Ending Violence As The Means To Solving Conflicts;
Of course the use of violence to solve conflicts can never be totally eliminated. But the use of violence, both domestically, and globally, is spinning way out of control. It seems currently these killing fields are the only method of population control in vogue. And yet these killing fields are a failure even at that, but not for lack of trying. Even more amazing, those who are most active in organized religions, with the exception of Buddhists and Quakers, are the biggest and most steadfast supporters of military engagements across the world. Something is dangerously wrong here, even ludicrous except for the massive death totals being rung up by these enthusiasts of violence. Of course each side knows in their heart their cause is absolutely right and that God is on their side. There are never any shortage of clergy of some sort to bless all these warriors of human, environmental, and material destruction. When I see these flag waving mobs flailing religious bibles of some sort in the air and screaming hate filled bile at their enemies, it seems like our world has become some sort of obscene insane asylum.
But really, how the hell can one stop all the violence which has permeated all levels of society in an ever increasing number of nations across the globe? We no longer have drafted armies out to save their nation from external attacks, but volunteer national or factional professional soldiers whose careers now are based on using military force to solve all problems that arise, domestically or globally. If there is any lull in the wars these professional soldiers will find one to wage. Each side in these conflicts sees all their efforts as some sort of military victory and nothing short of that. Even when every reason for starting the conflict is gone or never existed, winning remains the goal. Each side is willing to use whatever it takes to win, as winning becomes a goal and activity in and of itself. Nothing about the violence so prevalent across the globe is about peace or fairness or tolerance or reason--- and the only peace possible with this kind of mentality is the peace of total desolation, a sort of stone age grave yard like tranquility.
To me the beginning of the end of this mentality of employing violence to solve conflict has to start at the top, with world leaders, especially those in the United States---leaders who are willing to change the mindset of this crazy violence driven mania. It starts with the Lincolnian understanding that ALL ANYONE CAN KNOW OR EXPRESS BEARS THE STAMP OF THE CULTURE, CONTEXT, AND SHARED WAY OF LIFE OF THEIR OWN PECULIAR ENVIRONMENT. Much of what drives our own lives is not fact, but learned perceptions based on individualized experiences. What IS constant across cultures are basic moral precepts of right and wrong. I can't think of any human culture anywhere, past or present, which did not understand the basic Golden rule. Everyone, with the exception of psychopaths, knows it is wrong to kill, to steal, to cheat, etc. Unfortunately there are other, more selfish drives, which enable people to virtually ignore these inconvenient moral truths, truths which everyone logically understands.
Desperate people who strap homemade bombs to their backs and blow up their enemies and buildings and themselves are considered outrageous terrorists. Those who use sophisticated missiles to do the same thing without personal harm to themselves are freedom fighters. That's the wonder of language. I suppose, if you gave these suicide bombers the choice of using a sophisticated missile to blow up some people and buildings of their 'enemies' they would be glad to switch and do so. Would that then make them by definition a freedom fighter?
We need to go back to the basic principles upon which this country was founded and extend these principles to others. These principles have nothing to do with one religion or another. but freedom of religion. These principles have nothing to do with controlling what kind of government other sovereign nations adopt, but with freedom for others to adopt their own form of government. These principles have nothing to do with interfering with the internal policies and priority of other sovereign nations, but staying out of other nations internal affairs. These principles certainly have nothing to do with establishing foreign military bases in foreign countries to prop up governments so their own population can't overthrow them. Whether Saudi Arabia continues to be run by a Royal Family is the business of Saudi Citizens not the business of the U.S. The reality is that if we had not put military bases in Arabia during the first Iraq War, Al Queda (sp) would not even exist.
There is never anything wrong meeting with, and talking to, others about solving conflicts peaceably. There is nothing wrong with giving others the freedom to run their own lives, their own religions, and their own politics as they themselves determine.
There is never anything wrong with protecting your own security or demanding economic fairness. There is no country in the world with the slightest ability or intention to capture or invade the United States. In such a sense no nation has the security from attack that we do. All the terrorist groups surfacing across the globe seem to have one thing in common: they want United States military bases and personnel out of their country. For now the battles are far away. But the very nature of terrorism coupled with the wonders of the internet portend it will not stay so distant for long.
The most creative thing American politicians of late do is to generate endless reasons why we must remain in other countries with a vast military presence. In the Middle East it is oil. Fair enough, we stupidly continue to depend on mideast oil, one of our most senseless short term priorities. We continue to do almost nothing to reduce our dependency on oil as our source of energy. Our resources these days are all spent on military ventures. To hell with anything else. And even here, with this oil dependency, there is no reason to occupy middle east countries. A simple emphatic statement that they can run their own country as long as they supply us oil at world market prices will suffice to keep us from attacking them. I guess this is too easy and fails to meet our penchant for running other countries.
"Well", some would say, "we have to control these countries or they might attack Israel". Fair enough. The solution here is simple too. A firm statement that anyone who bombs Israel will be bombed by us should do the trick. Is there any country over there which doesn't know what the result will be if we were to bomb them? And it really wouldn't take years and years as we did in Vietnam or Iraq. There would be no need to toy with them. We don't need military bases right next door to do that either. We can bomb from ships, we can refuel in the air, we can always find allies willing to let us land at their own airports to refuel.
"But" some would insist, "What about suicide bombers and border raids by neighboring countries on Israel? How will these be ended?" These will be ended when Israel and the rest of the world--- which decided, in a moment of irrationality---after the holocaust---that the Jewish people needed their own state; the attacks end when Israel decides to compensate the displaced Arabs with a thriving economy. If one tenth of the money Israel spends on military matters had been spent on helping the Palestinians acquire a strong economy, then the Palestinians would have something to protect and stop their aggression. People with nothing to lose fight and will fight forever. It already seems like forever. The Arabs have always had a real point. It was not the Arabs who carried out any holocaust against the Jews---the holocaust happened in Europe, so why, if the Jews needed a separate state, was this state carved out from Arab lands? Why did the UN decide that a certain religious group had to have it's own state? Where is the logic there? Like where do the Baptists report to for their own state? Or the American Indians?
Global efforts should always be focused on finding ways for differing groups to co-exist. And this always arises from talking and meeting and negotiating, and compromising, and tolerating, and developing concern for all citizens of every ethnicity and religious affiliation. This obsessive use of violence to solve conflict is like a virus which spreads to all levels of society until even young people accept violence to solve disputes, disrespected incidents, religious differences, etc. No national leaders can preach one thing and do another without real costs to their society.
One sure cause of violence is extreme disparity between the wealth of a privileged or favored rich class and the poor. This massive accumulation of wealth in our own country in the hands of a wealthy few is going to invite disaster at some point. When 1% of the population owns 90% of the wealth in a country, as it now does in this country, that country is on the brink of economic chaos followed by widespread violence. This increased wealth in the hands of the top 1% has made the discrepancy between the rich and the poor greater now in our own country than any other industrialized country in the world. When the Have Nots finally explode with violence against the Haves, the Have Nots in history have always won in the long run. Always. There has never been an advanced civilization yet which was able to restrict the greed of the wealthy. The chickens always come home to roost, and those with such unnecessary wealth can never protect that wealth when the chaos comes.
