Never Thought I Would See The Day:
A lot of things in life just don't seem possible. NO WAY. Yet, not often, the impossible happens. I suppose the most unimaginable event was the creation of life itself. For every creation there is a Creator and thus God exists. I'll put this phenomenon at the top of the list here but any analysis of how, why, or when is far beyond human capabilities. If ever there was a case of what is, IS----life itself is it.
The most recent improbability was the election of a black to be President of the United States. As one upscale lady at a pool told a friend of mine, "I never thought I would see the day when pickaninnies would we running all over the White House."
It is hard enough for anyone to get most people to trust him/her---and then it is mostly a trust from those in the same social, economic, ethnic, religious, or cultural group. The Catholics trust Their Pope, American Indians trusted Their Chief, the Germans trusted Their Hitler, Protestants trusted Their Billy Graham, Blacks trusted Their Malcolm X, a team trusts Their coach, and so it goes on and on. We all tend to trust the familiar.
What odds would anyone have demanded 5 years ago that a black would be the next President of the United States? 1000 to 1 maybe? But it happened. It happened because an individual was able to project trustworthiness independent of race, culture, gender, economic status, country, and religion. Precisely what there is about Barack which generates this kind of trust is beyond my ability to explain. Barack really is Lincolnesque. And the multitude of grave problems facing Obama are of the same magnitude, if different in nature, as the grave problems Lincoln faced. Both came out of nowhere, both from humble backgrounds, both with respect for a justice and fairness unmatched by others, both with a lovable physical ugliness, both with a quiet strength, not so much like a steel beam, but more like a cable that shifts with the wind, this way and that, but ever so steadily leading to the distant predetermined end point. Lincoln educated the public and moved only so fast as the public could be made ready to follow. Barack seems to govern the same way. Lincoln used to tell the 'purists' on important issues, that "you do what you need to do to stir things up and create pressures, and when the time comes I reckon I will put my foot down firmly for the right principle. But I only intend to move so fast as the people are willing to follow" (this is paraphrased but accurate in content).
Given the HISTORY and the LESSENS learned from alcohol prohibition, who would have thought we would ever have had the kind of War on Drugs generated by making marijuana illegal? The logic for such a War as this doesn't exist. The results were predictable. Our country had already gone through all this with alcohol. But the War on Drugs took on a political life of it's own and the more it failed the more outrageous the war became, both in terms of cost, increasing the jail population, creating urban, rural, and suburban ghettoes, creating of all sorts of drug trafficking gangs, and turning hordes of young people into violence prone street thugs. Without marijuana to sustain the madness of it all, this whole vast underground illegal drug trafficking would be reduced to a minor problem. Most everyone knows, at some level, that abuse of recreational drugs is a medical problem requiring medical assistance, but only in recent months, mostly because of the ever increasing costs of this police War on Drugs, have there been some slight political movement. I guess more and more people are finally realizing that you can only maintain so many expensive war fronts. We all know it is not too smart to place yourself in the middle of family feuds, but it seems a lot less understand that placing our country in the middle of internal politics in other countries, does not exactly bring us the desired rewards or serve the best interests of citizens in these other countries either. We developed this notion of some sort of God driven 'manifest destiny', coupled with unmatched military superiority, which created the notion that we could police the world and even had some sort of moral imperative to do so. Even with the most backward of countries---like Vietnam, Somalia, Sudan, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.---we are stymied. We level infrastructure, we generate millions of refugees, we eliminate hundreds of thousands with 'smart' missiles, we employ serious torture of prisoners, and yet, when the dust settles, it is we who tire of it all, it is we who scramble for some excuse to withdraw, and ever so slowly begin to realize that the days of wars like World War I and World War II are over.
I also thought I would never see the day when euthanasia would begin to become acceptable. Ten years ago any serious consideration of letting people control their own dying process, including euthanasia, would have been considered an impossibility. But I guess too many people have watched too many others die a slow agonizing death and at a cost, in the last three months of a person's life, that amounts to one third of all medical costs in the country. In the 'good old days' the elderly got sick, or had their heart attack(s), cancers, etc. and then died shortly thereafter. It is not unusual for the elderly to be medically kept alive for decades in the most incapacitated conditions. It isn't just the dying person who suffers, but the caretakers who may find a good portion of their own productive years saddled with intensive caring for a parent or someone close to them. It has become a medical, social and ethical nightmare. Thus, we now have at least two states which empower individuals to control their own destiny, including euthanasia with strict guidelines. The guidelines are too narrow, but once started, this relegating decisions about the dying process to the dying, will move rather quickly to a point where the dying have more or less total control over their own dying process. The religious right may claim God controls who dies when, but in reality it is THEY who mandate the laws controlling just exactly how a person can die.
Is imperialism dying? Is this another thing that we thought we would never see the end of? Imperialism might be dying, if only because the strongest countries have increasingly little capability to control the weakest countries. When wars involved armies, some country would always win. But there are no armies in today's wars except on one side. We have hundreds of thousands of uniformed soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, mostly all huddled in some sort of secure green zones. For the most part, who deserves a bullet or missile up their ass is unclear. The 'tips' you get as to who the enemy really are, these tips are mostly quite unreliable, as are the tips as to where they actually might be. So you make educated guesses and a lot of innocent people die, get tortured, or lose their homes. So, yes, maybe imperialism is dying in the old fashioned sense of imperialism. But the replacement is even scarier-----terrorism. Everything about modern problems and conflicts, as people compete for more and more scarce resources amidst a human overpopulated globe, fosters terrorism as the only recourse for those angry about this or that. I never thought I would see the day imperialism would die out. But then I never thought it would be replaced by terrorism either. Not a good trade off.
Who would have thought, 20 years ago that gay people would ever be allowed to marry? When I was young if anything was hidden out of sight, with dire personal consequences if it were not, was the existence of gay people. It just never occurred to hardly anyone that the right to choose an of-age spouse should be unrestricted.It seems simple enough logically that each person should have the right to marry anyone of their choice. After all marriage is a bonding of love, not some sort of sexual orientation. There is probably nothing some gay people do in bed that some straight people don't do in bed. And anyone who thinks sexual compatibility or preferences has any intellectual foundation must have a mindset at the lowest level of the gene pool. Then of course was the notion that gay marriage would destroy the institution of marriage. I wonder how many straight married couples have gotten divorced in those states where gay marriage is legal because their own compatibility was affected? It is the old case of you really can't compare apples and oranges. In fact you really can't compare any marriage with another marriage, period. Each marriage is unique. And personal. My problems with marriage have always been far broader: In most cases I haven't a clue why some marriages last and others don't. If anyone needed my personal approval for their marriage what a farce that would be---I simply don't know who should marry who. And I don't know why I should lose any sleep over it either. Love is good. Hate is bad. Tolerance for diversity is good. Intolerance for diversity is bad. The Golden Rule is good. Any religious dogma which goes against the Golden Rule is bad. All else is smoke and mirrors.
At any rate I never thought I would see the day for many things. Of course for many things I never will see such a day. I think one of the hardest things in life is not to be too rigid. In sports, ok. Defend your team and favorite players with all the bias and energy you can. That is what keeps you welded to the sport. Anyone truly objective about sports could not possibly find it exciting. Sunday afternoons (and Sunday evening, Monday evening, often Thursday evenings and Saturdays) find the TV awash in pre game rantings by all kinds of commentators with all kinds of backgrounds, all spouting off about who will win, which players are good or bad, worthy of respect or not worthy of respect, and after all the shouting, ridiculing and pontificating is done, if any of them can pick the winners, in like 60% of the games, they usually are the most successful picker for the day. It is rare for anyone who can predict something with a 60% accuracy, to be viewed as an expert.
So it is with evolutionary progress: illogical barriers fall, human concocted religious dogmas crumble under their own weight----even the belief that humans are the endpoint of God's evolutionary process is totally lacking in any proof, let alone that God Himself is meddling on the behalf of specific individuals to tamper with His own evolutionary laws. Perhaps on rare occasions He does, hard to know, but on a large scale, highly improbable. And if He did so on a large scale, the evidence would be there for all to see. It is not there. The cards are dealt at random, you do the best you can with your hand, be thankful for the opportunity to be in the game, and find contentment through the Golden Rule---the inborn sense of ethics found in the human species. All other avenues for contentment fail.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Monday, June 29, 2009
NO WHERE TO ESCAPE
No Where To Escape
This could refer to the human race at this evolutionary point in time. It certainly seems the noose is tightening---more like an array of nooses all at once. You have to wonder at what point are we past the point of no return? How most people on this planet now live is beyond comprehension---in some sort of Modern Dark Ages, increasing exponentially.
But the title above really refers to the technological advances which make it possible to track individuals via satellite or pilotless planes or helicopters, etc. Dissidents of any sort, without the money and thus the equipment to compete with entrenched governmental resources, are being rendered impotent as an organized force. We see pictures of how this modern day surveillance can help us track down terrorists, robbers, prison escapees, etc. And we say, "Good! They have no where to escape. We got their asses!." And indeed we do. BUT, it is not all good news. This also empowers oppressive governments to suppress the ability of their own people to overthrow them. AND, it also ensures that the only way to fight oppression anymore is via terroristic acts. THAT IS TO SAY you really can't gather together in meetings because if one member is being monitored via satellite, all will get blown up with a 'smart' missile at such a meeting. So it boils down to evasive internet communications with group action pretty much out of the question, including peaceful demonstrations in many countries. There really is left no option but terrorism. This, to me, is really scary. Dissidents of all sorts, good or bad causes, are being backed into a corner in which, in more and more countries, the only option of action left is to create chaos via terrorism. How, for example, are the people of Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. suppose to engage themselves in any battles for justice? And guess exactly who those most suited to terrorism are? Yep, the thugsters in every society. We have individuals in every country now who thrive on terrorism---including torture, killing innocent people, maximizing infrastructure damage, and find the adrenalin rush of it all as stimulating as those individuals who engage in dangerous sports for the same kind of adrenalin rush.
When a person says, "War is hell" they can only speak for themselves. There are those for whom war is a way of life, the only activity which gives meaning to their existence. Driven by a belief that their side is 'right' or merely that certain 'others' deserve all the pain and degradation imaginable, these people---turned loose--have no empathy for whomever, at the moment, is their enemy---or even a friend or relative of their 'enemy'. And these days, you can bet any 'enemy' is rarely in uniform. SO HOW THEN do you identify your enemy? Often the information comes in through informants. SO, you don't like your neighbor, you are really really mad at someone----you turn them in. Off to interrogation they go. OR, you really are part of the enemy, if only a chauffeur, a relative, a friend of one of their friends, sold something to the wrong person, etc. and yet your relationship to the leaders is so superficial that you most likely know nothing of importance. Well, after a little water boarding, sexual humiliation, food and sleep deprivation, etc. you will cough up names---of course you will---and most likely it will be selective, like people who you would like to share this current experience with---and thus more people will be rounded up in the middle of the night and dragged in for interrogation. A high ranking American official at Abighab (SP), the famous detention center in Iraq, claimed 90% of those detained were not terrorists at all, just turned in by informants who wished them ill.
