Be the Change
March 26, 2017
by Gary Blanchard
In 1961, a ten-year-old sat in the school library at Baltimore’s Benjamin Franklin Elementary School; in his hands was a book he had just pulled off the shelf. That book was The Life of Mahatma Gandhi by Louis Fisher, and it would have a major impact on this child of the projects. It was one of those life-changing moments you so often hear about but so rarely encounter. And yes, I am what is left of that ten-year-old, and today’s talk will certainly have a lot to do with Gandhi.
Since we are Unitarian Universalists, I’m sure you’ve seen the bumper stickers that have a photo or drawing of Mahatma Gandhi, and offer this quote: “Be the change you want to see in the world”. Very inspirational, to be sure, but, it seems Gandhi never said it, even as Abraham Lincoln never said “You cannot believe every quote you see on the internet.”
Accepting the fact that Gandhi was not responsible for this sentiment, there is no doubt that he lived it. There is a story that a mother once brought her son to Gandhi, asking that he tell her son to stop eating sugar. Gandhi suggested that she bring her son back in two weeks. When she returned two weeks later, Gandhi looked at the boy, and told him to stop eating sugar. The mother then thanked Gandhi, but asked why he didn’t just say that two weeks before. Gandhi replied, “Because I needed the two weeks to stop eating sugar myself.” Gandhi would not ask others to something he would not do himself.
As one reads a biography of Gandhi, it soon becomes apparent that Gandhi expected a lot from others, but he made it a point to always live the life that he demanded of others. That, to me, begins to point to the importance of the this most famous misquotation Gandhi.
As a child, I was raised in the Methodist church, and was often reminded of the “Golden Rule”: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. When you come right down to it, is this not another way of saying “Be the change you want to see in the world”?
As we look at the life of Gandhi, we see a very self-conscious, shy person, who suffers humiliation and faces prejudice, slowly become a strong leader. Gandhi’s strength, however, is carefully channeled into positive actions that changed the world. He did not engage in demonizing those who opposed him. In fact, he often engaged those who were in opposition to him. During the height of the “All-India Spinners” campaign, when he encouraged Indians to spin their own cloth and boycott English cotton, he visited the English textile mills and charmed and befriended the workers there. Through his campaign of Satyagraha, loosely translated as “truth force”, Gandhi encouraged his followers to use non-violent strategies to bring about India’s freedom from British rule.
Gandhi’s example influenced many, most notably Martin Luther King Jr. He also had a major effect on that boy from the projects. At twelve, my refusal to fight, or to get beat up, led to the school sending me to meet with the psychiatric social worker at school. (It would seem that the kids who wanted to beat me up for no reason were fine, but I needed help.) Not only did I get time out of class, a few years later the social worker was able to write a letter to the draft board showing that I had the same attitude at twelve that I had at eighteen. That played a significant role in convincing the draft board to grant my Conscientious Objector status. Gandhi’s example continues to guide me even now, in my daily life.
Some of my approach developed from my days in public transportation. When I worked in Customer Service in my pre-counselor days, we were taught how to deal with an irate customer. If the person came in yelling, we were to stay calm and speak quietly. When you did this, the customer would soon begin to match your tone of voice, and soon the yelling would evolve into conversation.
In our current social and political climate, there seems to be a lot of emphasis placed on “doing battle.” This has been a steady decline, and it has led to a place where problems cannot be resolved. If we want to see change, perhaps it is time that we also be change. If we want communication rather than confrontation, we must make every effort to engage the people we disagree with in meaningful dialogue that moves us beyond our differences and toward resolving the issues that we all face. I might point out that this is not, as many think, “accepting evil.” It is recognizing and strengthening the good in people. While there may be some out there who are “pure evil”, the majority of folks are not, and we can, and must, find common ground that we can use to build on.
While I have mentioned Gandhi and King, not everyone who effects change through their actions becomes famous. We all know of Rosa Parks, whose refusal to give up her seat on a transit bus lead to a boycott that helped to desegregate the buses. Few, however, may know of Claudette Colvin, a fifteen-year-old African-American who refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white woman. This happened about nine months before Rosa Parks. Ms. Parks was aware of this young lady’s act of defiance; and may well have been inspired by her example. Ms. Parks has, rightfully, been remembered in history, but Ms. Colvin decided to be the change she wanted to see, and helped to spur a victory for civil rights.
