Hoppy and ME

Sarah Bakewell's new book delivered some personal insight

Hopalong Takes Command, illustration by Frank Schoonover for the 1905 story "The Fight at Buckskin"

I am reading a book that very unexpectedly has helped me clarify the cause of the discomfort I have felt with the world since I was four years old. When I was four I often played games with my friends based on the TV show Hopalong Cassidy. The show was made from spliced segments of the many Hopalong Cassidy movies that were made in the 30s and 40s. They were simple stories of good guys vs. bad guys, and after horse chases and a little gunplay, when Cassidy would always shoot the gun out of the bad guy’s hand, the good guys always won.

Even at that young age, this bothered me. Why, I wondered, would anyone choose to be the bad guy, when they knew that the good guys always won? This kind of reasoning was the start of my psychological future, as I remember thinking that maybe the bad guys didn’t realize they were bad. They probably thought they were doing the right things because they were misinformed, or had bad friends. After closer attention to a few more episodes, I saw that the bad guys were mean and unlikeable. I began to think that their personal problems must be more severe.

This was all going on in my head in 1949-50. The war had ended recently, and my family seemed relieved, but still badly affected by the tragedies that affected some of the relatives I never knew. I began to realize that in real life the good guys don’t always win. Next, by the time I was seven, I had learned from my own experiences with members of my extended family, and several of my friends, that it was often difficult to determine who was a good guy and who was bad. Everyone was both.

I have been bothered by these questions since then. As a practicing Psychologist for fifty years, I was able to answer some of those questions. I saw very clearly how people were selfish. People could be mean. Parents could be mean to their children. They usually had parents who were mean to them. People whom you trust might betray you. Lovers would break your heart. People were racist. People who had everything often didn’t care that others had nothing.

I saw how people had to make compromises because they needed to make a living and support themselves, or find someone to support them, which was the cause of depression in many women. Anyone who felt they had to compromise too much felt exploited. That made them feel angry and resentful. But everyone has to adapt to survive.

Still, I continued to think that by now, given everything that has happened in the world, our wealth of knowledge, new technologies, and prediction models, people would begin to want to do things differently, like stop dropping bombs on innocent people. I remember that in the ‘60s and ‘70s, it seemed as if people were becoming more aware that things like war and racism were counterproductive to living in a civilized society. But that trend has gone through some ups and downs.

The book I’m reading, Humanly Possible, by Sarah Bakewell, is helping me understand the philosophical basis of my views. The book is a history of humanistic thought beginning in the 1300s. But before she began their stories she clarified her definition of “humanism”. It is different from what I had thought.

I never would call myself a humanist because I thought it involved feeling that humans were special, innately good, and on a higher level of existence and spirituality than any other species. I knew that some humanists were atheists, while others thought that God had endowed humans with those powers.

But Professor Bakewell adds another part to her definition That is the part that lured me in. She wrote that a humanist only has to make people the highest priority in their decisions. They do this with the knowledge that no real, live people, come close to living up to what is humanly possible. Many people try, many people care, but everyone is flawed. Still, the goal is worth the struggle, and the more humanists there are, and the more influence they have, the better the world becomes.

The book explains how, for the most part, humanists have been oppressed and persecuted because the idea of putting people first has always gone against the patriarchal power structure. Kings, organized religions, dictators, generals, and most industrialists do not like to have too many humanists around. They like to say, whether they believe it or not, that there is a higher power that should be considered in making decisions. People should defer to a king’s wishes, to a god, to the need to defeat and kill an enemy, or to the goal of making money and larger profits. Very often the needs, wants, and even the lives of a large majority of people interfere with those priorities. It’s been that way for 5000 years.

However, if you take two minutes to think about this, you can understand how much better the world would be if people first thought about how their actions affect others. They might realize that wars, slavery, fracking, lay-offs, rejecting Medicaid, racism, sweatshops, lies, corruption, exorbitant drug prices, bullying, intimidating, not getting vaccinated, scapegoating immigrants, other religions, LBGTQ folks, and people who look and smell differently all create unnecessary suffering and death. Also, those things do not help the survival of the species.

After realizing this, I have adopted new patron saints. They are both Kings. They were both flawed humans, but they each, in very different ways, tried to promote equality and an appreciation that everyone is equal.

Specifically, they are Martin Luther King Jr. and Rodney King.

The question I still need to answer is the one Rodney King posed to the world:

“I just want to say – you know – can we, can we all get along?”

---

Also, after watching a few old clips, it’s clear that Hopalong Cassidy embodied the humanist philosophy. He was always protecting the good and kind people against those who tried to exploit them. Hopalong valued the health and lives all people over property, money, or power. He was usually smiling, upbeat, and enjoyed life. He never made any references to any higher power. He was just a good guy because it was the right thing to do. Obviously, he had a much greater influence on me than Howdy Doody, or Tom and Jerry.

This is good. there is so much more to figure out.

Song lyric of the day:

Here he comes

Here he comes

Hopalong Cassidy…

— TV theme song.

ED: The picture above is from an old book. William Boyd, who played Hopalong Cassidy on TV was very handsome and Hollywood charming. But I was’t going to pay $45 for a picture.