Fortitude

Fortitude: American Resilience in the Era of Outrage
By: Dan Crenshaw

I vaguely knew about this guy- you know... the guy with the eye patch. Well. Turns out he has some interesting things to say.

Here's the thing. The book is called 'Fortitude.' Fortitude means "strong-mindedness" and "resilience." So we must first ask: Is Dan Crenshaw qualified to talk to me about resilience? And the answer is a resounding yes. Politics aside, we learn that Crenshaw lost his mom to cancer when he was very young. He also went through the brutal training to become a Navy SEAL (part of it twice because he broke his leg). He was deployed in Afghanistan and was blown up by an IED. He lost an eye and endured a risky surgery and subsequent 6 weeks face-down recovery to save minimal vision in his other eye. And here he is: a member of the House of Representatives with a Master of Public Admin from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government.

So yeah. I think I'll listen to what he has to say about mental toughness and overcoming suffering.

The goal of his book is to instill resilience amidst an outrage culture. He is quick to clarify that there is indeed true injustice, wrongdoing, tragedy, and grief. There is a proper time to be outraged. What he is discussing in his book is an outrage that has been normalized that assumes the worst about people and glorifies victimhood. "It is about the hypersensitivity that has infected our society, where undesirable language is the equivalent of physical violence, where an old tweet or Facebook post can be grounds for ruination and public shame, and where an absence of reason or fact encourages public indictment, moral outrage, and mob rule. Outrage culture is the weaponization of emotion, and the elevation of emotion above reason."

I am onboard with this premise. Every day you see a headline reporting someone new being cancelled for "offensive" things. Groveling apologies ensue but are never enough for the mob. How did we get here? Life is now tedious, hoping we aren't the next ones called out for who knows what.

I agree with Barack Obama on this one. He says, “If you’re narrowly defining political correctness as a hypersensitivity that ends up resulting in people not being able to express their opinions at all without somebody suggesting they’re a victim...our social discourse and our political discourse becomes like walking on eggshells.”

Now the easy dismissal of Crenshaw's content would be- "Sorry, bro, we can't all be hardened, one-eyed Navy SEALS like you." And yes, that is accurate. But misses the point. Of course his mental toughness is on a whole notha level. But that doesn't mean we trash the book and say forget it. Dismissal of information because we aren't like the information-giver is exhibit A of weak-mindedness.

We read the book and consider his points.

He says, "This book is about...the importance of building a society of iron-tough individuals who can think for themselves, take care of themselves, and recognize that a culture characterized by grit, discipline, and self-reliance is a culture that survives. A culture characterized by self-pity, indulgence, outrage, and resentment is a culture that falls apart."

I especially emphasize the positives of thinking for ourselves and taking responsibility, and the negatives of indulgence and resentment. If you don't see the value in the first two and the poison in the last two, then you're going to need a lot more than this book to explain the reality of the world to you.

What I love about Crenshaw's writing (and his temperament as a politician) is that it is calm, rational, and transparent. Yes, you will have a very clear indication of his political views while reading this book (more on that later), but most of what he imparts is universally helpful and important.

He begins the book by talking about the elephant in the room- what happened to his eye? He follows that up with chapters of advice, paired with illustrations from his personal life and SEAL training. In short: emulating proper 'hero' characteristics, thinking before reacting emotionally, not letting anger about little things build up to burst, feeling shame when we make bad choices, challenging ourselves to produce endurance and perseverance, being detail-oriented by asking questions and seeking underlying meanings, and framing our suffering with the right perspective that allows us to overcome adversity instead of wallow in it.

So much of what he talked about resonated with what I feel when I turn on the TV and scroll through my newsfeed. There is, indeed, much outrage, and I truly think if more people exercised the things he suggests, our culture would look a lot different. People would be stronger and happier.

His point that passion is overriding accomplishment really struck me. Meaning- those who are loudest or angriest (passionate) get the most attention and "moral high ground" instead of those who are actually achieving something. His case in point was Greta Thunberg vs Boyan Slat. Everyone knows Greta- the angry Swedish girl who yells at the world about the environment. But no one knows Boyan Slat- the Dutch boy who invented a solution to help clean up ocean pollution. Greta was Time's person of the year and she offered no real solutions; Boyan actually DID something instead of SAID something and there is no global recognition. We are glorifying and drawing attention to outrage instead of accomplishment.

Crenshaw quotes: "Thomas Sowell, the preeminent economist and social theorist, put it in stark terms. 'One of the sad signs of our times,' he wrote, 'is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.'"

He challenges to change your perspective- you are not a product of your circumstances, you are an overcomer of your circumstances. Don't offend and be hard to offend.

I also found his observations about 'pure freedom,' indulgence and lack of discipline very telling. Our culture is pushing an agenda of self-fulfillment in the sense that we should be able to do whatever we want, whenever we want. But this implies relative morality. Freedom detached from a standard of morality is chaos. How could we ever all agree on a moral code determined by humanity. We currently have the Constitution, though John Adams even said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” And moral relativism can so easily destroy a nation.

There has been increasing condemnation of America and its founding as a whole. I firmly believe there is corruption in our government. But I think it's ridiculous to entertain thoughts of getting rid of our government or suddenly throwing everything it has done in the past into the trash bin and assuming the worst about our country and its principles. Starting over would be insane.

"So what is the right story? Is it just blindly assuming that whatever our country does is inherently good and righteous? No, that isn’t what I am suggesting. Just because victimhood ideology is toxic does not mean we have never had victims. But we must tell the story of America in a way that squares our suffering and injustice within the American identity without holding it in contempt for that injustice... Our country’s hands are not clean, and we shouldn’t pretend they are. But the right story to tell is this: Our country has not always lived up to its ideals, but that does not make the ideals themselves wrong."