I have seen the power of change in my profession, both on individuals who suffer from addiction and other disorders, and within the field as well. When I first became an addictions counselor in 1998, nearly 20 years ago, the field was very rigid. A perceived majority of workers believed there was only one way to treat addiction, that one needed a “spiritual awakening” to recover, and that addicted people had to be forced into change. People in treatment were told that they would always be addicts and were constantly one step away from relapse. People continued to identify with their addiction even after 20 or more years of recovery. The use of medication to treat addiction or any co-occurring disorders was seen as “taking the easy way out”; those who chose medication were told they were “not really in recovery.” This approach did work for a number of people; those who were not helped by it, however, were deemed to be “not ready.” The failure was the person’s, not the system’s failure.
I saw many problems with this, and right from graduation with a Bachelor’s degree began to challenge these ideas. I developed an approach called Positive Path Recovery. It suggested that treatment needs to fit the person, rather than making the person fit the treatment. It recognized, while spirituality is helpful for some, it is not a requirement for sobriety. My approach suggested that you cannot force people to change, but you can guide them to change. I told folks that they may never be able to become “social drinkers or moderate users”, but that they are not their disease, and should not continue to act as a slave to their substance of choice. Rather than focusing on preventing relapse, which gives a person a focus on failing, I suggested they have the positive focus of building and maintaining recovery, which is centered on success. I suggested that medication can indeed be a useful tool in recovery, but that it needs to be paired with help in making cognitive and behavioral changes that support recovery. I also went to great pains to recognize the power of the Twelve-Step approach, but to recognize it isn’t the right approach for all.
My early years promoting this approach were met with skepticism and reproach. Presentations at conferences were often challenged by audience members. As time went on, however, I began to realize that my ideas were given more consideration. Soon I found that concepts were being promoted that echoed my own ideas, like Motivational Enhancement Therapy, an approach that predates my Positive Path, but uses the idea of the stages of change to guide rather than push people into change. I found more and more that, rather than introducing themselves as addicts, people began to introduce themselves as a person in long-term recovery. I was very thrilled this semester as a student in my class pointed out the Positive Path approach, as presented in my book that we use as a text, seemed a bit rigid. That is when I came to realize that the change I wanted to see in the world of addiction treatment was happening.
I am not deluded enough to think that this happened solely because of me, but I do realize that by being the change I wanted to see, I did help to add to a spark that was in many others who work in my field. Together, but apart from one another, we helped to create an environment that is open to change.
I know many of you here are on Facebook, and see the level of division that seems to engulf our country, and the world. I see friends and family members engage in heated rhetoric that increases the depth of the divide. I hear, many times, the idea that “they acted like this toward us, so now it is our turn to act that way toward them.” It reminds me of another quote that Gandhi may not have said, “An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.” I am also reminded of the army major during the Vietnam War who stated, “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.” We cannot use anger and hatred to create the world we want to see.
Again, I am not suggesting that we give up our beliefs and accept a world view that is against everything we believe in. I am suggesting, however, that we need to approach those we oppose with an open and caring manner. We need to truly talk with them and to discover our common ground, and to begin to build a foundation for the common good. We need to understand why others believe as they do, and help them to understand our beliefs. We need to find the little things we can compromise on, and to discuss ways to resolve the larger differences.
Let me go back to the stages of change: Precontemplation, where a person doesn’t see a need for change, Contemplation, where they start to get glimmers of awareness, Preparation, when the person starts deciding how they can make a change, Action, when they start making that change, and, finally, Maintenance, which is keeping the change going. Slowly but surely, the addiction field has learned that you cannot push a person to change. When most people are pushed, they just dig in their heels and cling to their position. If we want to see change, we must help to guide people into it, helping them to see the need to be open to other ideas, and to encourage them to make the move from the comfort of long-held beliefs and to move forward in their lives. If we really want to encourage change, however, the best thing we can do is set an example. Let people see in us what they would like to see in themselves and in the world. As Gandhi didn’t say, Be the change you want to see in the world.
