New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2)

Publisher: In-Sight Publishing

Publisher Founding: March 1, 2014

Web Domain: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com

Location: Fort Langley, Township of Langley, British Columbia, Canada

Journal: In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal

Journal Founding: August 2, 2012

Frequency: Three (3) Times Per Year

Review Status: Non-Peer-Reviewed

Access: Electronic/Digital & Open Access

Fees: None (Free)

Volume Numbering: 12

Issue Numbering: 3

Section: A

Theme Type: Idea

Theme Premise: “Outliers and Outsiders”

Theme Part: 31

Formal Sub-Theme: None.

Individual Publication Date: July 8, 2024

Issue Publication Date: September 1, 2024

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen and Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson

Word Count: 2,911

Image Credits: None.

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN): 2369-6885

*Transcript edited for readability.*

*Please see the footnotes, bibliography, and citations, after the publication.*

Abstract

Scott Douglas Jacobsen is the Founder of In-Sight Publishing and Editor-in-Chief of “In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal” (ISSN 2369–6885). He is a Member of the Canadian Association of Journalists in Good Standing and finished his term as a Tobis Fellow in July of 2024. Jacobsen discusses: volunteer; humanist organizations; Fort Langley; and Wagner Hills Ministries. 

Keywords: research and writing, Miss Universe Canada, direct flight rescheduling, human rights organizations, women’s rights, Athabasca University student magazine, humanist organizations, internal conflicts, humanist community challenges, Mubarak Bala case.

New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2)

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Working with someone who can write and edit is awesome. That evolved into doing various things: conducting research and writing speeches. One speech I wrote was initially supposed to be for Sophie Gregoire Trudeau but ended up being for Miss Universe Canada—at least the first draft. Then, even at 3 am, “I had to change her ticket from Istanbul to Toronto without a layover in Vancouver. I needed a direct flight and had to call Air Canada. Here’s the information: I must reschedule a $4,000 ticket to ensure it was safe for a few hours.” Also, by getting to know these personalities, you learn the algorithms they tend to run, either implicitly in how they think or explicitly in how they behave.

It also gives insight into how to apply these concepts in different areas. That particular women’s rights organization involved a lot of writing, work, and interviews in those domains. I contributed mainly to the Athabasca University student magazine; at one point, I contributed two weekly articles. It boiled down to, in the end, interviews with the president and others and then columns around education news in Canada, post-secondary education, and science news in Canada. All those topics seem pretty much boilerplate humanism. Humanists care about human rights; women’s rights are human rights, and humanists care about science and education. Those fit right in the ballpark with them. So, again, you have common values, goals, and mutual benefits.

Dr. Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson: But values and goals aren’t always common. You’re describing a professional volunteer who helps people based on humanism and human rights. Yet, in one organization, things were said like, “You’re a man, so you’re slower,” and “Men are trash,” “All men are crazy and possessive.” What’s it like to volunteer your time in that environment? 

Jacobsen: That’s also true. Those particular statements were in blue-collar work environments, and I was the only man on-site for the most part. When it comes to those kinds of statements, those work environments aren’t the same as the organizational rights environments. So, those statements come from individuals who have an antipathy to the category of “man.” The individuals you’re quoting, I know their history; they had poor experiences, abusive or otherwise, probably in their intimate lives. Yet, I don’t think a generalized statement like that matches any of my experience, and I’m sure it doesn’t match yours either, with men in general. Although, as with anyone, men or any category or group, you will find those types of individuals who treat people that way based on their sex, gender, and so on.

At the same time, if they do, they don’t seem to count much as humanists or humanistic in any real sense. So, those statements or generalizations aren’t based on a representative sample of the general population. They’re based on a stereotype grounded in trauma, typically. Some projects weren’t explicitly humanist. They were based on wanting to research some of the prominent industries in my home township of Langley. Those sexist statements did come out. Yet, it’s important to talk about those because they aren’t discussed as much. It depends on the era and its focus. We should combat all these forms of hate. Yet, it becomes a little more difficult when those things are stated explicitly but commonly accepted. But they weren’t in those rights-based organizations. Those were highly blue-collar agricultural work environments. 