Everyone seems to agree that nuclear war is unthinkable. We are the only country who has ever used it. Whether it was right or wrong it sure dwarfs the Twin Towers in terms of killing innocent civilians. I know, it also saved a lot of lives by ending the war. No matter the correct answer here nuclear weapons are a threat wherever they exist. It makes no sense to ok some countries to have nuclear weapons and others not to have them. No one should be permitted to have them. There is no logical or fair method for deciding who can have nuclear weapons. As the crazy world stands now the only way any country can be assured the US will not invade their country at some point in time is for them to possess nuclear weapons. Right now, logic is irrelevant in much of what happens. Iran is criticized for arming certain factions in Iraq. And just what the hell are we doing? Imagine if certain countries were arming certain factions in Canada or Mexico, our neighbors. We would raise hell about it. We desperately need a leader who can get others across the globe to step back, reject violence, commit to fairness, and work out differences peaceably. People need to put down their flags, their religious bibles of varied sorts, their ethnicity, and focus on the problems that threaten quality of human life across our common globe. The money alone which is used to perpetuate all this violence, whether it be foreign wars or our War against Drugs, can be put to far more useful purposes including health care, global minimum wages, environmental matters, and education.
Of course there are those who say essentially that nothing can be done about all this violence, that it is part of life, and besides, it is always the other side who is responsible for it. Well, nothing is ever gained by not trying. At this point to accept this way of life, this mentality of using violence to solve conflicts---to accept this---is to accept that all hope is lost. And if all hope is lost one may as well put a gun to their own head and let it be over right now. Others disagree with everything I have said above and see the proper solution as wearing a flag pin, clutching a bible of some sort in their hand, and gleefully cheer all those amongst them who volunteer to go forth and do all this killing on the varied killing fields across the globe. My country, right or wrong, has never had so much irrational support across the globe. Increasingly it adds religion to the mix and the level of violence soars even higher. What a revolting development all this has become.
Finally, the cost of using violence to solve conflict has become astronomical. No where has the priority for violence as a means to some sort of end become so well funded as in the U.S. We spend more on military matters than all the rest of the countries in the world put together. We put more people in jail per one thousand people than any other country in the world. We are the only country with vast numbers of military bases in so many other countries, we are the only country in the world where it's citizens kill each other in such numbers absent a civil war or genocide, we are the only country in the world where the production of weapons is the largest industry in the country. We spend billions every month to support wars and even more to build weaponry. The cost is so high now that we respond by not even paying for our current wars, but borrowing money from other countries to pay for these wars. Considering the mind set of the founding fathers of this country, it all seems surreal. The cost is so great to support violence as the means of solving conflict, that millions of our citizens have no health care, there is little money for educating kids in poverty areas, there is little money to solve environmental problems, and the list goes on.
The most depressing aspect of all of this is the indifference we have come to have toward all of this. We have pretty much accepted violence as our way of life. Any one who suggests pulling the plug on all of this is labeled unpatriotic, out of touch with reality, gutless pansies and subjected to derogatory labels. The real kicker is that those most supportive of all this state supported violence are often the loudest proclaimers of being good devout Christians. Ah, the wonders of language. They all read their bibles, they have heard or read the words of Jesus, and yet they really think God is with us in all these ventures of violence. It was recently predicted by a United Nations study that in the near future 100 million people in the world are going to die of starvation from lack of food, in some cases because there is not enough food, and in other cases because they can't afford to buy the food. 100 million people are shortly to die of starvation! 100 million! The indifference to all this by our own country makes one wonder whether the Reverend Wrights of this world might not be the true Christians, the true patriots. Still, when we know we are right---I mean for sure right---- how upsetting to have some one scream in our face that we are not right, that we are not blameless. If that son of a bitch doesn't like it here, the way we do things, let him get the hell out of this country. Tis a shame he and his ilk don't live banded together in some far away land, we would then be free to take them out with a few smart bombs.
I recently watched a multipart documentary entitled: Vietnam: A Television History. It was a most depressing experience to watch the actual videos of the actions and words of those American leaders involved. There is absolutely no way America can come across as the good guy. These strange little Asian runts hung tough against all odds and and endless holocausts for hundreds and hundreds of years. Huge major powers subjected them to outside rule and slaughter for hundreds and hundreds of years. First the Chinese, then the French, then the Japanese, then the French again, and finally the Americans arrived to teach them the ultimate lesson. We dropped more bomb tonnage on Vietnam than the tonnage dropped in World War I and II. The lies and cruelness of American leaders of both parties, obsessed with winning for the sake of pride and mindless patriotism is unnerving to the core. The video shots of what we did to whole villages, to captured suspects, to women and children, and the carnage to our own young soldiers is mind boggling. It makes you want to hate everyone who supported that war. But wait---I supported that war enthusiastically until the very end---everything I hated about what I heard or saw our leaders say and do I adamantly supported at the time. Back then George Bush and I were companion ass holes. He hid in the National Guard and I hid behind a student deferment, and no one was a more forceful cheerleader for the war at that time than I. When I stood at the Vietnam War memorial in Washington some years ago, it was more than sadness for me, it was unrelenting personal shame. The Vietnamese fight for independence and self rule makes our own war for independence pale in comparison. They never had any advantage except perseverance. I am extremely glad they won. I am extremely embarrassed we ever invaded their country. I am extremely angry that I ever supported sending our own young people over there to die. And I know in my heart, that if I had been over there my blind hatred of these strange little 'worthless' creatures killing my fellow soldiers would have led me to engage in the same kind of atrocities against them. It is hard to understand why good people can become so bad, so irrational, so prejudice, so self serving, etc. I guess most all of us have the potential to be despicable to our very core. I hate that. I want to think that I would never, never, be senselessly cruel to others. But I was in my support of that war. I think now that truth lies in the Lincolnian principle ALL ANYONE CAN KNOW OR EXPRESS BEARS THE STAMP OF THE CULTURE, CONTEXT, AND SHARED WAY OF LIFE OF THEIR OWN PECULIAR ENVIRONMENT. Only when we understand this principle can we hope to achieve any real fairness towards others. Only when our religion becomes the Golden Rule as a mind set which overrides conflicting personal religious/political bias and family/wealth selfishness, can anyone be assured we ourselves do not become the kind of moral monsters capable of the kind of violence which needs so desperately to be ended across the globe.
Come back Abe, wherever you are.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
VIOLENCE BEGETS VIOLENCE
See #2 under Musing titled: "The World According to.......' in the April 2008 musings.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
YOU CAN NEVER GO HOME AGAIN
You Can Never Go Home Again:
I went to the horse races recently----twice----and it was a weird experience. I haven't been to the horse races since the 60's. For a while back in those days I went rather frequently.
I knew horse racing had lost much of it's luster, but was not prepared for the reality of modern day horse racing. I went on a Sunday and a Fri Eve. Both times the weather was warm, perfect for a day at the races. You realize times have changed when you pull in the parking lot a few minutes before the first race and the the vast parking lot is practically empty. The next thing you notice is the absence of any fees. No parking fee and the entrance fee is $1. Nothing these days worth anything is $1. Inside the huge complex there are no crowds. That is an understatement. There are seats available anywhere you choose, including at the finish line. In the enclosed inside bleachers I don't think you can count more than 50 people in stands that seat thousands. In the second floor enclosed bleachers I would be the only person in a whole section of the bleachers near the finnish line. In the lower outside bleachers there are a small smattering of families with small kids. But the total number of kids at the racetrack must be well under 100. Only a few of the betting windows need be open and there is never any line to place a bet. The atmosphere is one of eerie silence. Nothing about it is festive at all. Most of those at the race track sit inside in chairs staring at TV monitors. Except for the outside seating area, the track announcer is not broadcast. Clearly most people, all inside looking at monitors, don't want to hear any of it. Most of those mulling around inside are down and out discomfiturees, leading lives of quiet desperation. I feel sorry for them as I consider gambling an interest for those who can't do math. But the reality is, they do know the math, but all other avenues of hope have long since left their lives. They are no doubt even outside Obama's radar. I doubt you see any of them at an Obama rally chanting "Yes we can, yes we can".
