The Soul of a Citizen: Living with Conviction in a Cynical Time

Paul Rogat Loeb, The Soul of a Citizen: Living with Conviction in a Cynical Time. New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 1999. 362pp. $15.95 (paper).

"Cynicism or hope? That's the real question, the choice all of us face" (340). In his latest book, The Soul of a Citizen, social activist and writer Paul Rogat Loeb seeks to identify the problems at the heart of a society where people have become increasingly doubtful about their power to make a difference. Loeb pays close attention to personal problems that prevent transformative action which include not only feelings of disconnectedness, isolation, and a sense of powerlessness, but also perfectionism and a widespread acceptance of the myth that change happens either over night or not at all. All these attitudes produce burn-out, cynicism, and despair.

Loeb's book is full of practical suggestions for how to recapture commitment, vision, and the ability to act. The table of contents indicates where he is going. Chapter titles like "We Don't Have to be Saints," "One Step at a Time," "Unforeseen Fruits," and "Widening the Circle" speak for themselves. The strongest support for Loeb's project comes from the stories he tells of a large number of people who have learned how to become and remain active in cynical times and know how to make a difference, who have struggled with their own frustrations, and who through it all have grown tremendously. These stories continue throughout the book and provide a common thread.

At first sight, the book reads like a self-help book for activists. Loeb (even though he also questions the self-help tradition at times [see, for instance, pp. 138ff]) has no doubt learned from the masters of the trade and develops a number of helpful guidelines for people who want to become once again involved in their own lives and in the life of society. A closer look, however, reveals a few deeper and more foundational questions. Let me name three areas where the potential of Loeb's suggestions for engaging in transformative action needs to be explored further.

First of all, it seems unlikely that the battle between cynicism and hope can ultimately be decided at the level of pop-psychology. I seriously wonder whether the pop-psychological expectation that we can control our own destiny if we just put our minds to is among the reasons why cynicism continues to grow. Spirituality and religion in North America have often played right along, reinforcing our fantasies of being in charge. But even recycling our political savvy and power may not necessarily get us much further at a time when economic realities are taking over not only politics at the national and international levels but are also the politics of everyday life. In this situation a sustained look at how economic structures determine our lives and at the reach of the processes of commodification even into the most personal spaces would be necessary. Loeb gives some useful information at the macro level but does not provide the deeper analyses of how to resist the temptations of the powers that be.

Second, how do we make sure that our involvement is not pulled into other forms of cynicism that are less obvious? Loeb reminds us of the fact that the volunteer spirit of millions of Americans who provide care for people in need is often disconnected from working for change (204ff). As volunteers--and as a theologian I wonder whether the churches are perhaps the prime examples for this -- we seek to support people who are hurting but we often fail to call into question the systems that cause the problem. In this way we manifest another sort of cynicism that somehow seems to assume that poverty, homelessness, as well as racial and gender oppression are "natural" problems, things that are a "normal" part of life. This attitude can only be resisted, it seems to me, if we dare to take a closer look into the mirror: what if those of us who are trying to help are also part of the problem -- no matter how well we mean? Loeb does not really go into this issue (he usually gets no further than talking about the "pers onal rewards" of social engagement), but I doubt that this form of cynicism can be overcome without attempts to become aware of our own complicity with the system. Uncovering the lie which we all live in one way or another might lead to conversion and to an increased awareness of the need of working for change at all levels.

My third and final question has to do with the source of power that sustains us in our efforts to transform ourselves and the world. Loeb draws on many sources, including religious ones. This is the place where, as a theologian, I might be expected to be most pleased. That Loeb draws from various religious traditions, from his own Jewish one, from Christianity, as well as from Buddhism, must be seen as a plus. But too often Loeb's emphasis is on faith and spirituality as things that appear to reside within us. The reader gets the impression that there is something inside each of us that can be uncovered if we simply dig deep enough: the innocent activist "child" as it were, or some divine mandate.