Guest Post: The Clubhouse

From 2008-09, I worked as an AmeriCorps (basically domestic PeaceCorps) member in Boston's homeless shelter system through the amazing Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program. To just say the experience was meaningful would do it no justice and to properly explain its meaning would probably take more time than you are willing to spare, so I won't do either. But while working at St. Francis House, a day shelter for homeless adults located in the heart of downtown Boston, I developed a friendship with an individual familiar with the shelter system who, speaking from his own experience, opened my eyes to a unique perspective of what it really means to be homeless in America.

In addition to being a talented writer and a great guy, Bob now also holds the distinction of authoring YP's first guest post. It's been condensed, but I know you'll still enjoy:

The Clubhouse by Robert L. Karash

(Excerpted from Spare Change News, Cambridge MA, issue of May 7, 2010. Full article can be found here.)

In some towns people who are experiencing homelessness have to wander around during the day until they are allowed back into a homeless shelter to get their bed to sleep for the night. In other places, so-called day centers for the homeless exist to provide services and to simply be a place to go during what are often long days of waiting. People in situations of homelessness frequently consider it a huge blessing to have a daytime shelter or "clubhouse." But interestingly enough, not only the presently homeless spend time in these. Others—including the formerly homeless—may also come.

Cities which have these daytime clubhouses are very lucky indeed to provide for their less fortunate and not force them to be purposeless and hungry daytime nomads. In fact, everyone comes out winning.

When a person spends a significant period of time being homeless, especially in a community with other homeless people, and then obtains permanent housing, sometimes a puzzling thing happens. This person doesn't break his ties with the homeless community despite now being in possession of his own apartment, home and new life.

It's been written that very few if any "outside" people realize how very tight-knit the sense of community within a homeless population can be.

Exiting this community to live in an apartment or house might be difficult. For many, there is no outside substitute since they might be afraid, emotionally distressed, estranged from former friends and family, or alienated by their new surroundings.

So where do they go? They return to the safe place, the place where they know they can say they belong—the clubhouse.

So housed, formerly homeless people return to the clubhouse for a variety of reasons, including not having much money. But most will say they want to check in with their old friends. They simply don't want to feel isolated in their new apartment.

Transition periods are never easy. For a while, the newly housed may have to keep one foot in the clubhouse and one foot in their new abode until things settle. This goes hand-in-hand with another factor, namely, the fear of losing one's new apartment. The only way to cope with this restless anxiety is to visit the clubhouse.

With proper support, people can manage the transition from homelessness or temporary housing to permanent housing successfully. Few can travel this challenging journey alone and navigate it well.

The daytime shelter, or clubhouse, is an important place for many people. For many, it represents their real home until they get settled in a new permanent housing situation. Even after making this transition, the clubhouse can remain a place of solace, security and belonging for the indeterminable time it takes to switch internal emotional gears from being homeless to being housed. Shaking off the traumatic experience of being homeless can take a long time.

My, Republicans, What Short Memories You Have...

I'm tired of listening to people condemn the Obama Administration's "government takeover" of American liberties. Sick of hearing ignorant, opportunistic candidates and talking heads paint Obama like a foreign dictator and call him the worst president in history. Anyone can see Obama's off to a rough start (that's what happens when you inherit four generations worth of problems) but to claim he's the worst in history you must either have little to no knowledge of American political history (see: Buchanan, Harding, A. Johnson, etc) or you must be willing to say anything to fuel the flames of a rabid voting bloc motivated by pent-up frustration, some legitimate and some scary, in order to get elected.

The aforementioned presidents were really bad. Obama's only been in office for two years, so it's pretty difficult and stupid to compare him to these guys. But if you're dying to compare him to someone, you don't have to look that far back to find one worse than Obama: George W. Bush did more to intrude on the daily lives of Americans, expand the powers of the executive branch and trample on the Constitution than most self-proclaimed neocons with daddy issues could ever hope to do. This is what amazes me about Republicans in 2010: their dissatisfaction with the current administration has apparently led them to block the previous eight years out of their collective memory in a pathetically transparent attempt to regain power at any cost. And it just might work.

But where were these proponents of conservative government spending when Bush led us into a war that ended up costing almost a trillion dollars? Where were these ardent defenders of the Constitution when Bush, Cheney et al were treating it like last Sunday's funny pages? Why wasn't the Tea Party formed after Bush turned executive orders and signing statements into de facto legislation and gave his cronies the authority to subvert limitations on presidential powers that had been almost universally recognized for over 200 years yet simultaneously avoid oversight in the name of executive privilege?

I'll be the first to admit Obama has racked up some pretty hefty additions to our deficit, but he did so in the course of fixing problems that most people agreed needed to be fixed (if healthcare and finance reform are "disasters" now, what the hell were they before???) in amounts that are equivalent to or less than the debt we would have incurred had we continued down our pre-recession road. The voters spoke in 2008: Obama was elected to reform industries that had proven themselves to be failures and in need of reform. And even though many of these same voters are now deserting Obama as he gets his hands dirty and we are forced to accept the painful but inevitable consequences of our behavior, the guy is sticking to his message and doing what he was elected to do. As he should.

It'd be one thing if Republicans were offering any specific, constructive ideas other than "undoing the damage" inflicted by Obama's "socialist agenda," but they aren't. That's an advantage exclusively granted to the opposition: it's easy to point to current negative socioeconomic indicators as a reason for change (Dems did it in '08) but much more difficult to prove things would have been worse had they been done differently. Regardless, now is the time for a united front. And it seems to me that the Republican congressional leadership's sole focus is on doing whatever it takes to regain the majority, even if it means pandering to the vocal fringes of its party and putting the entire country back on the path that led us into this mess in the first place.