Since I don't like crowds, and like to quietly observe people and varied environments, the atmosphere was hardly boring, but reflectively sad. I know there may well be a lot of people betting at off track sites, but I suspect most people who bet are not betting on horse racing anymore. And a day at the track for a family to watch the horses run is almost nonexistent. When the horses enter the starting gate there is no noticeable excitement. During the entire race absolute silence reigns, even at the finish. Maybe 2 or three times the entire day I heard someone shout "C'mon 5, go, go, go," It was just nothing like horse races in the 60's with the crowds and the yelling.
On Sunday there was some security and a winner's circle. On Friday there was no winner's circle, no fanfare of any sort for the winning horse or jockey. Just another day at work. Some places you couldn't go. On Friday as far as I could tell one could go anywhere one chose. Maybe next time I will follow the horses back into the bowels of the racetrack. I really don't think anyone would pay me the slightest attention. I often stood at the entrance ramp where the horses come out on the the track. You know, maybe I could tell by observing each horse which might be the better runners. Sure. At first I picked the most powerful looking, but learned quickly that their power came with weight and that extra weight was a lot to keep moving over a long race. Then I decided maybe to pick the horses who acted real excited, those fighting being led around. I figured once they get out of the gate they are going to run like hell. Oops, wrong again. Maybe all their nervousness left them exhausted before the race. I did notice, compared to horses I feed in the pastures at one of the forest preserves where I take my daily walks, that these race horses have eyes that sparkle. I mean they are really aroused, but I couldn't decide whether the excitement was eagerness type excitement or accentuated fear. Compared to horses you see in a riding stable these horses really looked beautiful for the most part.
I wonder how hard most of these horses try to win? I am sure some really do, but the minds of animals are often a mystery to human insight. Maybe some of these really hi strung nervous horses really seek a little space to themselves and almost deliberately settle down in 5th or 6th place to avoid the bedlam further up front. Then there is the doping question. Who knows how much of that is involved? I also studied Sunday in the winner's circle a few of the obvious race track big shots. Perfect caricatures of some sort of mob gathering---the suits, the hats, the cigars, the mannerisms.
I didn't bet the first time I went, just content to poke around and observe. The second time I did bet. I arrived just in time to see the horses trot up toward the starting gate, sized them up, and chose a horse which looked like a good runner to me. Placed a $2 bet to place and he won the race. Well, this was going to be so easy! Then each race I picked two horses to place, a total of $4 per race. I never collected a dime until the 8th race when some horse I picked at 55-1 odds finished 2nd. Then in the 9th race one of my horses also placed. Was now on a roll but the races were over. I won a total of $16.80 I must be real smart. At least a quick learner. Yeah, sure.
For the time being, I am amused a bit and will probably go to the races for a few times. I prefer Hawthorne Race track where I went these past two times as opposed to Arlington where the class of horses is better. It is harder to beat the odds with horses having a solid past, as would be found at Arlington. Plus Hawthorne track is closer.
Perhaps in the near future these race tracks will become gambling casinos in addition to horse racing facilities. Why not----the percentage of our population slipping into the down and out discomfituree category is rising exponentially, so it ought to become easy to fill up the race tracks as sort of a way stop en route to jailing them. 23% of those in jail in the world are in American jails. I guess we call it 'tough love'. We must be one of the most 'loving' countries in the world. Last night 23 people were shot in Chicago. I wonder why they don't post the stats on how many people are wounded or killed in the U.S. every day alongside those wounded or killed in Iraq? Maybe too embarrassing. These are the best of times and yet the worst of times. For sure times change. A day at the horse races is not what it used to be.
I went to the horse races recently----twice----and it was a weird experience. I haven't been to the horse races since the 60's. For a while back in those days I went rather frequently.
I knew horse racing had lost much of it's luster, but was not prepared for the reality of modern day horse racing. I went on a Sunday and a Fri Eve. Both times the weather was warm, perfect for a day at the races. You realize times have changed when you pull in the parking lot a few minutes before the first race and the the vast parking lot is practically empty. The next thing you notice is the absence of any fees. No parking fee and the entrance fee is $1. Nothing these days worth anything is $1. Inside the huge complex there are no crowds. That is an understatement. There are seats available anywhere you choose, including at the finish line. In the enclosed inside bleachers I don't think you can count more than 50 people in stands that seat thousands. In the second floor enclosed bleachers I would be the only person in a whole section of the bleachers near the finnish line. In the lower outside bleachers there are a small smattering of families with small kids. But the total number of kids at the racetrack must be well under 100. Only a few of the betting windows need be open and there is never any line to place a bet. The atmosphere is one of eerie silence. Nothing about it is festive at all. Most of those at the race track sit inside in chairs staring at TV monitors. Except for the outside seating area, the track announcer is not broadcast. Clearly most people, all inside looking at monitors, don't want to hear any of it. Most of those mulling around inside are down and out discomfiturees, leading lives of quiet desperation. I feel sorry for them as I consider gambling an interest for those who can't do math. But the reality is, they do know the math, but all other avenues of hope have long since left their lives. They are no doubt even outside Obama's radar. I doubt you see any of them at an Obama rally chanting "Yes we can, yes we can".
Since I don't like crowds, and like to quietly observe people and varied environments, the atmosphere was hardly boring, but reflectively sad. I know there may well be a lot of people betting at off track sites, but I suspect most people who bet are not betting on horse racing anymore. And a day at the track for a family to watch the horses run is almost nonexistent. When the horses enter the starting gate there is no noticeable excitement. During the entire race absolute silence reigns, even at the finish. Maybe 2 or three times the entire day I heard someone shout "C'mon 5, go, go, go," It was just nothing like horse races in the 60's with the crowds and the yelling.
On Sunday there was some security and a winner's circle. On Friday there was no winner's circle, no fanfare of any sort for the winning horse or jockey. Just another day at work. Some places you couldn't go. On Friday as far as I could tell one could go anywhere one chose. Maybe next time I will follow the horses back into the bowels of the racetrack. I really don't think anyone would pay me the slightest attention. I often stood at the entrance ramp where the horses come out on the the track. You know, maybe I could tell by observing each horse which might be the better runners. Sure. At first I picked the most powerful looking, but learned quickly that their power came with weight and that extra weight was a lot to keep moving over a long race. Then I decided maybe to pick the horses who acted real excited, those fighting being led around. I figured once they get out of the gate they are going to run like hell. Oops, wrong again. Maybe all their nervousness left them exhausted before the race. I did notice, compared to horses I feed in the pastures at one of the forest preserves where I take my daily walks, that these race horses have eyes that sparkle. I mean they are really aroused, but I couldn't decide whether the excitement was eagerness type excitement or accentuated fear. Compared to horses you see in a riding stable these horses really looked beautiful for the most part.
I wonder how hard most of these horses try to win? I am sure some really do, but the minds of animals are often a mystery to human insight. Maybe some of these really hi strung nervous horses really seek a little space to themselves and almost deliberately settle down in 5th or 6th place to avoid the bedlam further up front. Then there is the doping question. Who knows how much of that is involved? I also studied Sunday in the winner's circle a few of the obvious race track big shots. Perfect caricatures of some sort of mob gathering---the suits, the hats, the cigars, the mannerisms.