OF COURSE, if it is ok for one group to torture prisoners, it is OK THEN for any opposing group to torture their prisoners. LOGICALLY, why then is it not ok for anyone to torture, disrespect, and humiliate their perceived enemies? There can be no ethics if ethics has no broad application. Selective morality defeats the morality in question. People like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld not only have some ego centric unlimited financial greed priorities, but they are what one could best describe as cowardly thugs. Cheney weaseled 5 deferments to get out of the Vietnam War. The whole cabal of right wing mentors for George Bush have never themselves ever put themselves in harm's way for any cause. Yet their eagerness to give others the green light to behave like street thugs and savages is seemingly unlimited. Their whole world, to them, is filled with self imagined 'good' guys and 'evil' guys. As their puppet George 'Hunches' Bush, a born again something or other, would sum it up, "if you are not with 'us' you are against us" And you can bet the 'us' does not include anyone outside his own inner circle. According to long standing polls, Bush's 'us' does not include like 70% of the American people.
At any rate, THE POINT IS--- this ability to monitor individuals via satellites, un-maned planes, helicopters, etc may seem a great advance in certain cases, but the broader implication is that this ability will be most useful to tyrannical regimes across the globe who will thus be able to eliminate any kind of public dissidence, any kind of open opposition. I love watching escaped convicts, or robbers, or wartime enemies being hunted down by all this technology, but what it means to civilized society and tyrannical regimes in the bigger picture is really scary. I think we know, when this kind of ability exists, it is most useful for all the 'street thug' mentalities across the globe. Terrorism favors these kind of people, and these kind of people, once in power, will use these techniques to stay in power.
Maybe in the future it will be best to know no one, get involved in nothing, and live away from crowded areas where terrorism will flourish. If you can be the dumbest, most isolated, and least involved person in society, maybe---just maybe---you will be least likely to be blown up, turned in, tortured, humiliated, or get a 'smart' bomb up your ass. THAT IS, until somebody's enemies seek refuge in your area. Watch out then! Good luck to all of us, especially the young for whom all this will be their inheritance.
This could refer to the human race at this evolutionary point in time. It certainly seems the noose is tightening---more like an array of nooses all at once. You have to wonder at what point are we past the point of no return? How most people on this planet now live is beyond comprehension---in some sort of Modern Dark Ages, increasing exponentially.
But the title above really refers to the technological advances which make it possible to track individuals via satellite or pilotless planes or helicopters, etc. Dissidents of any sort, without the money and thus the equipment to compete with entrenched governmental resources, are being rendered impotent as an organized force. We see pictures of how this modern day surveillance can help us track down terrorists, robbers, prison escapees, etc. And we say, "Good! They have no where to escape. We got their asses!." And indeed we do. BUT, it is not all good news. This also empowers oppressive governments to suppress the ability of their own people to overthrow them. AND, it also ensures that the only way to fight oppression anymore is via terroristic acts. THAT IS TO SAY you really can't gather together in meetings because if one member is being monitored via satellite, all will get blown up with a 'smart' missile at such a meeting. So it boils down to evasive internet communications with group action pretty much out of the question, including peaceful demonstrations in many countries. There really is left no option but terrorism. This, to me, is really scary. Dissidents of all sorts, good or bad causes, are being backed into a corner in which, in more and more countries, the only option of action left is to create chaos via terrorism. How, for example, are the people of Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, etc. suppose to engage themselves in any battles for justice? And guess exactly who those most suited to terrorism are? Yep, the thugsters in every society. We have individuals in every country now who thrive on terrorism---including torture, killing innocent people, maximizing infrastructure damage, and find the adrenalin rush of it all as stimulating as those individuals who engage in dangerous sports for the same kind of adrenalin rush.
When a person says, "War is hell" they can only speak for themselves. There are those for whom war is a way of life, the only activity which gives meaning to their existence. Driven by a belief that their side is 'right' or merely that certain 'others' deserve all the pain and degradation imaginable, these people---turned loose--have no empathy for whomever, at the moment, is their enemy---or even a friend or relative of their 'enemy'. And these days, you can bet any 'enemy' is rarely in uniform. SO HOW THEN do you identify your enemy? Often the information comes in through informants. SO, you don't like your neighbor, you are really really mad at someone----you turn them in. Off to interrogation they go. OR, you really are part of the enemy, if only a chauffeur, a relative, a friend of one of their friends, sold something to the wrong person, etc. and yet your relationship to the leaders is so superficial that you most likely know nothing of importance. Well, after a little water boarding, sexual humiliation, food and sleep deprivation, etc. you will cough up names---of course you will---and most likely it will be selective, like people who you would like to share this current experience with---and thus more people will be rounded up in the middle of the night and dragged in for interrogation. A high ranking American official at Abighab (SP), the famous detention center in Iraq, claimed 90% of those detained were not terrorists at all, just turned in by informants who wished them ill.
OF COURSE, if it is ok for one group to torture prisoners, it is OK THEN for any opposing group to torture their prisoners. LOGICALLY, why then is it not ok for anyone to torture, disrespect, and humiliate their perceived enemies? There can be no ethics if ethics has no broad application. Selective morality defeats the morality in question. People like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld not only have some ego centric unlimited financial greed priorities, but they are what one could best describe as cowardly thugs. Cheney weaseled 5 deferments to get out of the Vietnam War. The whole cabal of right wing mentors for George Bush have never themselves ever put themselves in harm's way for any cause. Yet their eagerness to give others the green light to behave like street thugs and savages is seemingly unlimited. Their whole world, to them, is filled with self imagined 'good' guys and 'evil' guys. As their puppet George 'Hunches' Bush, a born again something or other, would sum it up, "if you are not with 'us' you are against us" And you can bet the 'us' does not include anyone outside his own inner circle. According to long standing polls, Bush's 'us' does not include like 70% of the American people.
At any rate, THE POINT IS--- this ability to monitor individuals via satellites, un-maned planes, helicopters, etc may seem a great advance in certain cases, but the broader implication is that this ability will be most useful to tyrannical regimes across the globe who will thus be able to eliminate any kind of public dissidence, any kind of open opposition. I love watching escaped convicts, or robbers, or wartime enemies being hunted down by all this technology, but what it means to civilized society and tyrannical regimes in the bigger picture is really scary. I think we know, when this kind of ability exists, it is most useful for all the 'street thug' mentalities across the globe. Terrorism favors these kind of people, and these kind of people, once in power, will use these techniques to stay in power.
Maybe in the future it will be best to know no one, get involved in nothing, and live away from crowded areas where terrorism will flourish. If you can be the dumbest, most isolated, and least involved person in society, maybe---just maybe---you will be least likely to be blown up, turned in, tortured, humiliated, or get a 'smart' bomb up your ass. THAT IS, until somebody's enemies seek refuge in your area. Watch out then! Good luck to all of us, especially the young for whom all this will be their inheritance.
Saturday, June 13, 2009
'I NEED'
"I NEED"
I presuppose we are all hypocrites, maybe with me in the lead since I attempt to write profusely, if not eloquently, about ethical issues. In practice a lot of ethics is situational. Circumstances often set the likelihood of ethical actions. "Fair is Fair", the Golden Rule, "live and let live" are all basic and universal moral principles----but principles which operate under widely differing situations. With different genetic wiring and different operational environments, people employing these principles have widely dissimilar obstacles for implementation. "Judge not, that you be not judged" has substantial merit to it.
This is not to say the principles have limited validity. They don't, but indubitably it is easier for some people to be ethical, given their circumstances, than it is for others to be ethical given their circumstances. Leadership plays a big role. Good parents lead by example. If parents are ethical in limited circumstances kids often follow suit. Political leaders influence massive numbers of people regarding ethical issues. Hitler facilitated unethical behavior, Churchill instilled ethical behavior. Lincoln instilled ethical behavior as a moral imperative, Jefferson Davis perverted it as a function of self serving utilitarianism. Bush perverted ethics,, Obama brings out the better angels of human nature. All humans, with only psychopathic exceptions, understand right from wrong. We all have a genetically wired ethics derived from rational thought. The question invariably is one of finding the strength to do the right thing.
We often look at God's evolutionary process as a purely physical evolution. But there is also a moral progression in the evolutionary ladder. Until more modern times physical fitness controlled the survival of the fittest. But with the human species has come a moral component. We are not the most physically fit species on the planet. But we are the smartest, most creative, and strangely the most dangerous. Just how dangerous our species is to other species and to the earth's environment is becoming more clear in a very rapid fashion----like in my lifetime. When I was young the world was not overpopulated by humans, natural resources seemed endless, our atmosphere was not polluted, water was abundant to be used at will, the poorest could find land enough off which to live, and conflict was restricted to one uniformed army against another uniformed army. In that sense those were the good old days. But of course, in another sense, back then so many of the gadgets which make our lives so much easier and more entertaining, did not exist. It is a complicated conundrum.
Recently a good friend with many admirable personal traits, responded to the need for universal health care by stating: "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything.". This is no isolated position. Most Americans respond the same way. HOWEVER, none of the universal codes of ethics, all quite similar, admit to any ethics determined by convenience. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" does not have tacked on to it "whenever it is convenient, painless, or requires no sacrifice."
We have---of course not me---become a nation of WANTS without regard to ethical priorities or long term consequences. For example, when 80% of Americans supported attacking Iraq they really attached no intention to sacrifice, nor made any real effort to vision the consequences or the ethics involved. It just seemed like a good idea to topple a dictator of some sovereign nation thousands of miles away, bring 'democracy' to the people of Iraq, and, in the absence of any Cold War with any major world power to give us pause, to go into Iraq because the most powerful nation in the world can do so.
None of these advocates of invading Iraq ever claimed "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." And Bush was smart enough, if I can use the word smart loosely,to understand that the people would support the war only if there was no sacrifice demanded from the people. In fact, he implemented a series of tax cuts, mostly to the wealthy supporters of his political base. The cost of the Iraq War is into the billions (I will not bother to look it up since such big numbers have no real impact on us anymore). Let us just say that the cost of the Iraq War has exceeded by far the cost of providing adequate health care to all citizens. I suppose, one could say the troops paid a heavy sacrifice. But cleverly, the government cleared the way for endless wars by removing the kind of internal turmoil the Vietnam War created. Wars now are by volunteers. This may shock some, but there are a lot of young people, for various reasons, who prefer the excitement, challenge, salary, and danger of war compared to the mundane, often poorly salaried or unemployed civilian life existing for so many at this point in our history. Of course this reasoning is deceptive too. A good percentage of volunteers find that modern warfare on the front line is a bit much to stomach. With no recognizable enemy, it is a lot of senseless human tragedy caused by smart bombs, sniper fire, roadside bombs, suicide bombers, domestic gang atrocities, displaced families, massive unemployment, and human misery piled high everywhere you look. A lot of primitive raw savagery right in your face. As a consequence, more of these volunteer soldiers have committed suicide, or tried to, then have been killed by enemy combatants. Our country has the means, with few deaths by any Americans, to demolish the infrastructure of countries, create millions of refugees, and with the expense of huge fortified 'green zones' install some kind of limited standoff---all on borrowed money. Bush's unilateral war was kind of a free ride for the current generation, camouflaged as a crusade of 'good' vs 'evil'. Most of the world saw it differently.
