox News the other day, and I believe that it was Alan Colmes, liberal commentator and Obama apologist, who indicated that a trial would have helped provide “closure” for the area. I’m not a clairvoyant by trade, so I am hesitant to say what the result of such a try might portend. I am an engineer, an examiner of data. Based on my observations, a trial might result in a number of things for the community, but closure? I think not.

Since the term was introduced into the pseudo-psychological babble that passes for analysis in some quarters, it has seemed to take on almost a sacred state, a religious significance. Those who achieve it find bliss. Those who fail remain in torment. It is pursued through meditation and ritual, taught as the ultimate goal. It is the be-all, end-all. The Christ, not for our own sins, but for the sins that life heaps upon us. It’s the balm for every conflict that life hands us that ends in something less than “happily ever after.”

It is a sham.

When I was growing up, “closure” referred to removing the access to something that was open. We had another term for the situations mentioned above: Acceptance. It required no meditation, no ceremony, no trials, no “understanding generations of anger.” (I still don’t by the way. I keep trying, but it makes no sense at all to me. If anyone can help, use the comment block.)

Acceptance was the power that God gave each and every person who asked, and more than a few who did not, to move forward when life dealt them a hard blow. And unlike “closure,” there was no pretense that it could or should be sought on a community level. It was personal, the same way love or hate or forgiveness is personal. While others can work to help or hinder the process, it always started and ended on the personal level. 

This idea that a trial will somehow aid Ferguson in achieving “closure” is simply wrong. If that were the case, the Grand Jury verdict would have worked just as well. That people both inside and outside the community vowed to protest regardless of what verdict was reached shows that closure is not the goal. For those who live to stir dissension, it never is.

While a show trial would not achieve closure for a community, there are possibilities that some find appealing. The easiest to foresee is the destruction of Officer Wilson. For as long as the trial went on, he would be hauled through every bit of slime the race mongers could dredge up, scourged as a symbol of all that is wrong with American justice, all the while doing nothing that could hope to improve it. It would probably ruin him financially. A trial of this nature would be a bit beyond a public defender, especially with the legal guns likely brought to bear. And afterward, with his finances in ruin, how could he recover? Who would hire him? For that matter, who will hire him? 

It’s often been said that a rising tide lifts all boats. I believe that is true. I also believe the opposite: When society reaches out to drag a single person down unfairly, so that diminishes all. It is a lesson well displayed in history, not that many bother with such things anymore. People believe what they wish much of the time. It was not so long ago that lynch mobs were a far too common sight in America. They too believed that they were carrying out “justice.” And if the word had meant anything to them, they might also have said that they were looking for “closure.”

Everything old is new again.

No comments:

Post a Comment