I didn't bet the first time I went, just content to poke around and observe. The second time I did bet. I arrived just in time to see the horses trot up toward the starting gate, sized them up, and chose a horse which looked like a good runner to me. Placed a $2 bet to place and he won the race. Well, this was going to be so easy! Then each race I picked two horses to place, a total of $4 per race. I never collected a dime until the 8th race when some horse I picked at 55-1 odds finished 2nd. Then in the 9th race one of my horses also placed. Was now on a roll but the races were over. I won a total of $16.80 I must be real smart. At least a quick learner. Yeah, sure.
For the time being, I am amused a bit and will probably go to the races for a few times. I prefer Hawthorne Race track where I went these past two times as opposed to Arlington where the class of horses is better. It is harder to beat the odds with horses having a solid past, as would be found at Arlington. Plus Hawthorne track is closer.
Perhaps in the near future these race tracks will become gambling casinos in addition to horse racing facilities. Why not----the percentage of our population slipping into the down and out discomfituree category is rising exponentially, so it ought to become easy to fill up the race tracks as sort of a way stop en route to jailing them. 23% of those in jail in the world are in American jails. I guess we call it 'tough love'. We must be one of the most 'loving' countries in the world. Last night 23 people were shot in Chicago. I wonder why they don't post the stats on how many people are wounded or killed in the U.S. every day alongside those wounded or killed in Iraq? Maybe too embarrassing. These are the best of times and yet the worst of times. For sure times change. A day at the horse races is not what it used to be.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
ACQUIRED IMPERTURBABLE SERENITY
Acquired Imperturbable Serenity:
Serenity is not a state of mind associated with the formative or productive years. Whatever the varied and energetic goings on of youth or our productive years, it is left mostly to the terminational years to attain serenity. I wouldn't attempt to guess what percentage of those in their terminational years find serenity, but the failure to do so lies in the inability to stay out of the way of contentious human engagements and use the multitude of accumulated past experiences and observations to finally see the forest for the sake of the trees. Given relatively good health and at least minimal financial security, the terminational years are best suited for reflection, gratitude for past blessings, and personal introspection which creates a sort of mental portfolio of meaningful thoughts about your own life and life in general. This truly is the time to stop and smell the flowers, to better rearrange priorities, to take the rough edges off your personal prejudices, to finally reach a level of tolerance attainable only when one is no longer in the midst of all the pushing and shoving, to live without feeling so competitive or aggressive, to find the peace of solitude and reflection best found in nature rather than the hustle and bustle of human contentiousness centered around endless selfish small matters. It kind of gives new meaning to 'free at last'.
I know, why be 'free at last' as a prelude to 'dead at last'? I see the terminational years as a chance to write the eulogy of your life---I mean for yourself this is the only eulogy worth anything, with any other eulogies you'll already be dead. I guess my point with this short musing is that the terminational years can be a calming, introspective, serene experience. Since all of us differ, the route to serenity will differ, but I question whether anyone can really reach serenity without interacting with Mother Nature in one form or another. It just doesn't seem serenity comes from interacting with others, at least not lasting meaningful serenity. More seemingly, achieved serenity enables one to appreciate others, all kinds of others, and to tolerate people more. As a bonus, serenity achieved by those in their terminational years enables terminational people to be less of a burden or pest to others who are in their productive years. Dealing with medical states such as Alzheimer's Disease is of course a whole other matter. As far as I am concerned, this amounts to little more than sustaining some sort of potted plant---a totally useless and inane exercise. While the precise point might be debatable, there is always a point past which life is over, dead or not. I think each person should be required to put in writing their own thoughts about under what conditions they consider their life over, and these thoughts should be respected. I doubt anyone in their terminational years, having attained serenity in their life, would have the slightest interest in having some of their functional cells maintained when their 'being'---their very essence--- has left the building, or they are ready to pull the curtain. If dying isn't personal I don't know what is.
Part of what may block any achievement of serenity is the need for most people to envision some sort of personal partnership or relationship with God Himself. The assumption is often made that we as individuals in the evolutionary process are special enough to warrant a direct relationship with a God---a God viewed as some sort of celestial parent. And then we go even further and believe God communicates to us, and protects us via the dogma generated by the religion we inherit. This faith may be a useful crutch, but also creates endless tension and irrational mind sets. Many people, dealing with the stresses of aging, often are exasperated that God has abandoned them. It might be good for our ego to think God directed a particular sperm to a particular egg so that we as an individual might exist, or that God really communicates with us through some sort of inherited religion, or that God intercedes as the result of prayer to change this or that for us or others in matters of concern. Every Christmas Eve the Pope prays for Peace---like clockwork. Every preacher in every religion prays for peace repetitively, and peace never comes. Maybe God is deaf. We sometimes meet the Golden Rule by praying for the poor, the sick, the handicapped, the less fortunate and feel our obligations have been met through such praying. Like God will only help the poor etc. if we pray for him to do so. Maybe God just needs our nudging. Sure. We build gold gilded ornate temples of worship and stage elaborate ceremonies and engage in elaborate rituals, not all that different from ancient societies, in order to keep God on our side. Maybe God is stupid or vain. But in some sense all this does is to keep us on edge. As if God will make things better if only we can absorb the blows in life with which He tests us. Maybe God is the ultimate tormentor. It is really hard to enter any state of serenity in the presence of a tormentor.
The alternative is to accept God as the Creator of the evolutionary process, a process by now better documented, and that it is this process---His process---which has driven all aspects of the evolutionary process for eons. Maybe there is an afterlife. If so, it is no more astounding to human understanding than life itself. So each of us does the best he/she can with the cards dealt in the environment he/she finds themselves. We do the best we can, given the cards dealt, for both ourselves and others. And in this process, when the dust settles and we are in our terminational years, the proper kind of inward introspection gives us a sense of tranquility---an acceptance of the nature of life, and a gratefulness for the opportunity to have been a part of evolution, no matter how small the part, and just hope that maybe while life itself is a continuum (all forms of life were generated from already existing live cells), our own 'being' might likewise have a continuum in an afterlife. Serenity is not a state of mind one can get from wealth, or titles, or winning any contest, or receive from others, etc. No, serenity comes from an internal examination and appreciation of the God created evolutionary process.
During the formative years and productive years others are the sustenance for personal growth. During the terminational years any growth comes from within. This inward direction of thoughts tends to lead one away from excitement or challenges or competition and toward reflection---to search for soothing activities which generate a genuine mellowness. Too many elderly are bitter because they feel too much ignored by family or friends, and even more desolate when their peers go by the wayside one by one---either by death or otherwise. It really is hard to feel your support base crumble beneath you. Just as death needs to be seen as a natural product of living, inward thoughts need be seen as the sustenance for terminational serenity. Serenity is not the same as happiness or contentment. Contentment is achieving success from some earthly goal. Achieving success in the manner achieved during the productive years is gone with the wind by the terminational years. To pursue that kind of contentment or happiness is the race of a fool. That race really doesn't matter any more. Serenity is more the consequence of understanding the nature of the evolutionary process and our relationship to that process. Only then can one go gently down the stream to earthly oblivion.
It is the earlier stages of life which center on dependency of others and it is the last stage of life which needs to center on independence. No man is an island until the last stage of life. The choice is to let the island be some sort of barren, contentious, forlorn, lonely island---or an island of mellow serenity.