Robertson: Okay, well, thank you for explaining that. And I’m pleased that people in the organizations you have volunteered for haven’t descended to that. This is more an attitude of some people, and you’re very understanding, saying, “Well, they have issues that they’re working through.” So, you’re understanding their position rather than attacking back. Nonetheless, some organizations have attempted to use you. I recall one where a president of a humanist organization attempted to undermine another humanist organization and use you for that purpose. Organizations that advance human betterment do not always walk the talk. Is this a comment on the human condition that humanist organizations often fight internally or with each other? Do you have any insights on that? 

Jacobsen: My entrance into the humanist community was at a first meeting, where there was a huge disagreement on the western side of Canada over some drama happening in one of the provincial organizations. And it was a fight. I remember entering that meeting thinking, “What have I gotten myself into?” After talking with different humanists and different humanist organizations, not just in Canada but globally, there is a trend for the same human problems you get in other organizations to occur in humanist organizations. So, It’s healthy to mention these things and to talk about them. 

Coercion in humanist organizations differs from that in religious organizations in one respect. If you are in a religious institution with supernatural beliefs, and there is coercion from the leadership to others who have less authority or are an elder in the community, they reference the supernatural. So, it’s hard to make a concrete plan of accountability. In humanist organizations, we all have a common set of understandings where you’re dealing with people, people’s problems, and interpersonal issues. You’re not trying to excuse it with some divine moral law; you’re dealing with an individual who was coerced, and there was a human rights abuse there. At the same time, I don’t want to take this as a victim talk from myself or others. I want to understand the comparative advantage that Canadians have, Canadian humanists have, and especially the global north humanists have, where the issues are personal disagreements. People trying to use each other.

But a lot of the basics of life are provided. Humanist organizations have gone much further in societies and institutions. They’re not dealing with things at the level many global south humanists might be dealing with regarding some of their organizational issues. I can only recall, for instance, two cases of bad financial dealings of humanists that came up. One was a guy asking for money from people giving him money. It turns out he was not a good person. Then, there was another one where there was just a poor member of an American organization. I haven’t looked further into it, but they claim there was financial mismanagement. Yes, that’s just minor. No one’s getting killed, no one’s getting imprisoned.

So there’s a relative ranking here of the issues. In my case, the idea was to have you on the board and then join the board of this publication or this small publishing house. Even though the complaints this person might have had about this person, whether or not valid, that doesn’t justify trying to state, “Your job will be [fill-in-the-blanks.” Because that person is in a power-over position, if we use that type of argument, we have to be consistent about it. I took that as a strike against that person, and then I decided to resign from the board when there were second and third strikes. I simply take it as that. I don’t want to be seen as a victim; I don’t see myself as a victim. I see myself as very mildly victimized. I don’t forget it, just take that into account.

So, we’re better equipped to deal with these things. Then to say, “This one is serious, this one is not.” The one that is not, we can more or less brush off and get on with our lives. Whereas if you’re a Mubarak Bala in Nigeria, you’re getting dragged from Kaduna to Kano, and the police officers broke into your home; they were not in uniform; they didn’t have a warrant. They dragged him to a place where Sharia law is more in place. Now, he’s been in prison for over a thousand days. Even with all this international outcry against him, there are writers with pseudonyms as the vice president of the Atheist Agnostic Alliance of Pakistan. ‘Ayaz Nizami’ is a pseudonym for Abdul Waheed. He’s one of the cases, probably the only humanist case, for the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, a bipartisan group.

And three others were also imprisoned. I’ve been following this case for years now. Through 2021 on January 8th, he was given the death penalty. It hasn’t been actualized, happily. Yet he’s still illegitimately put in for, to those who don’t have a religious adherence, an imaginary crime. So, the comparison isn’t even close. It’s not even the same sport. So we can acknowledge these things and express them to colleagues and friends for mutual understanding and also just as a sounding board for other people to say, “Yes, that is wrong; it’s not right that that was done.” Yet, I don’t want people to be like the overweening, obsequious, supine liberal friend who says, “What can I do to help? I will do anything.”