Pretty much the same majority who supported this war also support the War on Drugs. There is always catchy phrases to support unethical dumb ass ventures. Like anyone who opposes the War on Drugs, as constituted, must be for recreational drug abuse. The cost of this War, in terms of dollars and wasted lives of young people is also way up in the billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of prisoners. We are so good at this police action that the percentage of our citizens now in jail is higher than every other country. Some prefer calling it 'tough love' and others see it more like cleansing the streets of racial or young victims of urban, rural, and suburban Drug War zones. Without marijuana sales to sustain it, drug dealing in this country would be a minor business. And precious few say to the politicians, "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." so the War on Drugs goes on and the use of marijuana in the U.S. about on par with those countries who don't have such a War on Drugs.
When it comes to adequate health care for all our citizens and spending the same amount of money to educate all of our children, the golden rule becomes inapplicable because "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything."
I am hardly prepared to argue exactly how the best health care program should be set up. But those who argue private corporations should operate health care in a free, unregulated market seem a bit irrational to me. Wasn't it a free, unregulated (police themselves) financial and real estate market which produced global recession? And if govt regulation of health care is so bad, why is it that the rest of the industrialized countries, who all have universal health care in one form or another, never vote it out? Can the people who have universal health care really be so stupid about it's value and the people who don't have it be so right about it's ineffectiveness? We have the most expensive health care system in the world with the least percentage of people protected compared to other industrialized countries.
The time where Americans can just focus on real or imagined 'I need" is either over or our lifestyle and our position in the world cannot be sustained. We needed gas guzzling SUV's until we finally destroyed our own car industry. We needed to punish marijuana smokers even though the financial and social cost of this punishment to our society has far exceeded the same costs which we incurred with the prohibition of alcohol.
Our 'needs' in the past were limited by our choices. Now, hell, there is some expensive thing for about every whim and convenience. And all of these needs are claimed so essential to our well being and happiness that "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything" (that might be covered by the Golden Rule). "I got's mine" is the new family values motto.
None of the above reflects my own escape from 'I need". But our fixation on what "I need" is so entrenched now that beginning with irresponsible reproduction and all that ensues from it, we are increasingly becoming under destructive attack by our own self centered 'needs'. I am cognizant that sitting where I sit presently, having just about everything "I need", seems to be an odd position from which to question others on what 'they need'. There is no way for me to escape this obvious nuance.
The ethical goal, it seems to me, should always be to maximize the ability of more and more to be able to have what 'they need' as I would want to have what "I need". Children 'need' just about everything they spy which interests them. But adults need guard against regressing to children all over again---minus, of course, a parent to say "NO". Adults don't have parents, we have matured consciences. We have the Golden Rule. That is our parent and the parent of every religious sect. It may not be that recognizable anymore, but buried in the origins of most every major religion is the Golden Rule. It is noteworthy that when one thinks of the religious right of any religion, the Golden Rule is not what comes to mind. And, 'live and let live' becomes, in the eyes of the religious right, the DEVIL.
In these times, in our own country, the Golden Rule cannot be our mantra until we get our priorities straight. There is no excuse for us to spend more money on military adventures and equipment than all the other major world countries combined. There is no ethical rational for our country being the only one with so many military bases all over the globe. Why do we need to be an empire, to use military bases to prop up often unpopular governments in foreign lands? Why shouldn't recreational drug abuse be the medical problem which it is instead of the criminal war it has been bred to be? Why are we so enthusiastic about buying goods made by slave labor? Is it that impossible to pay a fair dollar for the labor involved to provide what 'we need'? Is it relevant where exactly the slave labor force is located?
Let's be honest. What percent of the material goods we own we never use for years? And yet these are things "we need"? If we need them why are we not using them? With our priorities rearranged we can afford to ensure adequate health care for all, we can afford to spend an equal and adequate amount of money to educate every child, we could afford to pay honest prices for the labor involved to provide what 'we need', we could provide more humanitarian aid to the poorest across the globe, we could accept the need and means to control human reproduction, we could become more energy efficient, we could better protect the environment----and we can do all this with but modest self control over all our perceived 'needs'.
Well, why can't we have whatever we 'need'? Simply put, we can't because if we do, others in need will not be able to have their needs met. And let us bury the nonsense that "let them do like I did, get what they want the "old fashioned way---earn it". None of us earned our parents, earned what country we were born in, which town we were raised in, which schools we went to, which others were available to become our friends, earned our genetic make-up, earned the environment in which we were raised, earned our looks, our inherited talents, our personality, etc. Frankly, there is not a lot of "I" in God's evolutionary process. Humans always invent Gods to make it seem otherwise, but history has shown that God's laws of evolution apply to all living life forms. I would like for God to make me an exception, but a little birdie tells me He won't. The sanctity of life has nothing to do with our individual lives. The Golden Rule does. The sanctity of life is found in the evolutionary continuum of life. Life doesn't begin at conception, life began eons ago and continues today, ever changing, ever evolving, and it is this big picture which gives sanctity to life. If God Himself believed as the religious right would have everyone believe, none of us would die. God is not hovering over all of us, reserving for himself the decision when and how to murder us. Why do we have to get so self eccentrically silly?
'I need" to stop here. But let me close with the following observation. There are 100 million kids who will die in the next few years from preventable diseases and conditions. The average cost to prevent their death is $250. "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." We all have made this comment, in one form or another, many times. But really? Let me see, a thousand dollars would save 4 kids. A more modest car with good fuel efficiency would save what? A good $10,000 dollars? That is the life of 40 kids saved. What an obvious ethical course of action.
How many kids have I saved? None. I will in my Will but maybe that is a cop out. You know, let the money accumulate and then I can save more kids. Easy enough since I don't have kids. But most of you do. See, doing the right thing is heavily rooted in circumstances. You want your kids to have the money. Ethics is really tough. My heroes in this regard are Andrew Carnegie and Warren Buffet, Christ, Buddha, etc. Carnegie said it was a disgrace to die and not return your accumulated wealth back into the society from which it was derived. Christ said that in so far as we give assistance to the least amongst us, we can get to heaven. He also said it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. Of course rich means those richer than I or you. If there is a Heaven, it must be a cozy small group. I think maybe instead of television commercials, videos of individual kids dying with a phone number to save them, of the 100 million who will die in the next few years, should be telecast instead of commercials. I think if we could see them dying, we might not be so quick to say: "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." Actually, most people would be outraged at being forced to confront this. Sometimes outrage is a good thing. Perhaps for every $250 we spend on something we 'need', but maybe not really 'need' we ought to also spend $250 to save a kids life. My heavens, Bill Gates, our corporate CEO's, Professional Sport Team owners, major stars in professional sports, major entertainers---on this basis could save every one of the million dying kids and with our lesser help could give every person in our country quality health care and every child a quality education. Interesting.
I presuppose we are all hypocrites, maybe with me in the lead since I attempt to write profusely, if not eloquently, about ethical issues. In practice a lot of ethics is situational. Circumstances often set the likelihood of ethical actions. "Fair is Fair", the Golden Rule, "live and let live" are all basic and universal moral principles----but principles which operate under widely differing situations. With different genetic wiring and different operational environments, people employing these principles have widely dissimilar obstacles for implementation. "Judge not, that you be not judged" has substantial merit to it.
This is not to say the principles have limited validity. They don't, but indubitably it is easier for some people to be ethical, given their circumstances, than it is for others to be ethical given their circumstances. Leadership plays a big role. Good parents lead by example. If parents are ethical in limited circumstances kids often follow suit. Political leaders influence massive numbers of people regarding ethical issues. Hitler facilitated unethical behavior, Churchill instilled ethical behavior. Lincoln instilled ethical behavior as a moral imperative, Jefferson Davis perverted it as a function of self serving utilitarianism. Bush perverted ethics,, Obama brings out the better angels of human nature. All humans, with only psychopathic exceptions, understand right from wrong. We all have a genetically wired ethics derived from rational thought. The question invariably is one of finding the strength to do the right thing.
We often look at God's evolutionary process as a purely physical evolution. But there is also a moral progression in the evolutionary ladder. Until more modern times physical fitness controlled the survival of the fittest. But with the human species has come a moral component. We are not the most physically fit species on the planet. But we are the smartest, most creative, and strangely the most dangerous. Just how dangerous our species is to other species and to the earth's environment is becoming more clear in a very rapid fashion----like in my lifetime. When I was young the world was not overpopulated by humans, natural resources seemed endless, our atmosphere was not polluted, water was abundant to be used at will, the poorest could find land enough off which to live, and conflict was restricted to one uniformed army against another uniformed army. In that sense those were the good old days. But of course, in another sense, back then so many of the gadgets which make our lives so much easier and more entertaining, did not exist. It is a complicated conundrum.
Recently a good friend with many admirable personal traits, responded to the need for universal health care by stating: "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything.". This is no isolated position. Most Americans respond the same way. HOWEVER, none of the universal codes of ethics, all quite similar, admit to any ethics determined by convenience. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" does not have tacked on to it "whenever it is convenient, painless, or requires no sacrifice."
We have---of course not me---become a nation of WANTS without regard to ethical priorities or long term consequences. For example, when 80% of Americans supported attacking Iraq they really attached no intention to sacrifice, nor made any real effort to vision the consequences or the ethics involved. It just seemed like a good idea to topple a dictator of some sovereign nation thousands of miles away, bring 'democracy' to the people of Iraq, and, in the absence of any Cold War with any major world power to give us pause, to go into Iraq because the most powerful nation in the world can do so.