Serenity is not a state of mind associated with the formative or productive years. Whatever the varied and energetic goings on of youth or our productive years, it is left mostly to the terminational years to attain serenity. I wouldn't attempt to guess what percentage of those in their terminational years find serenity, but the failure to do so lies in the inability to stay out of the way of contentious human engagements and use the multitude of accumulated past experiences and observations to finally see the forest for the sake of the trees. Given relatively good health and at least minimal financial security, the terminational years are best suited for reflection, gratitude for past blessings, and personal introspection which creates a sort of mental portfolio of meaningful thoughts about your own life and life in general. This truly is the time to stop and smell the flowers, to better rearrange priorities, to take the rough edges off your personal prejudices, to finally reach a level of tolerance attainable only when one is no longer in the midst of all the pushing and shoving, to live without feeling so competitive or aggressive, to find the peace of solitude and reflection best found in nature rather than the hustle and bustle of human contentiousness centered around endless selfish small matters. It kind of gives new meaning to 'free at last'.
I know, why be 'free at last' as a prelude to 'dead at last'? I see the terminational years as a chance to write the eulogy of your life---I mean for yourself this is the only eulogy worth anything, with any other eulogies you'll already be dead. I guess my point with this short musing is that the terminational years can be a calming, introspective, serene experience. Since all of us differ, the route to serenity will differ, but I question whether anyone can really reach serenity without interacting with Mother Nature in one form or another. It just doesn't seem serenity comes from interacting with others, at least not lasting meaningful serenity. More seemingly, achieved serenity enables one to appreciate others, all kinds of others, and to tolerate people more. As a bonus, serenity achieved by those in their terminational years enables terminational people to be less of a burden or pest to others who are in their productive years. Dealing with medical states such as Alzheimer's Disease is of course a whole other matter. As far as I am concerned, this amounts to little more than sustaining some sort of potted plant---a totally useless and inane exercise. While the precise point might be debatable, there is always a point past which life is over, dead or not. I think each person should be required to put in writing their own thoughts about under what conditions they consider their life over, and these thoughts should be respected. I doubt anyone in their terminational years, having attained serenity in their life, would have the slightest interest in having some of their functional cells maintained when their 'being'---their very essence--- has left the building, or they are ready to pull the curtain. If dying isn't personal I don't know what is.
Part of what may block any achievement of serenity is the need for most people to envision some sort of personal partnership or relationship with God Himself. The assumption is often made that we as individuals in the evolutionary process are special enough to warrant a direct relationship with a God---a God viewed as some sort of celestial parent. And then we go even further and believe God communicates to us, and protects us via the dogma generated by the religion we inherit. This faith may be a useful crutch, but also creates endless tension and irrational mind sets. Many people, dealing with the stresses of aging, often are exasperated that God has abandoned them. It might be good for our ego to think God directed a particular sperm to a particular egg so that we as an individual might exist, or that God really communicates with us through some sort of inherited religion, or that God intercedes as the result of prayer to change this or that for us or others in matters of concern. Every Christmas Eve the Pope prays for Peace---like clockwork. Every preacher in every religion prays for peace repetitively, and peace never comes. Maybe God is deaf. We sometimes meet the Golden Rule by praying for the poor, the sick, the handicapped, the less fortunate and feel our obligations have been met through such praying. Like God will only help the poor etc. if we pray for him to do so. Maybe God just needs our nudging. Sure. We build gold gilded ornate temples of worship and stage elaborate ceremonies and engage in elaborate rituals, not all that different from ancient societies, in order to keep God on our side. Maybe God is stupid or vain. But in some sense all this does is to keep us on edge. As if God will make things better if only we can absorb the blows in life with which He tests us. Maybe God is the ultimate tormentor. It is really hard to enter any state of serenity in the presence of a tormentor.
The alternative is to accept God as the Creator of the evolutionary process, a process by now better documented, and that it is this process---His process---which has driven all aspects of the evolutionary process for eons. Maybe there is an afterlife. If so, it is no more astounding to human understanding than life itself. So each of us does the best he/she can with the cards dealt in the environment he/she finds themselves. We do the best we can, given the cards dealt, for both ourselves and others. And in this process, when the dust settles and we are in our terminational years, the proper kind of inward introspection gives us a sense of tranquility---an acceptance of the nature of life, and a gratefulness for the opportunity to have been a part of evolution, no matter how small the part, and just hope that maybe while life itself is a continuum (all forms of life were generated from already existing live cells), our own 'being' might likewise have a continuum in an afterlife. Serenity is not a state of mind one can get from wealth, or titles, or winning any contest, or receive from others, etc. No, serenity comes from an internal examination and appreciation of the God created evolutionary process.
During the formative years and productive years others are the sustenance for personal growth. During the terminational years any growth comes from within. This inward direction of thoughts tends to lead one away from excitement or challenges or competition and toward reflection---to search for soothing activities which generate a genuine mellowness. Too many elderly are bitter because they feel too much ignored by family or friends, and even more desolate when their peers go by the wayside one by one---either by death or otherwise. It really is hard to feel your support base crumble beneath you. Just as death needs to be seen as a natural product of living, inward thoughts need be seen as the sustenance for terminational serenity. Serenity is not the same as happiness or contentment. Contentment is achieving success from some earthly goal. Achieving success in the manner achieved during the productive years is gone with the wind by the terminational years. To pursue that kind of contentment or happiness is the race of a fool. That race really doesn't matter any more. Serenity is more the consequence of understanding the nature of the evolutionary process and our relationship to that process. Only then can one go gently down the stream to earthly oblivion.
It is the earlier stages of life which center on dependency of others and it is the last stage of life which needs to center on independence. No man is an island until the last stage of life. The choice is to let the island be some sort of barren, contentious, forlorn, lonely island---or an island of mellow serenity.
Monday, April 7, 2008
THE WORLD ACCORDING TO A TERGIVERSATING PHILOSOPHICOJURISTIC SECLUSIONIST
The World According to a Tergiversating Philosophicojuristic Seclusionist:
My little world has never been very static. Change and curiosity have altered my own perceptions of reality from my teenage years on. Even in the areas of religion and politics nothing was engraved in stone, probably a reflection of little indoctrination from my parents. This freedom to find my own path in life I attribute mostly to my dad. He seldom preached about anything, content to project an image of 'moral aloofness'. He didn't smoke, drink, swear, gamble, cut corners, be secretive about anything, or pull fast ones on anyone. He really annoyed me with all this 'Mr. Goody Two Shoes" stuff. He would wear a suit to a picnic. He couldn't even bother to get even over slights or small injustices. When I did dumb or bad things he expressed disappointment not anger. When my mother would demand he punish or tell me off, he would---in one way or another---say, "He knows right from wrong, he needs to find the strength to not let others lead him in the wrong direction. We didn't teach him to be that way. Now he has to find his own way in life and pay the consequences of any bad decisions." Even his prejudices he pretty much kept to himself, he simply never bad-mouthed anyone or any group. In essence he pretty much left me with a blank slate and a good example of how to live life and treat others.
Somehow I got through adolescence, my productive years, and find the time now in my terminational years to put all the pieces together. At this stage in my life nothing interests me as much as attempting to make sense of this thing called life. There are so many trees that it is almost impossible to see the forest. For someone like myself, a bona-fide social hermit of some sort, the excitement and satisfactions in life come not from others but from within. Others are important to me as some sort of play is interesting to watch. Life around us is really the original big screen TV. Clearly there is more sadness than joy in the lives of most on our globe. I have always really hated that reality---so many people living lives of quiet desperation, hardly knowing which end is up, which way to turn, and precious little support base from which to get any help. It is the trees getting in the way of the forest.