Why I Support The Ground Zero Mosque

I wish I didn't have to make a point to say that freedom of religion, more so than any other principle, represents the reason America came to be in the first place. But as the Ground Zero mosque (or Park51 now apparently) debate shows, there are those who don't think this fundamental right matters when it comes to certain religions building certain structures near certain places. Even worse, Republican congressional leaders and 2012 presidential contenders are turning the Park51 issue into an all-out attack on Islam. We know fear rallies the base, especially when you're in the minority, but this has gone too far. The calculated Republican response to the proposed mosque and Muslim cultural center a few blocks from where the World Trade Center once stood has been shameful and is contrary to America's founding principles.

It would be one thing if Rauf's Dharma Cordoba Initiative behind the proposed mosque/cultural center was in some way connected to Al Qaeda or any other known terrorist group. If that were the case, and if it ever is found to be in the future, I will be first in line calling for its demise. But until then, I (and the Constitution) support the project and the group behind it, the mission of which is to bridge the gap of cultural understanding between Muslims and westerners. Their location choice obviously stirs the pot, but it's no reason to prevent them from worshipping where they choose. Anyone who opposes this project on anything other than charges of insensitivity is either misinformed, anti-Islamic by nature or so desperate for political gain they are willing to slap the Constitution in the face.

9/11 was horrible. The wound is still fresh. It is insensitive of the Cordoba Initiative to make such a public and politicized, borderline stubborn, defense of where they build. NY's Gov. Paterson even reportedly offered them some prime real estate on the other side of the city, but they turned it down. Clearly, they don't have to continue building where they are proposing. However it is well within their constitutional rights to do so. I mean, it would be a nice gesture if they relocated a few dozen blocks away as a courtesy to this country and the almost 3000 who died that day. That would make quite a statement about their intentions to "bridge the gap." But, as Americans, we must be willing to accept and respect the decision of any legitimate religious organization when it comes to where they want to practice their religion in accordance with the law. There must be no exception, even for 9/11. As long as they obey the law, who are we to tell them where they can and cannot worship? It's not easy, but it's the stuff America is made of - being the bigger man even when it hurts like hell.

I applaud President Obama's defense of Park51. He's obviously swimming against the tide of public opinion...last time I checked, 70% of the country opposes the project. I guess I do too, on a reactionary gut level. But the issue requires more thought than just going with our initial emotional response. Obama is doing what he feels is right and constitutionally defended. Sure, he was speaking to a group of Muslims and got a little flowery with his language, but so did Thomas Jefferson when he entertained a Tunisian envoy for iftar in 1805 (as our current president so duly noted).

It wasn't an especially thoughtful or intelligent choice, but I support the Cordoba Initiative's right to build an institution dedicated to the practice of their faith and promoting cultural understanding, even if it's near an open wound. It's the definition of the American way. While I understand the public's emotional opposition, I don't agree with Republicans using 9/11 and the mosque issue as a way to whip up anti-Muslim, anti-Obama hysteria just before elections. It's predictably childish and deconstructive, not to mention far from patriotic.

All I know is many of the guys in opposition to this project, the same ones who love to spew Revolutionary era soundbites with vitriolic, Glenn Beck-esque fervor, would find themselves between a rock and a hard place if they could hear some of our founding fathers' thoughts on Park51.

In Defense Of American Values

In my last post, I identified myself as a practical progressive. I think I may have to push the boundaries of excessive alliteration and change that to practical progressive patriot: I love America. Not in a weird or even exceptionalist kind of way, don't get me wrong; a combination of opportunity, will, determination, ingenuity and ruthlessness built this country, not manifest destiny. But I still can't help but feel lucky and proud to be an American. (Don't worry, I'm not pulling a Sherrod knee-jerk here to placate my conservative readers, if you even exist. I really am probably one of the more flag-waving liberals on the East Coast. Guess that's what happens when you grow up in Boston listening to bedtime stories about James K. Polk and Kit Carson. Thanks Dad.)

To get this out of the way, I am more than aware America has blood on its hands. No need to go through the list right now. We are currently paying for our country's moral failings and will continue to do so. But in a world where we are reminded all too often of mankind's capacity for intolerance, America was created as and remains today a symbol of all that is good about human nature. Our founding fathers didn't have to form a democratic republic, the freest nation the world had ever seen. They could have kept alive the traditions of monarchy, theocracy, autocracy, all of which were big hits at the time. But they chose to build a country that would include the people in government and protect the rights of those commonly stepped on when the sole driving force was their own conviction. Hard to argue that this wasn't one of the more unique and formative acts in all of human history.

America isn't perfect, but it's this imperfection that makes us great: We are a truer reflection of human nature than any nation that has existed on earth. For the most part, humans are greedy and self-interested, easily brought to arms but not inherently violent, short-sighted and proud but also compassionate and admittedly in need of moral direction. America is all these things and more, for better or worse; its flaws are humanity's flaws. While we have a lot of things right, we still have a long way to go. America is a foggy but true compass guiding those living in an imperfect world towards the destination progress will eventually, hopefully, lead us to.

Basically, America is as close to perfect as we're gonna get right now. We're a country built on slavery, yet we tore our fledgling union apart in the name of progress to end it and came out stronger because of it. We are the most powerful country the world has ever seen, yet we actively promote peace and self-determination, even if largely in speech and in the interests of our bottom line. After WWII we could have been much more aggressive and literally taken over half the world, but we didn't even consider it. We chose to try and build the world into a safer one of cooperation and democracy, even if we went about it like a bull in a china shop. We still have our issues, some that have been around since America's birth and aren't going away anytime soon. But at the end of the day, despite our differences, we all agree on one thing: people should be free. It's an idea that America has championed for 234 years, and one we need to stop taking for granted.