None of these advocates of invading Iraq ever claimed "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." And Bush was smart enough, if I can use the word smart loosely,to understand that the people would support the war only if there was no sacrifice demanded from the people. In fact, he implemented a series of tax cuts, mostly to the wealthy supporters of his political base. The cost of the Iraq War is into the billions (I will not bother to look it up since such big numbers have no real impact on us anymore). Let us just say that the cost of the Iraq War has exceeded by far the cost of providing adequate health care to all citizens. I suppose, one could say the troops paid a heavy sacrifice. But cleverly, the government cleared the way for endless wars by removing the kind of internal turmoil the Vietnam War created. Wars now are by volunteers. This may shock some, but there are a lot of young people, for various reasons, who prefer the excitement, challenge, salary, and danger of war compared to the mundane, often poorly salaried or unemployed civilian life existing for so many at this point in our history. Of course this reasoning is deceptive too. A good percentage of volunteers find that modern warfare on the front line is a bit much to stomach. With no recognizable enemy, it is a lot of senseless human tragedy caused by smart bombs, sniper fire, roadside bombs, suicide bombers, domestic gang atrocities, displaced families, massive unemployment, and human misery piled high everywhere you look. A lot of primitive raw savagery right in your face. As a consequence, more of these volunteer soldiers have committed suicide, or tried to, then have been killed by enemy combatants. Our country has the means, with few deaths by any Americans, to demolish the infrastructure of countries, create millions of refugees, and with the expense of huge fortified 'green zones' install some kind of limited standoff---all on borrowed money. Bush's unilateral war was kind of a free ride for the current generation, camouflaged as a crusade of 'good' vs 'evil'. Most of the world saw it differently.
Pretty much the same majority who supported this war also support the War on Drugs. There is always catchy phrases to support unethical dumb ass ventures. Like anyone who opposes the War on Drugs, as constituted, must be for recreational drug abuse. The cost of this War, in terms of dollars and wasted lives of young people is also way up in the billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of prisoners. We are so good at this police action that the percentage of our citizens now in jail is higher than every other country. Some prefer calling it 'tough love' and others see it more like cleansing the streets of racial or young victims of urban, rural, and suburban Drug War zones. Without marijuana sales to sustain it, drug dealing in this country would be a minor business. And precious few say to the politicians, "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." so the War on Drugs goes on and the use of marijuana in the U.S. about on par with those countries who don't have such a War on Drugs.
When it comes to adequate health care for all our citizens and spending the same amount of money to educate all of our children, the golden rule becomes inapplicable because "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything."
I am hardly prepared to argue exactly how the best health care program should be set up. But those who argue private corporations should operate health care in a free, unregulated market seem a bit irrational to me. Wasn't it a free, unregulated (police themselves) financial and real estate market which produced global recession? And if govt regulation of health care is so bad, why is it that the rest of the industrialized countries, who all have universal health care in one form or another, never vote it out? Can the people who have universal health care really be so stupid about it's value and the people who don't have it be so right about it's ineffectiveness? We have the most expensive health care system in the world with the least percentage of people protected compared to other industrialized countries.
The time where Americans can just focus on real or imagined 'I need" is either over or our lifestyle and our position in the world cannot be sustained. We needed gas guzzling SUV's until we finally destroyed our own car industry. We needed to punish marijuana smokers even though the financial and social cost of this punishment to our society has far exceeded the same costs which we incurred with the prohibition of alcohol.
Our 'needs' in the past were limited by our choices. Now, hell, there is some expensive thing for about every whim and convenience. And all of these needs are claimed so essential to our well being and happiness that "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything" (that might be covered by the Golden Rule). "I got's mine" is the new family values motto.
None of the above reflects my own escape from 'I need". But our fixation on what "I need" is so entrenched now that beginning with irresponsible reproduction and all that ensues from it, we are increasingly becoming under destructive attack by our own self centered 'needs'. I am cognizant that sitting where I sit presently, having just about everything "I need", seems to be an odd position from which to question others on what 'they need'. There is no way for me to escape this obvious nuance.
The ethical goal, it seems to me, should always be to maximize the ability of more and more to be able to have what 'they need' as I would want to have what "I need". Children 'need' just about everything they spy which interests them. But adults need guard against regressing to children all over again---minus, of course, a parent to say "NO". Adults don't have parents, we have matured consciences. We have the Golden Rule. That is our parent and the parent of every religious sect. It may not be that recognizable anymore, but buried in the origins of most every major religion is the Golden Rule. It is noteworthy that when one thinks of the religious right of any religion, the Golden Rule is not what comes to mind. And, 'live and let live' becomes, in the eyes of the religious right, the DEVIL.
In these times, in our own country, the Golden Rule cannot be our mantra until we get our priorities straight. There is no excuse for us to spend more money on military adventures and equipment than all the other major world countries combined. There is no ethical rational for our country being the only one with so many military bases all over the globe. Why do we need to be an empire, to use military bases to prop up often unpopular governments in foreign lands? Why shouldn't recreational drug abuse be the medical problem which it is instead of the criminal war it has been bred to be? Why are we so enthusiastic about buying goods made by slave labor? Is it that impossible to pay a fair dollar for the labor involved to provide what 'we need'? Is it relevant where exactly the slave labor force is located?
Let's be honest. What percent of the material goods we own we never use for years? And yet these are things "we need"? If we need them why are we not using them? With our priorities rearranged we can afford to ensure adequate health care for all, we can afford to spend an equal and adequate amount of money to educate every child, we could afford to pay honest prices for the labor involved to provide what 'we need', we could provide more humanitarian aid to the poorest across the globe, we could accept the need and means to control human reproduction, we could become more energy efficient, we could better protect the environment----and we can do all this with but modest self control over all our perceived 'needs'.
Well, why can't we have whatever we 'need'? Simply put, we can't because if we do, others in need will not be able to have their needs met. And let us bury the nonsense that "let them do like I did, get what they want the "old fashioned way---earn it". None of us earned our parents, earned what country we were born in, which town we were raised in, which schools we went to, which others were available to become our friends, earned our genetic make-up, earned the environment in which we were raised, earned our looks, our inherited talents, our personality, etc. Frankly, there is not a lot of "I" in God's evolutionary process. Humans always invent Gods to make it seem otherwise, but history has shown that God's laws of evolution apply to all living life forms. I would like for God to make me an exception, but a little birdie tells me He won't. The sanctity of life has nothing to do with our individual lives. The Golden Rule does. The sanctity of life is found in the evolutionary continuum of life. Life doesn't begin at conception, life began eons ago and continues today, ever changing, ever evolving, and it is this big picture which gives sanctity to life. If God Himself believed as the religious right would have everyone believe, none of us would die. God is not hovering over all of us, reserving for himself the decision when and how to murder us. Why do we have to get so self eccentrically silly?
'I need" to stop here. But let me close with the following observation. There are 100 million kids who will die in the next few years from preventable diseases and conditions. The average cost to prevent their death is $250. "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." We all have made this comment, in one form or another, many times. But really? Let me see, a thousand dollars would save 4 kids. A more modest car with good fuel efficiency would save what? A good $10,000 dollars? That is the life of 40 kids saved. What an obvious ethical course of action.
How many kids have I saved? None. I will in my Will but maybe that is a cop out. You know, let the money accumulate and then I can save more kids. Easy enough since I don't have kids. But most of you do. See, doing the right thing is heavily rooted in circumstances. You want your kids to have the money. Ethics is really tough. My heroes in this regard are Andrew Carnegie and Warren Buffet, Christ, Buddha, etc. Carnegie said it was a disgrace to die and not return your accumulated wealth back into the society from which it was derived. Christ said that in so far as we give assistance to the least amongst us, we can get to heaven. He also said it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God. Of course rich means those richer than I or you. If there is a Heaven, it must be a cozy small group. I think maybe instead of television commercials, videos of individual kids dying with a phone number to save them, of the 100 million who will die in the next few years, should be telecast instead of commercials. I think if we could see them dying, we might not be so quick to say: "I'm sorry I don't have the capacity to pay considerably more for anything." Actually, most people would be outraged at being forced to confront this. Sometimes outrage is a good thing. Perhaps for every $250 we spend on something we 'need', but maybe not really 'need' we ought to also spend $250 to save a kids life. My heavens, Bill Gates, our corporate CEO's, Professional Sport Team owners, major stars in professional sports, major entertainers---on this basis could save every one of the million dying kids and with our lesser help could give every person in our country quality health care and every child a quality education. Interesting.
Sunday, June 7, 2009
CANTIGNY
Cantigny
I guess everyone entering their terminational phase of life does a good amount of soul searching about life, what life means, and mostly how best to go gently down the stream to the end. Because we are all so different, there is no pat answer, no clear path---just many measured decisions as there were so many measured decisions in both our formative years and productive years.
For me, I have sort of settled on certain general guidelines for a contented journey through my terminational years. And a lot of it centers around a place called Cantigny. But that will come later.
1. During my formative and productive years it was always a process of adding on more and more---mostly for power, control, money, prestige, social success, meeting ever increasing obligations to more and more people, etc. It was add, add, add. Now I feel a real need to subtract, subtract, subtract. And with each subtraction I feel a little lighter, a little freer, a little less exasperated, a little less rushed---and a lot more time for contemplative thoughts. A sort of "been there, done that" and now is the time to put it altogether, reduce stress, pressure, pestiferous involvements, and try to see the big picture. What I have always needed, and never more so than now, is SPACE---personal space.
2. So much of the formative years and productive years depend on others. Few of us are a Terrell Owens with the requisite ingredients to go it alone and bulldoze our way to the top. He may be a one man 'little engine that could' but most of us are not. I am smart enough to realize most anything I achieved was either handed to me (genetics) or dependent on the assistance and kindness of others. Most of the environmental influences on my life I didn't choose---not my parents, my place of birth, my schools, my circle of friends, my opportunities, etc. To the extent I have done well at anything in life it is truly a stretch to say "I did it the old fashioned way---I earned it." The amount of luck involved in life overshadows all other factors. Realizing this is humbling. It makes you face reality. It makes you more sympathetic to those less lucky who live lives of quiet desperation.
3. Whatever my limited blessings I don't get silly and egotistical, claiming God has personally engineered any of my successes, failures or tragedies. To infer in any way that God assisted me in my achievements while letting those in Dafar and other such ghastly environments be brutally tortured and murdered is to envision a God with the mindset of Hitler (help the 'pure' followers and massacre the 'heathens' or whatever else one might call them). No, I have accepted God as the Creator of the evolutionary process, and the laws which drive the process. Don't talk to me about the sanctity of life because we are all dead, as individuals, in the long run---but it is life itself AS A CONTINUUM that has sanctity and has been the case now for millions of years. Despite my wishes otherwise, I am not individually noteworthy in the total scheme of things. Rather, I am grateful that this God created process---His process---gave me the chance to exist.
4. I also accept that nothing about my life has any permanence. Change is the operative word and that is just the sum of it. We all spend a lot of time trying to prevent change. "Things are not like they used to be" is an oxymoronic expression usually implying change is bad. And this change includes all relationships. We can pretend that relationships are made in heaven or even "what God has joined together let no man put asunder", or friendships are lasting, etc. The facts are otherwise and relationships last just so long as the relationship is compatible with changing times, changing locations, changing personalities, changing interests, etc. Many relationships last longer not because they are still the same, but because the fear of losing whatever is left is greater than the weakened glue holding the relationship together. If one ever counts all the 'close' friends over a lifetime, most are currently anything but close or even alive as the years pass. The tragedy is not that friendships mostly fade; rather the blessing is that they meant so much at the time. It makes little sense to blame others for not changing over time as you have changed over time.