I never doubted the existence of God. At first it was just blind faith in my inherited religious dogmas. With time I felt increasingly uncomfortable with blind faith. Aside from basic moral concepts---concepts universally accepted as moral---the particulars of varied religions seemed invented, always based on someone's recollection of a prophet, and years after the prophet's death. I never doubted the wisdom or moral goodness of these prophets, but emissaries from God was another matter. It seems since the appearance of man on this planet, man always invented God---in one form or another. And God was always humanesque in every conception. To deny the existence of God would be akin to denying the existence of someone who gives you an anonymous gift.
The God created gift of life is found in the evolutionary process. Nothing man made ever remotely compares to the complexities and wonders of nature. I never feel more religious or more in contact with this created evolutionary process than when in nature as a solitary admirer. It is there in nature I know my dad was right. I, like others, know right from wrong. To what extent I ever have the strength to do right rather than wrong is always the question. It is the same question others, in one form or another, must address. We all know the golden rule. It is a global inconvenient truth---a truth which we often work around when it clashes with our own interests, desires, needs.
I listen to Presidential debates and am impressed with their vast knowledge of the trees. Yet when all has been said (but often never done), it is the forest which needs be seen in order to bring any real lasting changes. I doubt ever in the history of man on the earth have so many ominous forces of nature been closing in on the welfare of human life upon this earth. We can stall---we can tinker---we can protect a few at the expense of the many---we can keep our heads in the sand----we can and are doing all of this, but Nature always bats last. Always.
I see 5 global forces of nature closing in on humanity which are not addressed in Presidential debates. Maybe they understand these forces and simply reflect the global attitude of denial.
More likely, the nature of the evolutionary process is such that no species has yet to escape the laws of nature. The notion that God often, if ever, interferes with the laws of nature to personally guide any of us through any land mines of misfortune, is simply not supported by history. These laws of nature apply to all----the good and the bad. We can pray all we want for God to intercede here and there, for this or that situation, but clearly Nature rolls on. Whether we like it or not, we are not, individually or collectively, any kind of end point for justice or happy endings. We're all dead in the long run, at least regarding any earthly life. Any life after death is beyond human comprehension. The justice and brilliance of this created system is that the evolutionary process has always proceeded upwards and onwards to new levels of life.
At any rate, there appear to be at least 5 major forces to be contended with for improving the welfare of human existence. I will address each force separately and just add each force to this musing as I write it up. For now I will only list the first force.
1. Reproductive Responsibility
There are far too many people on this earth for our natural resources to be protected or provide a quality life for all inhabitants on the earth. Every aspect of our environment is now being assaulted past the point of any replenishment or protection. The atmosphere, the land, the sea, other species, minerals and vegetation are all under massive assault by human densities. Politicians can babble all they want about how the good life is going to be spread to all. With the global population as is, this is literally an absurd declaration. The United States alone consumes something like 25 or 35 percent of the energy consumption of the whole world. Anyone who thinks there are enough natural resources to spread this 'good life' to all across the globe, or even to all in our own country, is simply being silly. The choice is clear: impose reproductive responsibility on all populations across the globe or assign increasingly vast numbers of human beings to lives of hopeless cruel desperation. The right of anyone to reproduce at the rate of rabbits is lost to the right of humanity as a whole to protect the quality of life for those born under responsible reproduction laws. It would seem that raising two kids properly is quite enough of an accomplishment for parenting needs. Anything else is just ignorant, selfish, and cruel. A whole book could be written on this topic, but for the purpose here, not necessary. I think most people understand the dilemma here, but just choose not to seriously think about it: "Oh, things will work out, solutions will be found", etc. Yeah, sure. And I am going to live forever. I mean why not, I have so far. There seem to be all around everywhere more horse's asses than horses.
Every few days I will add to this a new major ominous force affecting human destiny. Perhaps you can guess the other four.
#2.
Violence Begets Violence
For all the good and noble principles contained in the American Constitution and the Christian Bible, American society has always been of a rather violent nature. We never really lost the mentality of the 'Wild West'. It seems much of American History is knee deep in our self proclaimed 'manifest destiny'. And 'manifest destiny' has always been used to take what we want at the moment by force. We may feel the Tibetians or the Jews and other abused groups here and there deserve their own state but the American Indians never ended up with even the smallest state in either North or South America. The institution of slavery was seeped in violence and we were one of the last civilized nations to give it up and only after a bloody Civil War that is hard to match in casualties by anyone else's Civil War. At least no other nation came in and controlled or managed our own Civil War. Nations were a bit more sovereign back then. Today sovereignty is ok unless it conflicts with our 'manifest destiny' of the moment.
I watched a forum recently on television in which the participants talked about ways to reduce the number of high school students shot in Chicago. So far this year 23 students have been shot and killed. A few days ago 23 people were shot in one day. None of the participants in the forum seemed able to see the forest for the sake of the trees. The truth is that Americans have been leading the way in using violence as a means of solving conflict. And we have been doing it at every level, in most every arena. To me it seems that while violence can gravitate both ways, the most pervasive influence comes from the top down. If our leaders use violence to solve conflict then this mentality is adopted by citizens across the board. If people think they can stop the violence in public schools without changing the mentality of our own leadership and policies they are mistaken. What other country has engaged itself in endless military operations across the globe? What other country remotely approaches our own policy of supporting 750 military bases in 130 different countries? How many other countries treat recreational drug abuse as a police matter rather than a medical problem to the extent we do? What other country jails anywhere near the number of its citizens as we do per one hundred thousand population? Why do we spend more money on military matters than all the other countries in the world combined? What other country supplies more weapons to the rest of the world than us? What other country has the production of weapons as their biggest industry? How can any government do all this and then expect their citizens not to use violence themselves to solve disputes? In some respect the gun enthusiasts are right, people kill people, not guns. The Canadians have as many guns loose in their population as ours and kill vastly fewer people than we do.
Violence really does beget violence. The Golden rule should be a lot less inconvenient and a lot more imperative. Tolerance begins at the top. We are so proud, and rightly so, of our own war for independence from colonial rule. How can we then use our vast military might to virtually colonize other countries? There was a time when the statue of Liberty was a beacon to the world for independence and noninterference into the affairs of other nations. There was a time when we would be the last one to enter any war abroad. As one now in his 60's I can remember a youth when no one ever feared being shot at school. It was virtually unheard of. Domestic violence was minimal, drive by shootings didn't exist, the War on Drugs had not yet turned our urban and rural poor areas into barren war zones devoid of stores and people---people not out on their porches and the streets, but hiding behind windows and doors covered by iron bars. To this day the vast majority of American people have never accepted the disgrace of what we did to Vietnam. To have done what we did to the Vietnamese people whose struggle for independence lasted hundred of years ---hundreds of years---first the Chinese, then the French, then the Japanese, then the French again, then finally the United States. What those people went through to win that war is the epic caricature, if there ever was one, of David vs Goliath---with Goliath being in the plural. It would almost make a case for moving the Statue of Liberty over to Hanoi. One can forgive our ignorance at the time, but there can be no forgiveness when we turn around and continually attempt to bomb other countries 'back into the Stone Age'.