That’s also not good because it infantilizes the other person and encourages a culture of victimhood where it may be in quotes for “victim.” The problem with that is not finding people who have been victimized and who have been well-worn. It disempowers people from helping themselves out in many cases. Then, when there are real victims of real traumatizing circumstances, the resources are distributed to everyone. So, it becomes a cost over the subset of those who are real victims, who have been victimized, and who do need proper care. So, I also want to keep it in perspective while acknowledging reality.

Robertson: Looking internationally certainly helps us keep perspective and be thankful for some of the things we enjoy here. Nonetheless, you mentioned religion and come from a very religious part of the country. 

Jacobsen: Not anymore. 

Robertson: Fort Langley is only 20 kilometres from Surrey. Where’s Trinity Western University, anyway? You took these guys on, and a bunch of conservative religious dads attempted to cancel you. Tell me about it.

Jacobsen: Yes, I’ve written a lot about Fort Langley. It’s not old Fort Langley. Old Fort Langley was known as a national historic site for farmers and hippies. That’s the Fort Langley I grew up in. It was great. Over time, the newer brand has seen an increase in real estate prices and an influx of evangelical students and education through Trinity Western University. The population has changed. It’s not to say everyone, but it has made a change, and there’s been a development that changes the small character of that town, too. It’s not unrecognizable, but the feel is different.

Trinity Western University, for those who may not know, although many people in the humanist community probably know, is the largest private university in Canada. Their denomination is Christian, specifically evangelical Christian. They are political. They have, for instance, the Laurentian Leadership Center in Ottawa. They want to influence culture. Some research has shown that their theology appears to have become more conservative over time relative to how multicultural and liberal Canada has become. So, it’s not an action towards their selective literalist interpretations of some parts of New and Old Testament scripture from a worldview. It’s more a reaction to how the surrounding society is changing. They want to be a bulwark for evangelical Christian theology.

They have a community covenant, and that community covenant is what got them in trouble originally. When they attempted to get a law school, they lost in BC, then in Ontario, and it went to the Supreme Court of Canada. Some stipulations from that community covenant, which was mandatory for staff, faculty, administration, and students, had some things that were considered questionable to the Supreme Court of Canada and the lower courts about LGBTI+ people. So they lost the case for a law school, not 5-4; they lost 7-2. It was an overwhelming loss for them and a big embarrassment for the community. They were redlining their finances, so they opened up a Richmond campus that brought in more funds.

Because they are private, domestic, and international students who pay the same prices, a bachelor’s degree might cost around $120,000. That’s approximately three to four times as much as an ordinary domestic student would pay in Canada. That theology has influenced the area, and they have been active up to the Supreme Court of Canada and federal levels. Knowing that community, I understand they see themselves as God’s people. At the same time, I like the students quite a lot. They’re normal students; they have a worldview–I understand–that doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. At the same time, the administration tends to be the one that puts out ridiculous things like this community covenant.

If you talk to members of some of the LGBTI community, there’s one subpopulation that formed something called One TWU. That is a community group for the LGBTI evangelical Christian community there. Yet, they must state they’re not formally connected to the university. So it’s peripherally orbiting because the students are there, but they’re not a formally associated organization. They are para-Trinity. They are part of the community but not formally associated with the bureaucracy and institution of Trinity Western University. So the area, with rising property prices and advanced education for each Christian there, probably could make an argument given that they are the largest evangelical university and the rising costs of real estate there. They are wealthy in terms of how much money they have, just in the equity of their homes.

And they’re highly educated, given the amount of time they’ve been there. It’s a small town, and the growth of that university is certainly a testament to the original president there. His name was Snyder. He was president longer than any private or public university president, like 30-plus years. So, he established a contiguous legacy and didn’t sink the university. So that’s a testament to his ability as a bureaucrat to maintain and sustain the university’s growth.

Robertson: You also have an organization called Wagner Hills Ministries, which you wrote is a unique Christian ministry within the evangelical Christian community. How are they unique? What are they doing?

Jacobsen: So, they are a Christian recovery center. They have updated their website, news, and social media output. For instance, their YouTube channel now has more testimonies from people who have gone through it. Yet, I am suspicious of religious recovery programs, not merely because they adhere to a religion or any gods, but more because the success rate of other Christian recovery programs like Alcoholics Anonymous is very low. You are the expert here, the Counseling Psychologist, but as far as I know, religious recovery programs typically fail rather than succeed. So, I become skeptical as a result.

