Joe and I
Joe Biden and I are both 80. We are both going to have to listen to people in our culture tell us we are too old for big things in the next two years. The subtle, sometimes not subtle, message is that we are no longer relevant, useful, or competent. If you’re 80, you know what I’m talking about. If you’re not there yet, you will know.
We are going to hear a lot of talk about competence and age.
Ageism has always been with us, but it has been in the background as one of the less popular isms. Racism has been in the spotlight and has awakened a large part of our population to the value of diversity and inclusion.
Ageism has now taken its place in the spotlight as the focus of a presidential campaign.
Nikki Haley, in her recent announcement to run for president, suggested that we require competency tests for anyone over the age of 75 who chooses to run for public office. She is linking competency to age.
This is an attempt to make ageism a matter of public policy, and it should be as alarming as if she had said we should return to the days when racism was a matter of public policy.
We didn’t require a competency test for our previous president who was described as a malignant narcissist by a large number of psychiatrists who backed up their claims with references to the literature that described this condition. Those claims were also backed up by our observation of his behavior over a long period of time. That did not seem to be important to the people who voted for him. We did not link competence to malignant narcissism in that campaign. Why are we linking competence to age now?
We need a wise elder as president. Joe Biden may or may not be that wise elder. A man, woman, Republican, Democrat, or Independent could be our next president but his or her age shouldn’t be the determining factor.
Let’s bring back Martin Luther King’s famous quote:
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
To paraphrase this wonderful quote, I have a dream that one day I will live in a world where men and women will not be judged by their age, but by the content of their character.
There seems to be some confusion over the meaning of the words “Elder” and “Elderly.” Let’s see if we can put them in their distinct but respectable categories.
Elderly is chronological. It’s a function of the calendar and the passing of time, something we have no control over. The word usually implies some lack of ability or function. We should do a better job of honoring the elderly for they are our future selves.
Elder is evolutionary. It is a function of the intentional transition from the ego-driven first half of life into the soul-driven second half of life, not a function of the calendar.
Elderly is an adjective. Elder is a noun.
A wise elder is a person who has a certain kind of gravitas gained from their experience and their suffering. Elders are venerated in other cultures.
A wise elder has transcended their ego and discovered their soul. They know what really matters.
A wise elder has a high degree of emotional intelligence. They understand their own emotions and the emotion of others. More importantly, they are able to regulate their own emotions, a quality that is highly desirable in a person who has the power to destroy the world.
A wise elder has compassion. We poked fun at Bill Clinton’s famous campaign statement, “I feel your pain.” It may have been a catchy phrase dreamed up by his speech writers, but the ability to feel the pain of others is important for any leader whose decisions will inevitably cause pain for some people.
Erik Erikson calls someone at this stage of life a “generative” person, one who is eager and able to generate life from his or her own abundance and for the benefit of following generations.
Let’s focus on competence, experience, and character instead of age.