How the hell can we expect our own citizens not to use violence on each other, including young teenagers when we have leaders of our own country attacking problems and conflicts with such public preaching as "you can run but you can't hide", "dead or alive" "what ever it takes to win, we will do"? This is not condoning the use of violence by those who set the tone for our own behavior? Then, when those whom we attack respond with "whatever it takes to win, we will do", we call them terrorists. If body counts are used to label who is the biggest terrorist, then we have a commanding lead. But who is winning? Absolutely no one. All societies across the globe, at every level, are losing. We will continue to build bigger, better, and more sophisticated weapons of destruction, whether it be for exterminating people or demolishing buildings----and the growing mobs of ever more desperate people will continue to find simple and effective ways to terrorize our own lives---and like Ho Chi Minh (sp) prophesied: "You will kill ten of us for every one of you we kill, but in the end it is you who will lose". He proved right, we lost and we deserved to lose. None of the reasons for attacking that country proved to have any validity. After hundreds and hundreds of years the Vietnamese finally gained control over their own country. Their War for Independence made our own War for Independence look like a cakewalk.
That forum which debated how to reduce the shootings in our high schools missed the forest for the sake of the trees. There is nothing much one can do about prevention as long as our own country supports violence as the means to solve conflict. Is there anything more absurd than George Bush the Warrior behind a podium telling opposing forces in other countries to stop killing each other and solve their problems peaceably? I don't see much difference between Bush the President and 'Scarface Bubba' the neighborhood gang leader. Both function with the same mentality, the same methods.
The next tidal shock for the American people will be when there is ever a real biological or chemical attack in a major city. All cities now have elaborate plans to deal with such an eventuality. The police, firemen, hospitals, etc all have plans for efficient response. Of course these essential personnel are going to stay on duty and not try to get their own families to safety. Of course. And if Vietnam went communist the whole rest of Asia would fall. Of course. And Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Of course. And the way to win the war on terrorism is to level third world countries back into the Stone Age (they are practically there to start with). Of course. And the way to reduce abuse of recreational drugs is not to treat these problems as medical problems but as criminal actions to be eliminated by the police. Of course. And the band plays on. Can Barack change anything? Time will tell. There really is nothing left but hope, and the supply of that is dwindling at the same exponential rate as our earthly natural resources. We now all get to meet Nero, the famous fiddler----He is us. Zippidy Do Da, Zippy Dey, My, oh my, what a wonderful Day.
My little world has never been very static. Change and curiosity have altered my own perceptions of reality from my teenage years on. Even in the areas of religion and politics nothing was engraved in stone, probably a reflection of little indoctrination from my parents. This freedom to find my own path in life I attribute mostly to my dad. He seldom preached about anything, content to project an image of 'moral aloofness'. He didn't smoke, drink, swear, gamble, cut corners, be secretive about anything, or pull fast ones on anyone. He really annoyed me with all this 'Mr. Goody Two Shoes" stuff. He would wear a suit to a picnic. He couldn't even bother to get even over slights or small injustices. When I did dumb or bad things he expressed disappointment not anger. When my mother would demand he punish or tell me off, he would---in one way or another---say, "He knows right from wrong, he needs to find the strength to not let others lead him in the wrong direction. We didn't teach him to be that way. Now he has to find his own way in life and pay the consequences of any bad decisions." Even his prejudices he pretty much kept to himself, he simply never bad-mouthed anyone or any group. In essence he pretty much left me with a blank slate and a good example of how to live life and treat others.
Somehow I got through adolescence, my productive years, and find the time now in my terminational years to put all the pieces together. At this stage in my life nothing interests me as much as attempting to make sense of this thing called life. There are so many trees that it is almost impossible to see the forest. For someone like myself, a bona-fide social hermit of some sort, the excitement and satisfactions in life come not from others but from within. Others are important to me as some sort of play is interesting to watch. Life around us is really the original big screen TV. Clearly there is more sadness than joy in the lives of most on our globe. I have always really hated that reality---so many people living lives of quiet desperation, hardly knowing which end is up, which way to turn, and precious little support base from which to get any help. It is the trees getting in the way of the forest.
I never doubted the existence of God. At first it was just blind faith in my inherited religious dogmas. With time I felt increasingly uncomfortable with blind faith. Aside from basic moral concepts---concepts universally accepted as moral---the particulars of varied religions seemed invented, always based on someone's recollection of a prophet, and years after the prophet's death. I never doubted the wisdom or moral goodness of these prophets, but emissaries from God was another matter. It seems since the appearance of man on this planet, man always invented God---in one form or another. And God was always humanesque in every conception. To deny the existence of God would be akin to denying the existence of someone who gives you an anonymous gift.
The God created gift of life is found in the evolutionary process. Nothing man made ever remotely compares to the complexities and wonders of nature. I never feel more religious or more in contact with this created evolutionary process than when in nature as a solitary admirer. It is there in nature I know my dad was right. I, like others, know right from wrong. To what extent I ever have the strength to do right rather than wrong is always the question. It is the same question others, in one form or another, must address. We all know the golden rule. It is a global inconvenient truth---a truth which we often work around when it clashes with our own interests, desires, needs.
I listen to Presidential debates and am impressed with their vast knowledge of the trees. Yet when all has been said (but often never done), it is the forest which needs be seen in order to bring any real lasting changes. I doubt ever in the history of man on the earth have so many ominous forces of nature been closing in on the welfare of human life upon this earth. We can stall---we can tinker---we can protect a few at the expense of the many---we can keep our heads in the sand----we can and are doing all of this, but Nature always bats last. Always.
I see 5 global forces of nature closing in on humanity which are not addressed in Presidential debates. Maybe they understand these forces and simply reflect the global attitude of denial.
More likely, the nature of the evolutionary process is such that no species has yet to escape the laws of nature. The notion that God often, if ever, interferes with the laws of nature to personally guide any of us through any land mines of misfortune, is simply not supported by history. These laws of nature apply to all----the good and the bad. We can pray all we want for God to intercede here and there, for this or that situation, but clearly Nature rolls on. Whether we like it or not, we are not, individually or collectively, any kind of end point for justice or happy endings. We're all dead in the long run, at least regarding any earthly life. Any life after death is beyond human comprehension. The justice and brilliance of this created system is that the evolutionary process has always proceeded upwards and onwards to new levels of life.
At any rate, there appear to be at least 5 major forces to be contended with for improving the welfare of human existence. I will address each force separately and just add each force to this musing as I write it up. For now I will only list the first force.
1. Reproductive Responsibility
There are far too many people on this earth for our natural resources to be protected or provide a quality life for all inhabitants on the earth. Every aspect of our environment is now being assaulted past the point of any replenishment or protection. The atmosphere, the land, the sea, other species, minerals and vegetation are all under massive assault by human densities. Politicians can babble all they want about how the good life is going to be spread to all. With the global population as is, this is literally an absurd declaration. The United States alone consumes something like 25 or 35 percent of the energy consumption of the whole world. Anyone who thinks there are enough natural resources to spread this 'good life' to all across the globe, or even to all in our own country, is simply being silly. The choice is clear: impose reproductive responsibility on all populations across the globe or assign increasingly vast numbers of human beings to lives of hopeless cruel desperation. The right of anyone to reproduce at the rate of rabbits is lost to the right of humanity as a whole to protect the quality of life for those born under responsible reproduction laws. It would seem that raising two kids properly is quite enough of an accomplishment for parenting needs. Anything else is just ignorant, selfish, and cruel. A whole book could be written on this topic, but for the purpose here, not necessary. I think most people understand the dilemma here, but just choose not to seriously think about it: "Oh, things will work out, solutions will be found", etc. Yeah, sure. And I am going to live forever. I mean why not, I have so far. There seem to be all around everywhere more horse's asses than horses.