5. In the terminational years it is smart to depend on others less and less. Too much dependency on others leads to grief. Some will die. Some will be too busy in their productive years to fawn over us, no matter how beloved we may be. Frankly, a lot of this belovedness at some point becomes duty. The terminational years can be stretched out so long now by medical advances that the burden and expense on others in their productive years is becoming increasingly oppressive. It is not just a matter of being kind. There is duty involved. People always view it as the duty of the young to care for the old. But there is also a duty for the old to let the young concentrate on their productive years. It is not so much the physical or environmental aspects I refer to here as it is the companionship or attention placed on those in their productive years by those in their terminational years. This modern twisted concept of family values often ends up a suffocating trap. The solution is to find ways in one's terminational years to amuse oneself, do things by yourself, seek pleasure in ways which do not impose on others. It does everyone a favor and especially the aging terminationist. It gives you a life.
6. Some of the best friends to those in their terminational years are not people, but nature and pets and reading and poking around, and eating, and attention to all the simpler things in life. It doesn't make a lot of sense to get less embroiled in the machinations once so part of your own productive life and then get emotionally in the middle of such machinations of others in their productive years. Let them do their thing, you do yours. I rarely accept invitations to join groups for any kind of get-to-gether. Mindless chit chat. If you can't recognize when you are out of the mix, you are an aging fool. If you still seek to be important, or controlling, or socially relevant then you may as well as wear a clown suit for the occasions. JUST LET THINGS GO!!! Then hold on to things which can stimulate your mind and bring tranquility to your final descent. We all are going to die alone, and if the state and religious leaders get out of the way, we will be able to control our own dying process. When that assurance is achieved by law, then the fear of death is greatly reduced. The point of enough is enough may vary, but enough is enough at some point for all.
7. "Just let things go". But then what? I always envisioned most of my life how nice it would be to own a huge estate all my own, adequately separated from neighbors, with beautiful grounds, gardens, walkways, grassy knolls, ponds, exotic trees and bushes, and endless peacefulness. What a perfect way to spend one's terminational years. Well, enter Cantigny. This is the former estate of Robert McCormick, the founder of the Chicago Tribune. He died in the early 40's and left his estate as a gift to the public. Most of the public could care less. For me, a good day is pleasant weather and wandering either though nature settings or, strangely, in downtown Chicago, including the lakefront. I probably average 3 hours a day if it is local wandering, or all day if it is in Chicago. What you DO HAVE in your terminational years is time to observe, to think, to be thankful for past experiences, to appreciate nature---all of nature. Cantigny is the estate I always dreamed about. And if I arrive there between 4 and 5 PM the estate, most days except holidays, is virtually mine. If I come across a handful of people the entire time there it is about average. I spend more time enjoying the estate than Robert McCormick ever did. I walk, I read, I sometimes nap, I think, I observe, I let the forces of nature (however you wish to define that) instill in me the kind of contentment not obtainable elsewhere. One really can feel a part of God's evolutionary process, if one let's it happen. I think even looking into the eyes of certain animals, including your own pets, you gain a sense of connection with the history of life over eons of time. Man is the one species who tries to assign himself a special place in the evolutionary process, creates a God in man's own image, creates a God who favors the human species over other species, a God who meddles with the evolutionary process for our individual benefit or punishment, a God who gave us dominion over all other species. We somehow conceive of our selves as the end product of the process or even specially created separate from the process. When you take the time, and search in the right places, you can gain a sense of perspective, a sense of meaning, a sense of how timeless everything really is, how vast God's created universe really is----and in that search you find real contentment, not some sort of transient shallow contentment found in so much of human centered activities. In the terminational years it is best to step back, step aside, and create your own little world of meaning, observation, expression, and contemplative nirvana. You don't have to discard others, but simply let others set the level of involvement. Select the environment for your terminational years with care. Know yourself and act accordingly. I always thought my best fit would to be a hermit. But not really. I like interaction with people, with access to all kinds of restaurants, nature, a big city, animals, etc. But I also need a lot of personal space to engage myself with activities which do not include others. You cannot fully enjoy nature, including a city, museums, etc. if the experience is filled with conversations about human issues and personal problems and people's families etc. When you wander about, here and there, you need to absorb it all in a concentrated contemplative way. More and more people can't stand to be alone with their thoughts for even minutes. They really ought to have their cell phones,Ipods, and whatever other gadgets pump mindless entertainment into their heads---all these gadgets may as well be permanently affixed to their heads. Entertainment is not meaningful learning. It is just entertainment. Entertainment is not understanding. And I see no evidence that this massive information overload creates any real happiness. These are not zippidy Doo Dah people. They are more like wound up robots, mindless busybodies with no substantive matters of importance about anything on their minds. Everything about their lives, to me, seems shallow, egocentric, and with misplaced priorities. It becomes a case of garbage in, garbage out. It takes a lot of time to think and sort things out and grasp real meaning, to set priorities, to understand yourself and others before you can begin to see the forest for the sake of the trees. Then again, maybe it is I who just can't see the value of it all. Old people never see much value in the culture of the young. Of course none of this is of any relevance here anyway. It is I who am traveling through my terminational years and choose the path most helpful to my own needs.
I think I have seen ENOUGH pushing, shoving, competing, manipulating, outsmarting, winning, losing, plotting, yelling, whining, planning, avoiding, prejudicial crusades, and discriminatory cruelty for one reason or another in my lifetime. Sometimes, like others, I have been the oppressor on issues and sometimes I have been one of the victims. So be it. All of it is now a total bore to me. I sit in the grandstands, distant from the action, and I let it all be viewed now from a more logical, more honest, and fairer perspective. Ethics is the Golden Rule. All else is bullshit---one emotional irrational cabal after another bothering others over personal or religious nuances. Live and let live has never been clearer to me than in my terminational years.
And no place plays a bigger role in my new and final chapter of life than Cantigny. There is the perfect place to put all the pieces of life together, to take the past and sort out all that I have learned. I know, nothing I have learned matters all that much, except the alternative is to stay in the mainstream of life's commotions and get trampled ignominiously or ignored ignominiously---being a bother to those around you, until bitter and angry you finally take that last leap into the great unknown. Not me, I will wait serenely at Cantigny for the approaching sunset. Evolution continues. TIME STAYS, WE GO. Goodnight J.H. wherever you are.
I guess everyone entering their terminational phase of life does a good amount of soul searching about life, what life means, and mostly how best to go gently down the stream to the end. Because we are all so different, there is no pat answer, no clear path---just many measured decisions as there were so many measured decisions in both our formative years and productive years.
For me, I have sort of settled on certain general guidelines for a contented journey through my terminational years. And a lot of it centers around a place called Cantigny. But that will come later.
1. During my formative and productive years it was always a process of adding on more and more---mostly for power, control, money, prestige, social success, meeting ever increasing obligations to more and more people, etc. It was add, add, add. Now I feel a real need to subtract, subtract, subtract. And with each subtraction I feel a little lighter, a little freer, a little less exasperated, a little less rushed---and a lot more time for contemplative thoughts. A sort of "been there, done that" and now is the time to put it altogether, reduce stress, pressure, pestiferous involvements, and try to see the big picture. What I have always needed, and never more so than now, is SPACE---personal space.
2. So much of the formative years and productive years depend on others. Few of us are a Terrell Owens with the requisite ingredients to go it alone and bulldoze our way to the top. He may be a one man 'little engine that could' but most of us are not. I am smart enough to realize most anything I achieved was either handed to me (genetics) or dependent on the assistance and kindness of others. Most of the environmental influences on my life I didn't choose---not my parents, my place of birth, my schools, my circle of friends, my opportunities, etc. To the extent I have done well at anything in life it is truly a stretch to say "I did it the old fashioned way---I earned it." The amount of luck involved in life overshadows all other factors. Realizing this is humbling. It makes you face reality. It makes you more sympathetic to those less lucky who live lives of quiet desperation.
3. Whatever my limited blessings I don't get silly and egotistical, claiming God has personally engineered any of my successes, failures or tragedies. To infer in any way that God assisted me in my achievements while letting those in Dafar and other such ghastly environments be brutally tortured and murdered is to envision a God with the mindset of Hitler (help the 'pure' followers and massacre the 'heathens' or whatever else one might call them). No, I have accepted God as the Creator of the evolutionary process, and the laws which drive the process. Don't talk to me about the sanctity of life because we are all dead, as individuals, in the long run---but it is life itself AS A CONTINUUM that has sanctity and has been the case now for millions of years. Despite my wishes otherwise, I am not individually noteworthy in the total scheme of things. Rather, I am grateful that this God created process---His process---gave me the chance to exist.
4. I also accept that nothing about my life has any permanence. Change is the operative word and that is just the sum of it. We all spend a lot of time trying to prevent change. "Things are not like they used to be" is an oxymoronic expression usually implying change is bad. And this change includes all relationships. We can pretend that relationships are made in heaven or even "what God has joined together let no man put asunder", or friendships are lasting, etc. The facts are otherwise and relationships last just so long as the relationship is compatible with changing times, changing locations, changing personalities, changing interests, etc. Many relationships last longer not because they are still the same, but because the fear of losing whatever is left is greater than the weakened glue holding the relationship together. If one ever counts all the 'close' friends over a lifetime, most are currently anything but close or even alive as the years pass. The tragedy is not that friendships mostly fade; rather the blessing is that they meant so much at the time. It makes little sense to blame others for not changing over time as you have changed over time.
5. In the terminational years it is smart to depend on others less and less. Too much dependency on others leads to grief. Some will die. Some will be too busy in their productive years to fawn over us, no matter how beloved we may be. Frankly, a lot of this belovedness at some point becomes duty. The terminational years can be stretched out so long now by medical advances that the burden and expense on others in their productive years is becoming increasingly oppressive. It is not just a matter of being kind. There is duty involved. People always view it as the duty of the young to care for the old. But there is also a duty for the old to let the young concentrate on their productive years. It is not so much the physical or environmental aspects I refer to here as it is the companionship or attention placed on those in their productive years by those in their terminational years. This modern twisted concept of family values often ends up a suffocating trap. The solution is to find ways in one's terminational years to amuse oneself, do things by yourself, seek pleasure in ways which do not impose on others. It does everyone a favor and especially the aging terminationist. It gives you a life.