I think this book is entirely worth reading and is a very important and revealing critique of the outrage culture we are undeniably in right now. But "Fortitude" is not without its flaws. One thing I had issue with was the emphasis on self-reliance and shame. I am totally for personal responsibility and being a contributor to society, but we are fallible creatures. We can set our minds to accomplish all the things, but we will still let ourselves down. We can aspire and desire all we want but no good thing is done apart from God. Self-reliance in terms of functioning properly in a society is obviously important but in a more abstract sense in terms of 'fulfillment'- self-reliance can only go so far.

I am unsure about the status of Crenshaw's faith. He mentioned in his book that he "doesn't wear his faith on his sleeve" so I'm not sure what role it plays in his life, but I think the absence of God in this discussion is a pretty big missing piece. He does point out the value of religion and that it provides us with purpose, which every human being needs. But there is still danger to take the 'self-sufficient' mentality too far where we see no value in weakness and no need for God.

As Christians, we talk a lot about our own weakness. 2 Corinthians 12:9 says, "But he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.' Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me." Eliminating weakness from our life isn't the main goal. The main goal is relying on One who is stronger than us. 1 Corinthians 1:27 says, "God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong."

Self-sufficiency blinds us to our desperate need of a Savior. No amount of resilience and mental toughness can save us from the reality of our own sin. Do I think Crenshaw wrote this book to convince people they don't need God? No, I realize this book was not intended to talk about fortitude specifically in relation to the Christian life. But I must point out that though I think his advice is valuable and should be heeded in terms of functioning in the world- we must be cautious not to expect it to carry us further than it can.

Let's circle back quickly to my earlier comment on his political views candidly written into this book. His last chapter is probably where it gets the most direct when referring to the Left vs the Right. Many reviewers are calling out a double standard that while he calls out downfalls on the Left, he doesn't point out the downfalls of (particularly) the Trump administration.

I will admit that at times, he directed more criticism at the left than the right. But let's look at a few facts Crenshaw provided: "Self-identified liberals outnumber conservatives in journalism by a ratio of thirteen to one. In 2016, 96% of the media's political donations went to Hillary Clinton. Only 9.2 percent of academic faculty members identify as conservative." Those are fairly significant stats to consider. The loudest narrative we are hearing comes from the media, pop culture, and academia. Which is majorly skewed to liberal politics. Though 'cancellation' seems indiscriminate, I think it would be hard to refute that most of the 'outrage' expressed is coming from more liberal sources. Show me research to the contrary and I'll look at it.

Were there things from the Trump Administration that deserve criticism? Yes. Really, he did not do much talking about Trump's presidency at all- good or bad. Does that discredit his entire book? Nope. And frankly, I'm tired of intelligent, researched, and straight up true things/people being dismissed because they voted or supported a particular candidate or a particular political party. It's illogical and a detriment to responsible political discourse. People who show outrage at this book, clearly didn't read it. You don't have to agree with all of it- I didn't. But if you have rejected the entirety of this book for no other reason than "He voted for Trump" I would venture to guess that emotions have superseded your ability to seek truth.

I'll leave you with some good quotes to give you more flavor of the book:

"Our tendency to react wildly to headlines, which are already largely crafted to elicit emotional responses rather than inform the public, is asphyxiating the deliberative system of government designed by our Founders. It has created a troubling new reality where even new or more complete sets of facts cannot sway opinions. I am not saying you have to change your opinion, but you should at least have a serious, honest, and coherent reason for why not. Reactive dismissal of new information is indicative of mental weakness. Absorbing new information honestly, even if you don’t ultimately change your mind, is a sign of fortitude."

"The extreme nature of the outrage mob, willing to pounce at even the slightest offense, devoid of any benefit of the doubt, has forced the shame response into extreme categories. Everyone has two options now: show deep shame, or show no shame. The middle option of showing a little amount of shame in proportion to the actual offense is hardly an option at all. There is simply no reward for it. No grace given, no outrage will subside."

"Victimhood culture seeks to alter the definition of injustice entirely, where all disparities become discrimination, even when the evidence suggests otherwise."

"Dropping weapons-grade accusations, like that of racism, Nazism, sexism, homophobia, without cause or evidence is a sign of weakness, not strength. It is reflective of a mind that refuses to engage itself critically, and instead reaches for insult and ad hominem attacks to shroud ignorance and policy illiteracy."

"Personal responsibility leads to empowerment, control, and ultimately success. A person who isn’t personally responsible—feels no shame for it—is by definition waiting for someone else to be responsible for them. This isn’t empowering. This is disempowering. Someone else has responsibility for you and therefore control over your destiny... It is the height of helplessness."

"I believe our modern-day outrage culture is partly due to a misunderstanding of what our duties and virtues are, where they came from, and why they are good. For the outraged, there are serious questions about whether or not many basic truths actually exist at all. The postmodernists driving this revolutionary thought question everything simply for the sake of questioning it...You have a cultural trend that seeks to tear down anything traditional simply because it is old."

"He doesn’t suffer in any real way—and he is outraged. His problems are small but his emotions are not—they are elevated, outsized, and shared across cyberspace. The loss of suffering, this perpetual quest to remove all obstacles and hardships from our paths, has allowed people to find grievance in the small things, or —worse for the mind and soul—find grievance in things they have no ability to change."

"People are told that they are powerless and oppressed, and there is a specific other group to blame for it... Your misfortune is not the fault of your own decisions, but a consequence of the “1 percent” who ensure the “system is rigged.” The phrase “check your privilege” becomes the favorite tactic used to discredit opponents and subvert real discourse...To be oppressed is good for your status, according to the new counterculture."

Pin this to Pinterest!