Every few days I will add to this a new major ominous force affecting human destiny. Perhaps you can guess the other four.
#2.
Violence Begets Violence
For all the good and noble principles contained in the American Constitution and the Christian Bible, American society has always been of a rather violent nature. We never really lost the mentality of the 'Wild West'. It seems much of American History is knee deep in our self proclaimed 'manifest destiny'. And 'manifest destiny' has always been used to take what we want at the moment by force. We may feel the Tibetians or the Jews and other abused groups here and there deserve their own state but the American Indians never ended up with even the smallest state in either North or South America. The institution of slavery was seeped in violence and we were one of the last civilized nations to give it up and only after a bloody Civil War that is hard to match in casualties by anyone else's Civil War. At least no other nation came in and controlled or managed our own Civil War. Nations were a bit more sovereign back then. Today sovereignty is ok unless it conflicts with our 'manifest destiny' of the moment.
I watched a forum recently on television in which the participants talked about ways to reduce the number of high school students shot in Chicago. So far this year 23 students have been shot and killed. A few days ago 23 people were shot in one day. None of the participants in the forum seemed able to see the forest for the sake of the trees. The truth is that Americans have been leading the way in using violence as a means of solving conflict. And we have been doing it at every level, in most every arena. To me it seems that while violence can gravitate both ways, the most pervasive influence comes from the top down. If our leaders use violence to solve conflict then this mentality is adopted by citizens across the board. If people think they can stop the violence in public schools without changing the mentality of our own leadership and policies they are mistaken. What other country has engaged itself in endless military operations across the globe? What other country remotely approaches our own policy of supporting 750 military bases in 130 different countries? How many other countries treat recreational drug abuse as a police matter rather than a medical problem to the extent we do? What other country jails anywhere near the number of its citizens as we do per one hundred thousand population? Why do we spend more money on military matters than all the other countries in the world combined? What other country supplies more weapons to the rest of the world than us? What other country has the production of weapons as their biggest industry? How can any government do all this and then expect their citizens not to use violence themselves to solve disputes? In some respect the gun enthusiasts are right, people kill people, not guns. The Canadians have as many guns loose in their population as ours and kill vastly fewer people than we do.
Violence really does beget violence. The Golden rule should be a lot less inconvenient and a lot more imperative. Tolerance begins at the top. We are so proud, and rightly so, of our own war for independence from colonial rule. How can we then use our vast military might to virtually colonize other countries? There was a time when the statue of Liberty was a beacon to the world for independence and noninterference into the affairs of other nations. There was a time when we would be the last one to enter any war abroad. As one now in his 60's I can remember a youth when no one ever feared being shot at school. It was virtually unheard of. Domestic violence was minimal, drive by shootings didn't exist, the War on Drugs had not yet turned our urban and rural poor areas into barren war zones devoid of stores and people---people not out on their porches and the streets, but hiding behind windows and doors covered by iron bars. To this day the vast majority of American people have never accepted the disgrace of what we did to Vietnam. To have done what we did to the Vietnamese people whose struggle for independence lasted hundred of years ---hundreds of years---first the Chinese, then the French, then the Japanese, then the French again, then finally the United States. What those people went through to win that war is the epic caricature, if there ever was one, of David vs Goliath---with Goliath being in the plural. It would almost make a case for moving the Statue of Liberty over to Hanoi. One can forgive our ignorance at the time, but there can be no forgiveness when we turn around and continually attempt to bomb other countries 'back into the Stone Age'.
How the hell can we expect our own citizens not to use violence on each other, including young teenagers when we have leaders of our own country attacking problems and conflicts with such public preaching as "you can run but you can't hide", "dead or alive" "what ever it takes to win, we will do"? This is not condoning the use of violence by those who set the tone for our own behavior? Then, when those whom we attack respond with "whatever it takes to win, we will do", we call them terrorists. If body counts are used to label who is the biggest terrorist, then we have a commanding lead. But who is winning? Absolutely no one. All societies across the globe, at every level, are losing. We will continue to build bigger, better, and more sophisticated weapons of destruction, whether it be for exterminating people or demolishing buildings----and the growing mobs of ever more desperate people will continue to find simple and effective ways to terrorize our own lives---and like Ho Chi Minh (sp) prophesied: "You will kill ten of us for every one of you we kill, but in the end it is you who will lose". He proved right, we lost and we deserved to lose. None of the reasons for attacking that country proved to have any validity. After hundreds and hundreds of years the Vietnamese finally gained control over their own country. Their War for Independence made our own War for Independence look like a cakewalk.
That forum which debated how to reduce the shootings in our high schools missed the forest for the sake of the trees. There is nothing much one can do about prevention as long as our own country supports violence as the means to solve conflict. Is there anything more absurd than George Bush the Warrior behind a podium telling opposing forces in other countries to stop killing each other and solve their problems peaceably? I don't see much difference between Bush the President and 'Scarface Bubba' the neighborhood gang leader. Both function with the same mentality, the same methods.
The next tidal shock for the American people will be when there is ever a real biological or chemical attack in a major city. All cities now have elaborate plans to deal with such an eventuality. The police, firemen, hospitals, etc all have plans for efficient response. Of course these essential personnel are going to stay on duty and not try to get their own families to safety. Of course. And if Vietnam went communist the whole rest of Asia would fall. Of course. And Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Of course. And the way to win the war on terrorism is to level third world countries back into the Stone Age (they are practically there to start with). Of course. And the way to reduce abuse of recreational drugs is not to treat these problems as medical problems but as criminal actions to be eliminated by the police. Of course. And the band plays on. Can Barack change anything? Time will tell. There really is nothing left but hope, and the supply of that is dwindling at the same exponential rate as our earthly natural resources. We now all get to meet Nero, the famous fiddler----He is us. Zippidy Do Da, Zippy Dey, My, oh my, what a wonderful Day.
THE END MUST BE NEAR
The End Must Be Near
Time Magazine is giving their readers a chance to select the world's most influential people. So I went on line at Time.com to participate and they give you the running total so far. I have sometimes referred to Obama as maybe the last best hope civilization has. This has to be a nugacious inane futile hope. According to the readers of Time Magazine these are the top five most influential people in the world.
1. Rain (Who the hell is this?)
2. Stephanie Meyer
3. Britany Spears
4. Stephen Colbert
5. Madonna
Whoa! Stop the World I want to get off.
Obama came in 6th. Does that mean there is a slimmer of hope or that I am one position away from the prevalent mentality? George Bush came in 186th. Well, he shouldn't complain, his calibre of mental acuity swept the first 5 places. Of course the real kicker is that after my defending Terrell Owens for the last couple of years he didn't even make the list at all. Pout, pout, pout.
Time Magazine is giving their readers a chance to select the world's most influential people. So I went on line at Time.com to participate and they give you the running total so far. I have sometimes referred to Obama as maybe the last best hope civilization has. This has to be a nugacious inane futile hope. According to the readers of Time Magazine these are the top five most influential people in the world.
1. Rain (Who the hell is this?)
2. Stephanie Meyer
3. Britany Spears
4. Stephen Colbert
5. Madonna
Whoa! Stop the World I want to get off.
Obama came in 6th. Does that mean there is a slimmer of hope or that I am one position away from the prevalent mentality? George Bush came in 186th. Well, he shouldn't complain, his calibre of mental acuity swept the first 5 places. Of course the real kicker is that after my defending Terrell Owens for the last couple of years he didn't even make the list at all. Pout, pout, pout.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)