6. Some of the best friends to those in their terminational years are not people, but nature and pets and reading and poking around, and eating, and attention to all the simpler things in life. It doesn't make a lot of sense to get less embroiled in the machinations once so part of your own productive life and then get emotionally in the middle of such machinations of others in their productive years. Let them do their thing, you do yours. I rarely accept invitations to join groups for any kind of get-to-gether. Mindless chit chat. If you can't recognize when you are out of the mix, you are an aging fool. If you still seek to be important, or controlling, or socially relevant then you may as well as wear a clown suit for the occasions. JUST LET THINGS GO!!! Then hold on to things which can stimulate your mind and bring tranquility to your final descent. We all are going to die alone, and if the state and religious leaders get out of the way, we will be able to control our own dying process. When that assurance is achieved by law, then the fear of death is greatly reduced. The point of enough is enough may vary, but enough is enough at some point for all.
7. "Just let things go". But then what? I always envisioned most of my life how nice it would be to own a huge estate all my own, adequately separated from neighbors, with beautiful grounds, gardens, walkways, grassy knolls, ponds, exotic trees and bushes, and endless peacefulness. What a perfect way to spend one's terminational years. Well, enter Cantigny. This is the former estate of Robert McCormick, the founder of the Chicago Tribune. He died in the early 40's and left his estate as a gift to the public. Most of the public could care less. For me, a good day is pleasant weather and wandering either though nature settings or, strangely, in downtown Chicago, including the lakefront. I probably average 3 hours a day if it is local wandering, or all day if it is in Chicago. What you DO HAVE in your terminational years is time to observe, to think, to be thankful for past experiences, to appreciate nature---all of nature. Cantigny is the estate I always dreamed about. And if I arrive there between 4 and 5 PM the estate, most days except holidays, is virtually mine. If I come across a handful of people the entire time there it is about average. I spend more time enjoying the estate than Robert McCormick ever did. I walk, I read, I sometimes nap, I think, I observe, I let the forces of nature (however you wish to define that) instill in me the kind of contentment not obtainable elsewhere. One really can feel a part of God's evolutionary process, if one let's it happen. I think even looking into the eyes of certain animals, including your own pets, you gain a sense of connection with the history of life over eons of time. Man is the one species who tries to assign himself a special place in the evolutionary process, creates a God in man's own image, creates a God who favors the human species over other species, a God who meddles with the evolutionary process for our individual benefit or punishment, a God who gave us dominion over all other species. We somehow conceive of our selves as the end product of the process or even specially created separate from the process. When you take the time, and search in the right places, you can gain a sense of perspective, a sense of meaning, a sense of how timeless everything really is, how vast God's created universe really is----and in that search you find real contentment, not some sort of transient shallow contentment found in so much of human centered activities. In the terminational years it is best to step back, step aside, and create your own little world of meaning, observation, expression, and contemplative nirvana. You don't have to discard others, but simply let others set the level of involvement. Select the environment for your terminational years with care. Know yourself and act accordingly. I always thought my best fit would to be a hermit. But not really. I like interaction with people, with access to all kinds of restaurants, nature, a big city, animals, etc. But I also need a lot of personal space to engage myself with activities which do not include others. You cannot fully enjoy nature, including a city, museums, etc. if the experience is filled with conversations about human issues and personal problems and people's families etc. When you wander about, here and there, you need to absorb it all in a concentrated contemplative way. More and more people can't stand to be alone with their thoughts for even minutes. They really ought to have their cell phones,Ipods, and whatever other gadgets pump mindless entertainment into their heads---all these gadgets may as well be permanently affixed to their heads. Entertainment is not meaningful learning. It is just entertainment. Entertainment is not understanding. And I see no evidence that this massive information overload creates any real happiness. These are not zippidy Doo Dah people. They are more like wound up robots, mindless busybodies with no substantive matters of importance about anything on their minds. Everything about their lives, to me, seems shallow, egocentric, and with misplaced priorities. It becomes a case of garbage in, garbage out. It takes a lot of time to think and sort things out and grasp real meaning, to set priorities, to understand yourself and others before you can begin to see the forest for the sake of the trees. Then again, maybe it is I who just can't see the value of it all. Old people never see much value in the culture of the young. Of course none of this is of any relevance here anyway. It is I who am traveling through my terminational years and choose the path most helpful to my own needs.
I think I have seen ENOUGH pushing, shoving, competing, manipulating, outsmarting, winning, losing, plotting, yelling, whining, planning, avoiding, prejudicial crusades, and discriminatory cruelty for one reason or another in my lifetime. Sometimes, like others, I have been the oppressor on issues and sometimes I have been one of the victims. So be it. All of it is now a total bore to me. I sit in the grandstands, distant from the action, and I let it all be viewed now from a more logical, more honest, and fairer perspective. Ethics is the Golden Rule. All else is bullshit---one emotional irrational cabal after another bothering others over personal or religious nuances. Live and let live has never been clearer to me than in my terminational years.
And no place plays a bigger role in my new and final chapter of life than Cantigny. There is the perfect place to put all the pieces of life together, to take the past and sort out all that I have learned. I know, nothing I have learned matters all that much, except the alternative is to stay in the mainstream of life's commotions and get trampled ignominiously or ignored ignominiously---being a bother to those around you, until bitter and angry you finally take that last leap into the great unknown. Not me, I will wait serenely at Cantigny for the approaching sunset. Evolution continues. TIME STAYS, WE GO. Goodnight J.H. wherever you are.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Misdirected Anger
Misdirected Anger
The email forwarded here was sent to me. I have a different take on the meaning of it all. (Now I can't locate the email. It was a video of Muslims in Britain screaming death threats to non Muslims and demanding all sorts of things).
The last time I saw these kind of hate signs and rhetoric goes back to the 60's and the Black Panthers. I felt then, the way this email is supposed to make Americans or Canadians feel today----really angry.
I guess I start with the belief that human qualities of kindness, justice, cooperation, tolerance, etc. are qualities existent to about the same degree in all humans of all ethnic ilk. I also have learned to regret that religious extremists of all ilk tend to bring out the worst in human nature.
Back in the 60's my anger at the Black Panthers and black demonstrations in general was coupled with my first exposure to teaching in a University with a large component of blacks. In fact the first two years the University was located in the worst section of Chicago in buildings that duplicated the movie Blackboard Jungle. To say I was on edge was an understatement. To say the students were on edge was an understatement.
I suspect all the turmoil came to a head in the 60's because Television made it possible for all people everywhere in the country to become aware of how others lived. When I was growing up there was a sizable black population in my town but they may as well have lived on Mars. I knew they existed but that is about the sum of it. And it was probably vice-versa. Much of the angry conflict prevalent across the globe is probably of the same nature---as modern communication makes more and more people aware of how others live, more and more anger and conflict becomes generated.
At any rate the Black Panthers may have forced everyone's attention, but the average blacks I faced in the classroom were good persons---reasonable, fair, and honest---BUT, now they had a more hardened sense of hope and expectations. And I, well aware of the tension, had a heightened sense of pressure to evaluate everything I did in terms of fairness and opportunity. In other words, the extremism and hatred of the Black Panther demonstrations and speeches forced all sides to recognize a problem existed and forced the more reasonable people to address legitimate issues.
These Muslim extremists are the Black Panthers of the Muslim world. It is no more logical to claim all Muslims are extremists than to say all blacks are Black Panthers. It is as necessary to realize the Muslim extremists are not without legitimate issues as it was to realize the Black Panthers brought to the surface legitimate issues. These screaming hate filled Muslims are no more the solution than the Black Panthers were the solution. The solution, as always, is to be found among the less radical, less emotional, fair minded, more tolerant population on both sides---those with no braces on their brains.
As a general rule when sizable groups of people gather with such a level of anger and threats of death to others, beneath it all there are invariably legitimate grievances. Another general rule is that solutions can only be arrived at by attempting to view the issues at hand through the eyes of the protesters. Finally, one must distinguish between conflicts based on beliefs and conflicts based on injustice. People who are just trying to shove their beliefs down someone else's throat will be the most difficult population with which to deal. We already know that with issues like abortion, gay rights, prayers in schools, etc. To this day I can't really claim any simple way to instill in all citizens the importance of leaving religious beliefs out of politics. No one should be forced to follow the religious beliefs of another.
The basis for resolving the kind of conflict evidenced in such hostile and threatening demonstrations is always to get the root problems on the table and each side apply the golden rule. When each side is prepared to do unto others as they would have others do unto them, justice and peace can be achieved. The Golden Rule is why slavery was abolished, women got the right to vote, schools were desegregated, job opportunities were made a more level field, etc.
In the case of Muslim anger it probably starts with Non-Muslim interference in Muslim countries. After all it is only non Muslim countries invading Muslim countries. I am trying to think of any Muslim country which has invaded a Non Muslim country in this modern Age. I think there are cases in Africa where Muslim populations within a country have been genocidal toward non-Muslim populations as well as vice-versa. There is, of course, the Muslim attack on the World Trade Center Towers. But this gets a bit complicated in that Al Queda was formed originally to oppose American Military bases in Saudi Arabia. Almost all the hijackers were Arabians and most of the money to sustain Al Queda-like groups across the world has come from wealthy Arabians. Arabia has always played both sides of the turmoil. I suppose, if I were a Muslim, I would feel that non-Muslims are the ones interfering in Muslim countries and that Muslim countries have not invaded non-Muslim countries or established military bases in non-Muslim countries, etc.
After this the picture gets quite complicated. There is little individual freedom in Muslim countries and they spend an inordinate amount of energy killing each other, persecuting each other, while corrupt deadly religious gangs vie endlessly for control and power over others. As a result many Muslims move abroad for safety and economic reasons. The Iraq War, for example, has produced over a million Iraqi refugees who are homeless and have fled the country for their own safety. Who wants these refugees in their country? No one. When you are not welcomed any place---for legitimate or non legitimate reasons----you will have a hard time getting employment, getting a good education, and will end up living in ghettoes. And who do they blame for their misery? If the refugees are from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, etc, then the the blame most often is directed at the non-Muslim invading country. After all, they used to have a home, schools, a job, a community---now they have nothing. We, of course, prefer to talk about individual freedom, despotic rulers, democracy, and our own economic necessities.
It is hard to pinpoint exactly when this country decided to get so involved in the internal affairs of other countries. Certainly the founding fathers, almost to a man, warned us against getting involved in the affairs of other countries. Part of our misdirected mentality was the 'wild west', a long period in our history when guns and violence ruled local law enforcement. We have a long history of being 'gun nuts'. Then the youth of our democracy and our sparsely populated country rich in natural resources generated a notion of manifest destiny----the idea that we had all these riches and opportunities for success because God favored our nation over others. With such rapid success came, as always comes with such rapid success, a certain amount of arrogance, feelings of superiority, bullying, and exploitation. Human nature is human nature and were the roles reversed it would all go down the same way.