March 26, 2017
by Gary Blanchard
In 1961, a ten-year-old sat in the school library at Baltimore’s Benjamin Franklin Elementary School; in his hands was a book he had just pulled off the shelf. That book was The Life of Mahatma Gandhi by Louis Fisher, and it would have a major impact on this child of the projects. It was one of those life-changing moments you so often hear about but so rarely encounter. And yes, I am what is left of that ten-year-old, and today’s talk will certainly have a lot to do with Gandhi.
Since we are Unitarian Universalists, I’m sure you’ve seen the bumper stickers that have a photo or drawing of Mahatma Gandhi, and offer this quote: “Be the change you want to see in the world”. Very inspirational, to be sure, but, it seems Gandhi never said it, even as Abraham Lincoln never said “You cannot believe every quote you see on the internet.”
Accepting the fact that Gandhi was not responsible for this sentiment, there is no doubt that he lived it. There is a story that a mother once brought her son to Gandhi, asking that he tell her son to stop eating sugar. Gandhi suggested that she bring her son back in two weeks. When she returned two weeks later, Gandhi looked at the boy, and told him to stop eating sugar. The mother then thanked Gandhi, but asked why he didn’t just say that two weeks before. Gandhi replied, “Because I needed the two weeks to stop eating sugar myself.” Gandhi would not ask others to something he would not do himself.
As one reads a biography of Gandhi, it soon becomes apparent that Gandhi expected a lot from others, but he made it a point to always live the life that he demanded of others. That, to me, begins to point to the importance of the this most famous misquotation Gandhi.
As a child, I was raised in the Methodist church, and was often reminded of the “Golden Rule”: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. When you come right down to it, is this not another way of saying “Be the change you want to see in the world”?
As we look at the life of Gandhi, we see a very self-conscious, shy person, who suffers humiliation and faces prejudice, slowly become a strong leader. Gandhi’s strength, however, is carefully channeled into positive actions that changed the world. He did not engage in demonizing those who opposed him. In fact, he often engaged those who were in opposition to him. During the height of the “All-India Spinners” campaign, when he encouraged Indians to spin their own cloth and boycott English cotton, he visited the English textile mills and charmed and befriended the workers there. Through his campaign of Satyagraha, loosely translated as “truth force”, Gandhi encouraged his followers to use non-violent strategies to bring about India’s freedom from British rule.
Gandhi’s example influenced many, most notably Martin Luther King Jr. He also had a major effect on that boy from the projects. At twelve, my refusal to fight, or to get beat up, led to the school sending me to meet with the psychiatric social worker at school. (It would seem that the kids who wanted to beat me up for no reason were fine, but I needed help.) Not only did I get time out of class, a few years later the social worker was able to write a letter to the draft board showing that I had the same attitude at twelve that I had at eighteen. That played a significant role in convincing the draft board to grant my Conscientious Objector status. Gandhi’s example continues to guide me even now, in my daily life.
Some of my approach developed from my days in public transportation. When I worked in Customer Service in my pre-counselor days, we were taught how to deal with an irate customer. If the person came in yelling, we were to stay calm and speak quietly. When you did this, the customer would soon begin to match your tone of voice, and soon the yelling would evolve into conversation.
In our current social and political climate, there seems to be a lot of emphasis placed on “doing battle.” This has been a steady decline, and it has led to a place where problems cannot be resolved. If we want to see change, perhaps it is time that we also be change. If we want communication rather than confrontation, we must make every effort to engage the people we disagree with in meaningful dialogue that moves us beyond our differences and toward resolving the issues that we all face. I might point out that this is not, as many think, “accepting evil.” It is recognizing and strengthening the good in people. While there may be some out there who are “pure evil”, the majority of folks are not, and we can, and must, find common ground that we can use to build on.
While I have mentioned Gandhi and King, not everyone who effects change through their actions becomes famous. We all know of Rosa Parks, whose refusal to give up her seat on a transit bus lead to a boycott that helped to desegregate the buses. Few, however, may know of Claudette Colvin, a fifteen-year-old African-American who refused to give up her seat on a bus to a white woman. This happened about nine months before Rosa Parks. Ms. Parks was aware of this young lady’s act of defiance; and may well have been inspired by her example. Ms. Parks has, rightfully, been remembered in history, but Ms. Colvin decided to be the change she wanted to see, and helped to spur a victory for civil rights.