The Alcoholics Anonymous skepticism is based on the evidence that’s been put out about them. Then, on a moral level, there are at least two levels of analysis. From their internal view, they are doing God’s work to help people farm, read the Bible, pray, and engage in community service for about a year. At that particular institution, they are helping people get sober and stop misusing substances and alcohol. In general, most Canadians would agree that healthy use of substances or sobriety is typically healthier than addiction or substance misuse and alcohol misuse or alcohol and substance abuse, to use that terminology. On the other analysis, they give people deliverance through Christ in their phraseology and imagery. From an outside view, and by outside, I mean outside the Christian theological frame, you have people being recommended to come to you or doing outreach to get people or having advertisements for people to come towards you as a Christian ministry to make “disciples,” their term, who are in a weakened state physically and mentally.

So it seems as if they are having people become disciples of Christ when they’re in some of the most difficult circumstances many people will ever go through. I’m not speaking from a pedestal; I’m not a person with addiction issues. My father is an alcoholic and has been a substance misuse. He is to this day. I haven’t had major contact with him for eight or nine years. So I saw that growing up.

Knowing how vulnerable people can be in those circumstances, it seems that on that second level of moral analysis, they are using what is seen as a public good for coercive purposes. That, to me, seems profoundly immoral because you’re not going to a person who is in a proper state, a healthy state of mind and body; you’re coming to them when they’re weak.Then you’re closing them off for a year.

And that, to me, doesn’t seem right. It seems like going for a good end through questionable means and direction. Is that clear?

Robertson: Yes, what you’re describing is a religious proselytizing form of ambulance chasing. You’ve taken them on but sparred with British Columbia’s homeopathic society president. 

Jacobsen: So, it depends on how much time I have to focus. Sometimes, I will take time to write hopefully a richer article. The Wagner Hills articles do that transition. The son of the founder, Helmut Boehm, his son, Jeremy Boehm, emailed me. He sent me the longest email I have ever received in doing this for over a decade, over 10,000 words. I interviewed him to get some of his perspectives because I wanted to continue that conversation since my article was barbed. It did change some of my opinions.

Bibliography

None

Footnotes

None

Citations

American Medical Association (AMA 11th Edition): Jacobsen S, Robertson LH. New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2). July 2024; 12(3). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2

American Psychological Association (APA 7th Edition): Jacobsen, S., & Robertson, L. H. (2024, July 8). New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2). In-Sight Publishing. 12(3).

Brazilian National Standards (ABNT): JACOBSEN, S.; ROBERTSON, L. H. New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2). In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, Fort Langley, v. 12, n. 3, 2024.

Chicago/Turabian, Author-Date (17th Edition): Jacobsen, Scott, and Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson. 2024. “New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 12, no. 3 (Summer). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2.

Chicago/Turabian, Notes & Bibliography (17th Edition): Jacobsen, S., and L. H. Robertson. “New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal 12, no. 3 (July 2024). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2.

Harvard: Jacobsen, S., & Robertson, L. H. (2024) ‘New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2)’, In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, 12(3). http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2.

Harvard (Australian): Jacobsen, S & Robertson, L H 2024, ‘New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2)’, In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 12, no. 3, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2.

Modern Language Association (MLA, 9th Edition): Jacobsen, Sam, and Lloyd Hawkeye Robertson. “New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2).” In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal, vol. 12, no. 3, 2024, http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2.

Vancouver/ICMJE: Jacobsen S, Robertson LH. New Enlightenment Project Podcast Interview with Scott Jacobsen on Boilerplate Humanism and Action (2) [Internet]. 2024 Jul; 12(3). Available from: http://www.in-sightpublishing.com/jacobsen-2.

License

In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Based on a work at https://in-sightpublishing.com/.

Copyright

© 2012-Present by Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Authorized use/duplication only with explicit and written permission from Scott Douglas Jacobsen. Excerpts, links only with full credit to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with specific direction to the original. All collaborators co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their purposes.