Of course if everybody followed the Golden Rule it really would make little difference what kind of religion or form of government reigned anywhere. Unfortunately, reality reigns and a lot of ifs serve merely as an exercise in pipe dreaming. The big picture in evolutionary history demonstrates endless upward progress in complexity of life and living, but evolutionary history has shown no mercy to any species unable to cope with the environment of it's time and place. Humans have always invented Gods of some sort, always a God who thinks like us and, with the proper worship, will intervene in our lives to make our own individual lives better. History and observation refutes this mentality. All advanced human civilizations have self destructed. It has always been some sort of combination of environmental abuse or catastrophe, an extended military empire too expensive to maintain, and an amassment of wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the many.
The difference today is human overpopulation of the globe. Adding this to the mix and it really seems evident that this is our Achilles Heel. We may in some sense be brighter than rabbits, but like rabbits we produce in the same fashion, and this irresponsible reproduction is destroying our environment, creating terrorism all over the globe as people compete for dwindling resources including land, food, water, shelter, health care, etc. Our impact on other species is so devastating now that species extinction rates are at a level unseen in millions of years. These pictures of enraged Muslims can easily be interchanged with enraged groups of people of different ilks all over the globe. Our anger is pretty much always directed at victims these days. And these victims of human overpopulation are all over the place. Ours is a relatively new country and is not yet in the dire straits of overpopulation seen in other parts of the globe. Even with dwindling natural resources we have the power, for now, to simply take what we need by force. But the limits of our power to do this are becoming increasingly evident. With all our sophisticated and deadly weapons we can't conquer and control the weakest of countries anymore---like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, etc. We can conquer, but we can't make their lives better and in fact, our attempts to do so is so expensive that our own domestic needs are coming up short on cash to help the unfortunate in our own country.
Most people know, at some level, that we are overrunning the planet. But we simply cannot seriously talk about it. We have Presidential debates ad-nausea and no one---no one---talks about it. Up until recently our policies were such that we could not even give foreign aid to help any country with birth control measures. And controlled family planning is an automatic no-no.
At any rate, I don't look at hate-filled mobs screaming hate filled comments toward those who they blame for their fates, and feel hatred toward them. Rather, I feel saddened that we live in a world where so many are trapped in lives of desperation and injustice. I can't recall, off-hand, any time when an ethnic or religious group ever displayed such hate and anger when some sort of injustice was not taking place toward them. Fate has been kind to me and I live in the best available circumstances for these times. It is not a question of 'there but for the grace of God goes I". I am not one who sees God as One Who chooses who gets what fate or a God meddling in such a way as to make life better for selected deserving followers of some inherited religion. God created the evolutionary process---a process which gave me the chance, by luck, not divine intervention, to be a part of this process. The sanctity of life is defined by this evolutionary process, not individual fates in the process. Humans were not the first species nor is there any reason to conclude we will be the last species. There is not even any assurance we as a species will survive. LIfe is a continuum and changes over time spans beyond our real comprehension---millions of years. I would genuinely like to be more self important to the process, and not myself become extinct through death. Life after death seems a real stretch, but then so does evolutionary history. In the end, whatever will be, will be, and the result be controlled by the God created laws of evolution. I think when one sees the bigger picture it is hard to hate those whose lives are such, that were I to mingle with them in their environment, they would do me harm.
As always, as the real solution to conflict, lies the Golden Rule coupled with Live and Let Live. We have the tools, but not always the will power. The question is not "how dare them express such hate" but what injustices exist in their lives to bring them to such a state of anger?
The email forwarded here was sent to me. I have a different take on the meaning of it all. (Now I can't locate the email. It was a video of Muslims in Britain screaming death threats to non Muslims and demanding all sorts of things).
The last time I saw these kind of hate signs and rhetoric goes back to the 60's and the Black Panthers. I felt then, the way this email is supposed to make Americans or Canadians feel today----really angry.
I guess I start with the belief that human qualities of kindness, justice, cooperation, tolerance, etc. are qualities existent to about the same degree in all humans of all ethnic ilk. I also have learned to regret that religious extremists of all ilk tend to bring out the worst in human nature.
Back in the 60's my anger at the Black Panthers and black demonstrations in general was coupled with my first exposure to teaching in a University with a large component of blacks. In fact the first two years the University was located in the worst section of Chicago in buildings that duplicated the movie Blackboard Jungle. To say I was on edge was an understatement. To say the students were on edge was an understatement.
I suspect all the turmoil came to a head in the 60's because Television made it possible for all people everywhere in the country to become aware of how others lived. When I was growing up there was a sizable black population in my town but they may as well have lived on Mars. I knew they existed but that is about the sum of it. And it was probably vice-versa. Much of the angry conflict prevalent across the globe is probably of the same nature---as modern communication makes more and more people aware of how others live, more and more anger and conflict becomes generated.
At any rate the Black Panthers may have forced everyone's attention, but the average blacks I faced in the classroom were good persons---reasonable, fair, and honest---BUT, now they had a more hardened sense of hope and expectations. And I, well aware of the tension, had a heightened sense of pressure to evaluate everything I did in terms of fairness and opportunity. In other words, the extremism and hatred of the Black Panther demonstrations and speeches forced all sides to recognize a problem existed and forced the more reasonable people to address legitimate issues.
These Muslim extremists are the Black Panthers of the Muslim world. It is no more logical to claim all Muslims are extremists than to say all blacks are Black Panthers. It is as necessary to realize the Muslim extremists are not without legitimate issues as it was to realize the Black Panthers brought to the surface legitimate issues. These screaming hate filled Muslims are no more the solution than the Black Panthers were the solution. The solution, as always, is to be found among the less radical, less emotional, fair minded, more tolerant population on both sides---those with no braces on their brains.
As a general rule when sizable groups of people gather with such a level of anger and threats of death to others, beneath it all there are invariably legitimate grievances. Another general rule is that solutions can only be arrived at by attempting to view the issues at hand through the eyes of the protesters. Finally, one must distinguish between conflicts based on beliefs and conflicts based on injustice. People who are just trying to shove their beliefs down someone else's throat will be the most difficult population with which to deal. We already know that with issues like abortion, gay rights, prayers in schools, etc. To this day I can't really claim any simple way to instill in all citizens the importance of leaving religious beliefs out of politics. No one should be forced to follow the religious beliefs of another.
The basis for resolving the kind of conflict evidenced in such hostile and threatening demonstrations is always to get the root problems on the table and each side apply the golden rule. When each side is prepared to do unto others as they would have others do unto them, justice and peace can be achieved. The Golden Rule is why slavery was abolished, women got the right to vote, schools were desegregated, job opportunities were made a more level field, etc.
In the case of Muslim anger it probably starts with Non-Muslim interference in Muslim countries. After all it is only non Muslim countries invading Muslim countries. I am trying to think of any Muslim country which has invaded a Non Muslim country in this modern Age. I think there are cases in Africa where Muslim populations within a country have been genocidal toward non-Muslim populations as well as vice-versa. There is, of course, the Muslim attack on the World Trade Center Towers. But this gets a bit complicated in that Al Queda was formed originally to oppose American Military bases in Saudi Arabia. Almost all the hijackers were Arabians and most of the money to sustain Al Queda-like groups across the world has come from wealthy Arabians. Arabia has always played both sides of the turmoil. I suppose, if I were a Muslim, I would feel that non-Muslims are the ones interfering in Muslim countries and that Muslim countries have not invaded non-Muslim countries or established military bases in non-Muslim countries, etc.
After this the picture gets quite complicated. There is little individual freedom in Muslim countries and they spend an inordinate amount of energy killing each other, persecuting each other, while corrupt deadly religious gangs vie endlessly for control and power over others. As a result many Muslims move abroad for safety and economic reasons. The Iraq War, for example, has produced over a million Iraqi refugees who are homeless and have fled the country for their own safety. Who wants these refugees in their country? No one. When you are not welcomed any place---for legitimate or non legitimate reasons----you will have a hard time getting employment, getting a good education, and will end up living in ghettoes. And who do they blame for their misery? If the refugees are from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, etc, then the the blame most often is directed at the non-Muslim invading country. After all, they used to have a home, schools, a job, a community---now they have nothing. We, of course, prefer to talk about individual freedom, despotic rulers, democracy, and our own economic necessities.
It is hard to pinpoint exactly when this country decided to get so involved in the internal affairs of other countries. Certainly the founding fathers, almost to a man, warned us against getting involved in the affairs of other countries. Part of our misdirected mentality was the 'wild west', a long period in our history when guns and violence ruled local law enforcement. We have a long history of being 'gun nuts'. Then the youth of our democracy and our sparsely populated country rich in natural resources generated a notion of manifest destiny----the idea that we had all these riches and opportunities for success because God favored our nation over others. With such rapid success came, as always comes with such rapid success, a certain amount of arrogance, feelings of superiority, bullying, and exploitation. Human nature is human nature and were the roles reversed it would all go down the same way.
Of course if everybody followed the Golden Rule it really would make little difference what kind of religion or form of government reigned anywhere. Unfortunately, reality reigns and a lot of ifs serve merely as an exercise in pipe dreaming. The big picture in evolutionary history demonstrates endless upward progress in complexity of life and living, but evolutionary history has shown no mercy to any species unable to cope with the environment of it's time and place. Humans have always invented Gods of some sort, always a God who thinks like us and, with the proper worship, will intervene in our lives to make our own individual lives better. History and observation refutes this mentality. All advanced human civilizations have self destructed. It has always been some sort of combination of environmental abuse or catastrophe, an extended military empire too expensive to maintain, and an amassment of wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the many.
The difference today is human overpopulation of the globe. Adding this to the mix and it really seems evident that this is our Achilles Heel. We may in some sense be brighter than rabbits, but like rabbits we produce in the same fashion, and this irresponsible reproduction is destroying our environment, creating terrorism all over the globe as people compete for dwindling resources including land, food, water, shelter, health care, etc. Our impact on other species is so devastating now that species extinction rates are at a level unseen in millions of years. These pictures of enraged Muslims can easily be interchanged with enraged groups of people of different ilks all over the globe. Our anger is pretty much always directed at victims these days. And these victims of human overpopulation are all over the place. Ours is a relatively new country and is not yet in the dire straits of overpopulation seen in other parts of the globe. Even with dwindling natural resources we have the power, for now, to simply take what we need by force. But the limits of our power to do this are becoming increasingly evident. With all our sophisticated and deadly weapons we can't conquer and control the weakest of countries anymore---like Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, etc. We can conquer, but we can't make their lives better and in fact, our attempts to do so is so expensive that our own domestic needs are coming up short on cash to help the unfortunate in our own country.
Most people know, at some level, that we are overrunning the planet. But we simply cannot seriously talk about it. We have Presidential debates ad-nausea and no one---no one---talks about it. Up until recently our policies were such that we could not even give foreign aid to help any country with birth control measures. And controlled family planning is an automatic no-no.