I have seen the power of change in my profession, both on individuals who suffer from addiction and other disorders, and within the field as well. When I first became an addictions counselor in 1998, nearly 20 years ago, the field was very rigid. A perceived majority of workers believed there was only one way to treat addiction, that one needed a “spiritual awakening” to recover, and that addicted people had to be forced into change. People in treatment were told that they would always be addicts and were constantly one step away from relapse. People continued to identify with their addiction even after 20 or more years of recovery. The use of medication to treat addiction or any co-occurring disorders was seen as “taking the easy way out”; those who chose medication were told they were “not really in recovery.” This approach did work for a number of people; those who were not helped by it, however, were deemed to be “not ready.” The failure was the person’s, not the system’s failure.
I saw many problems with this, and right from graduation with a Bachelor’s degree began to challenge these ideas. I developed an approach called Positive Path Recovery. It suggested that treatment needs to fit the person, rather than making the person fit the treatment. It recognized, while spirituality is helpful for some, it is not a requirement for sobriety. My approach suggested that you cannot force people to change, but you can guide them to change. I told folks that they may never be able to become “social drinkers or moderate users”, but that they are not their disease, and should not continue to act as a slave to their substance of choice. Rather than focusing on preventing relapse, which gives a person a focus on failing, I suggested they have the positive focus of building and maintaining recovery, which is centered on success. I suggested that medication can indeed be a useful tool in recovery, but that it needs to be paired with help in making cognitive and behavioral changes that support recovery. I also went to great pains to recognize the power of the Twelve-Step approach, but to recognize it isn’t the right approach for all.
My early years promoting this approach were met with skepticism and reproach. Presentations at conferences were often challenged by audience members. As time went on, however, I began to realize that my ideas were given more consideration. Soon I found that concepts were being promoted that echoed my own ideas, like Motivational Enhancement Therapy, an approach that predates my Positive Path, but uses the idea of the stages of change to guide rather than push people into change. I found more and more that, rather than introducing themselves as addicts, people began to introduce themselves as a person in long-term recovery. I was very thrilled this semester as a student in my class pointed out the Positive Path approach, as presented in my book that we use as a text, seemed a bit rigid. That is when I came to realize that the change I wanted to see in the world of addiction treatment was happening.
I am not deluded enough to think that this happened solely because of me, but I do realize that by being the change I wanted to see, I did help to add to a spark that was in many others who work in my field. Together, but apart from one another, we helped to create an environment that is open to change.
I know many of you here are on Facebook, and see the level of division that seems to engulf our country, and the world. I see friends and family members engage in heated rhetoric that increases the depth of the divide. I hear, many times, the idea that “they acted like this toward us, so now it is our turn to act that way toward them.” It reminds me of another quote that Gandhi may not have said, “An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.” I am also reminded of the army major during the Vietnam War who stated, “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.” We cannot use anger and hatred to create the world we want to see.
Again, I am not suggesting that we give up our beliefs and accept a world view that is against everything we believe in. I am suggesting, however, that we need to approach those we oppose with an open and caring manner. We need to truly talk with them and to discover our common ground, and to begin to build a foundation for the common good. We need to understand why others believe as they do, and help them to understand our beliefs. We need to find the little things we can compromise on, and to discuss ways to resolve the larger differences.
Let me go back to the stages of change: Precontemplation, where a person doesn’t see a need for change, Contemplation, where they start to get glimmers of awareness, Preparation, when the person starts deciding how they can make a change, Action, when they start making that change, and, finally, Maintenance, which is keeping the change going. Slowly but surely, the addiction field has learned that you cannot push a person to change. When most people are pushed, they just dig in their heels and cling to their position. If we want to see change, we must help to guide people into it, helping them to see the need to be open to other ideas, and to encourage them to make the move from the comfort of long-held beliefs and to move forward in their lives. If we really want to encourage change, however, the best thing we can do is set an example. Let people see in us what they would like to see in themselves and in the world. As Gandhi didn’t say, Be the change you want to see in the world.