At any rate, I don't look at hate-filled mobs screaming hate filled comments toward those who they blame for their fates, and feel hatred toward them. Rather, I feel saddened that we live in a world where so many are trapped in lives of desperation and injustice. I can't recall, off-hand, any time when an ethnic or religious group ever displayed such hate and anger when some sort of injustice was not taking place toward them. Fate has been kind to me and I live in the best available circumstances for these times. It is not a question of 'there but for the grace of God goes I". I am not one who sees God as One Who chooses who gets what fate or a God meddling in such a way as to make life better for selected deserving followers of some inherited religion. God created the evolutionary process---a process which gave me the chance, by luck, not divine intervention, to be a part of this process. The sanctity of life is defined by this evolutionary process, not individual fates in the process. Humans were not the first species nor is there any reason to conclude we will be the last species. There is not even any assurance we as a species will survive. LIfe is a continuum and changes over time spans beyond our real comprehension---millions of years. I would genuinely like to be more self important to the process, and not myself become extinct through death. Life after death seems a real stretch, but then so does evolutionary history. In the end, whatever will be, will be, and the result be controlled by the God created laws of evolution. I think when one sees the bigger picture it is hard to hate those whose lives are such, that were I to mingle with them in their environment, they would do me harm.
As always, as the real solution to conflict, lies the Golden Rule coupled with Live and Let Live. We have the tools, but not always the will power. The question is not "how dare them express such hate" but what injustices exist in their lives to bring them to such a state of anger?
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Weird Politics
Weird Politics
Some aspects of politics are just strange. Like who could ever have predicted in advance that blks would get the vote before women? A long time before at that. Like who could have predicted the biggest supporters of abortion rights and gay marriage would be Catholic politicians? One just thinks of the Catholic Church as being the most hostile in this area. Or that Spain and the New England (heavily Catholic) states would be the first to establish gay marriage? Or who could have predicted we would have a black President before a female President? Or who could have predicted that the Supreme Court would be dominated by Catholics? Or who could have predicted so many former Bush administrators would bolt and become part of the Obama administration, especially Secretary of Defense Gates?
Who could have predicted so many evangelical ministers had kinky sex lives? Well, maybe psychiatrists could have. Who could have predicted that the religious right would be the primary support base for war, torture, death penalties, assault gun protections, and Guantanamo? Who could have predicted so many Catholic Priests would sexually molest children? Again, maybe psychiatrists who better understood the consequences of repressed sexual outlets. But the parents who entrusted the priests with their children would have been the last to worry. Who would have predicted that the end of the Cold War would lead to terroristic wars across the globe with the atrocities on both sides grotesque. The end of the Cold War just triggered endless hot wars. Who would have predicted that in barely a decade Americans would come to be so despised and distrusted across the globe? There are dozens of countries to which Americans are advised not to travel.
Who would have predicted that Favre would go from heroesque to pleasegoawayesque.
Who could have predicted that shows like American Idol and an assortment of other unrealistic 'reality' shows would become so popular? Who could have predicted that NASCAR races would become an addiction to so many? Who could have predicted newspapers would fade into oblivion? Who could have predicted that a Senate election seat could remain undecided 7 months after the election and could go another 4 months? Who could have predicted that the NFL administrators, the NFL legal team, an Owner, the entire ESPN sport commentators, and 80% of the fans could go after Terrell Owens for at least 8 years and he still remains standing---highly paid, his sports jerseys rank in the top 10 sales-wise in all sports, his stats up in the top five all time in most all categories, and he alone seems no worse for the wear, unlike the rest of us---who are either exhausted or apoplectic. Who would have predicted the American Auto Industry would be on the verge of extinction? Who would have believed American workers would lose pensions, high salaries, job security, and be left increasingly with no health care? Who would have predicted that it would take working 2 or 3 jobs for many families to survive?
I guess many might have predicted we never had any intention of rebuilding Iraq after demolishing it, but who would have predicted New Orleans could be destroyed and not be rebuilt after 4 years? Who would have predicted our country would wage wars while giving tax cuts, do it with a voluntary army, be oblivious to a runaway national debt to finance the war, and life in the U.S. for most people be totally unaffected by wars that go on and on for more than 7 years? Maybe that is why 80% of the people supported it. There was a time when any war meant sacrifice for everyone. In fact war used to mean sacrifice, but sacrifice is not a word Americans have come to tolerate---at least not until our whole economy tanked. Oops! An empty cookie jar fell right on top of us.
Who would have predicted that with more and more people in a neighborhood there would be less and less interaction between neighbors? Who would have thought there would come a time when it is dangerous to be friendly to a child not your own? Who would have thought that bar hopping would fade along with other social events and dating would become an arranged or achieved venture online? Who would have thought with only needing a pill to abort, that abortion would still be an issue? Who would have thought Americans would really support a format for professional sports in which wealthy private owners and wealthy players are allowed to exploit the fans, the cities in which they play, and do all this with virtual no regulation, no policing, no limitations on their profits (owners and players) and fans support the 'home' team even though the 'home' team often barely resembles the team the year before? Maybe only those of us with low IQ's are attracted to professional sports.
Who would have predicted that churches would become more and more irrelevant even though belief in God would rise? Church and religion used to be almost synonymous. Now they are often totally separate entities. Who would have predicted that our country would never bother to secure it's borders and actually entice undocumented workers so they could be paid less than minimum wages? Who would have predicted American Corporations would incorporate overseas to avoid paying taxes to this country, employ mostly foreign workers, and give themselves salaries comparable to sport stars and owners of professional sport teams? Who would have predicted Barry Goldwater would repudiate the Republican Party? Who would have predicted the word conservative would no longer mean less government involvement in personal lives, separation of church and state, and good neighbors to foreign countries and come to stand for a religious state, and arrogant exploitation of foreign nations as part of a God given manifest destiny to run the world? Who would have predicted that in the twentieth century we are still debating evolution vs. Creationism?
At any rate, I need to stop, but clearly human predictive abilities are limited. But not to worry---we all know things will turn out the best in this best of all possible worlds. It will won't it? Like I say, not to worry, we are all dead in the long run. For some of us long run no longer applies. Damn, now that I am old enough to really live I am old enough to die.
Some aspects of politics are just strange. Like who could ever have predicted in advance that blks would get the vote before women? A long time before at that. Like who could have predicted the biggest supporters of abortion rights and gay marriage would be Catholic politicians? One just thinks of the Catholic Church as being the most hostile in this area. Or that Spain and the New England (heavily Catholic) states would be the first to establish gay marriage? Or who could have predicted we would have a black President before a female President? Or who could have predicted that the Supreme Court would be dominated by Catholics? Or who could have predicted so many former Bush administrators would bolt and become part of the Obama administration, especially Secretary of Defense Gates?
Who could have predicted so many evangelical ministers had kinky sex lives? Well, maybe psychiatrists could have. Who could have predicted that the religious right would be the primary support base for war, torture, death penalties, assault gun protections, and Guantanamo? Who could have predicted so many Catholic Priests would sexually molest children? Again, maybe psychiatrists who better understood the consequences of repressed sexual outlets. But the parents who entrusted the priests with their children would have been the last to worry. Who would have predicted that the end of the Cold War would lead to terroristic wars across the globe with the atrocities on both sides grotesque. The end of the Cold War just triggered endless hot wars. Who would have predicted that in barely a decade Americans would come to be so despised and distrusted across the globe? There are dozens of countries to which Americans are advised not to travel.
Who would have predicted that Favre would go from heroesque to pleasegoawayesque.
Who could have predicted that shows like American Idol and an assortment of other unrealistic 'reality' shows would become so popular? Who could have predicted that NASCAR races would become an addiction to so many? Who could have predicted newspapers would fade into oblivion? Who could have predicted that a Senate election seat could remain undecided 7 months after the election and could go another 4 months? Who could have predicted that the NFL administrators, the NFL legal team, an Owner, the entire ESPN sport commentators, and 80% of the fans could go after Terrell Owens for at least 8 years and he still remains standing---highly paid, his sports jerseys rank in the top 10 sales-wise in all sports, his stats up in the top five all time in most all categories, and he alone seems no worse for the wear, unlike the rest of us---who are either exhausted or apoplectic. Who would have predicted the American Auto Industry would be on the verge of extinction? Who would have believed American workers would lose pensions, high salaries, job security, and be left increasingly with no health care? Who would have predicted that it would take working 2 or 3 jobs for many families to survive?
I guess many might have predicted we never had any intention of rebuilding Iraq after demolishing it, but who would have predicted New Orleans could be destroyed and not be rebuilt after 4 years? Who would have predicted our country would wage wars while giving tax cuts, do it with a voluntary army, be oblivious to a runaway national debt to finance the war, and life in the U.S. for most people be totally unaffected by wars that go on and on for more than 7 years? Maybe that is why 80% of the people supported it. There was a time when any war meant sacrifice for everyone. In fact war used to mean sacrifice, but sacrifice is not a word Americans have come to tolerate---at least not until our whole economy tanked. Oops! An empty cookie jar fell right on top of us.
Who would have predicted that with more and more people in a neighborhood there would be less and less interaction between neighbors? Who would have thought there would come a time when it is dangerous to be friendly to a child not your own? Who would have thought that bar hopping would fade along with other social events and dating would become an arranged or achieved venture online? Who would have thought with only needing a pill to abort, that abortion would still be an issue? Who would have thought Americans would really support a format for professional sports in which wealthy private owners and wealthy players are allowed to exploit the fans, the cities in which they play, and do all this with virtual no regulation, no policing, no limitations on their profits (owners and players) and fans support the 'home' team even though the 'home' team often barely resembles the team the year before? Maybe only those of us with low IQ's are attracted to professional sports.
Who would have predicted that churches would become more and more irrelevant even though belief in God would rise? Church and religion used to be almost synonymous. Now they are often totally separate entities. Who would have predicted that our country would never bother to secure it's borders and actually entice undocumented workers so they could be paid less than minimum wages? Who would have predicted American Corporations would incorporate overseas to avoid paying taxes to this country, employ mostly foreign workers, and give themselves salaries comparable to sport stars and owners of professional sport teams? Who would have predicted Barry Goldwater would repudiate the Republican Party? Who would have predicted the word conservative would no longer mean less government involvement in personal lives, separation of church and state, and good neighbors to foreign countries and come to stand for a religious state, and arrogant exploitation of foreign nations as part of a God given manifest destiny to run the world? Who would have predicted that in the twentieth century we are still debating evolution vs. Creationism?
At any rate, I need to stop, but clearly human predictive abilities are limited. But not to worry---we all know things will turn out the best in this best of all possible worlds. It will won't it? Like I say, not to worry, we are all dead in the long run. For some of us long run no longer applies. Damn, now that I am old enough to really live I am old enough to die.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)