Politics, Passions, Economics and Care Giving:  What is life really about?

02 Oct 2016 Leave a comment

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Last week I turned 70 years old.  This was quite a milestone for a guy who once did not think there was any life beyond thirty.  This week, I attended the 52nd Nobel Conference at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter Minnesota.   I would bet Minnesota has more towns named after saints than any other state or perhaps even country in the world.  One wonders why these early Scandinavians who settled in this area of the Midwest needed to pay so much homage to saints.  Knowing as many Lutherans as I do (My spouse belongs to this crazy cult of Christians) I would have thought that they would have named more cities after composers.  We should have dozens of cities with names like: Bach, Beethoven, Brahms, Praetorius, Vulpius, Schein, Schütz and of course Handel.  Is there a Lutheran who has not song the Halleluiah Chorus?  However, I digress.

Monday night this week, Karen and I watched the “Great Debate” live on Facebook or YouTube.  The debate featured the two presidential candidates for the USA in their first head to head confrontation.  The purpose of such debates is to demonstrate the candidates’ positions on key policy issues and to highlight their competency or lack of competency for the job.  However, everyone knew or expected that the debate might deal with everything from sex to gender and even past indiscretions of the candidate’s spouses.  The true wild card (besides Trump) was the moderator.  In the past, the moderators have been unable to control the debaters and this fault was even more egregious with Trump.  Thus this debate had the potential of a no-holds boxing much with no rules that would make an MMA (mixed martial arts) match look tame.

In round one, Hillary came out first and as Trevor Noah noted gave the first lie of the evening.  She said “Donald, it is good to be here with you tonight” or something like that.  The first round was tame with each candidate feeling the other out.  Like two boxers probing each other to see where the weak points were they were both careful to be courteous and to look presidential.

donald-trump-vs-hillary-clinton

Of course, as is now well known and thus shall not be endlessly repeated, the debate went downhill from there, as least as far as Trump was concerned.  If anyone thought that he could “stay on topic” or demonstrate an even rudimentary knowledge of policy and positions, I will be happy to sell them the Brooklyn Bridge.  His supporters must be either delusional or stupid.  Only sycophants or as we used to call them in school “ass kissers” like Giuliani and Christie would have thought that Trump looked anything but the sexist and bigot that he is.

Hillary won every round as Trump made a fool of himself in the following areas:

  • Appearing unprepared
  • Bragging about not paying taxes
  • Bragging about his bankruptcies being smart business
  • Continuing to insult women and call them names
  • Continually interrupting and shouting over the moderator and Hillary
  • Having no concrete plans or ideas that were practical or feasible

Subsequent polls now show Hillary back up by several points and Donald on the decline again.  However, it is too early to declare the game over as there are still too many people out there who flip flop every day and who seem to change their minds depending on which way the wind is blowing.

people-with-passion-can-change-the-world-for-the-better

People with Passion can Change the World for the Better

Traveling down to St. Peter on Tuesday to pick up my friend Vic who was going to the conference with me, I finished another one of the Great Courses by the Teaching Company.  This one was called “The Passions: Philosophy and the Intelligence of Emotions” by Professor Robert C. Solomon.  This was an audio course that you play in your car.  I have completed several of these now and the quality of these courses is very high.  The speakers are outstanding and the lectures are usually quite enthralling.  These courses make long trips much less tedious and as a bonus you learn something about life.  I learned about the importance of emotions and as opposed to my old idea that emotions (like Spock thought) were useless impediments in life.  I now appreciate how much they add to my life.  Life without emotions would be a world without color.

2016-logoOn Tuesday and Wednesday along with my good friend Vic Ward, I attended the 52nd Nobel Conference which was titled:  “In Search of Economic Balance.”  It featured many illustrious and highly respected economists such as:  Dan Ariely, Orley Ashenfelter, Paul Collier, Deirdre McCloskey, John List and several other well-known economists.  After every lecture, there was a panel discussion where the speaker and several of the other economists had a chance to discuss and interact.  Following these discussions, my friend and I debated, discussed and summarized what we thought were the most important points of each lecture.  I attended eight lectures, six panel discussions and numerous discussions each evening with Vic.

jims-apple-farmOn the way back from St. Peter, we stopped Jim’s Apple Farm when we saw a sign that said “Next exit, Minnesota’s largest candy store.”  I bought several treats for Karen and the guys at the library in Frederic. Jim’s lived up to its billing.  It may just be the largest candy store in the US. It is certainly the largest candy store I have ever been in.

I returned home late on Thursday and had a brief respite before traveling out again.  On Friday, Karen and I went to New Richmond to attend the 10th Annual Regional Caregivers Conference at the Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College.  The theme this year was “Finding Hope, Humor and Heart in Caregiving.”  The keynote speaker was Elaine Sanchez, author and co-founder of Caregiverhelp.com.

Karen and I both attended Elaine’s keynote speech and then Karen went to a session on music therapy while I attended a session on “Coping with Anger and Guilt in Caregiving” that was also given by Elaine Sanchez.  I have to say that Ms. Sanchez was one of the best speakers I have ever heard in my life.  The major thrust of the conference this year was dealing with people who are getting old (Karen and I) and how to handle people with conditions such as Dementia, Delirium, Alzheimers and Depression with love and compassion.  My background as you might know has little to do with such medicine.  However, with Karen and I both passing the 7th decade of our lives, the future has an increasing probability that one or the other of us will sooner or later face a debilitating condition that will require the other of us to provide care and support.  Thus, the purpose of attending this conference was for us to better learn the basics of caregiving for the elderly.

2016-conference-banner-for-web_post-conference-version_thin-1024x248Karen having spent thirty years of her life in Home Health Care is much better grounded and infinitely more knowledgeable than I am in this area.  Many of the ideas in the conference sessions were basic for her but for me the opposite was true.  I had my eyes opened and many of my concepts about conditions such as Dementia have now been thrown out the window.  I cannot begin to describe how much I learned at this conference and how valuable the ideas were for me.

Perhaps even more important than the knowledge and theory I learned was the fact that Karen and I are both committed to continuing our journey through life together no matter what obstacles are thrown in our way.  Karen had a mammogram on Monday of this week and when we returned home from the conference on Friday, we found an envelope in the mail from the clinic.  The results were not entirely positive and she now has to go back to the clinic for some follow-up tests.  Karen’s mother died from breast cancer so this is a particularly threatening and scary area for her.  Each day seems to bring good news and bad news and a never ending challenge to stay positive in the face of the difficulties that growing old poses.  I am sorry to tell you but one does not grow old like fine wine at least in the physical domain and often not in the mental domain either.

The week is now coming to a close.  We have visitors from out of town today and Sunday may just be the first day this week where nothing is happening.  But looking back on the week, can anyone tell me what ties these conferences, debates and courses together?  What do the subjects of politics, economics, passions and care giving have in common?  Four seemingly very disparate themes, yet a common thread clearly run through all of them.  Like a mosaic or kaleidoscope, the more I journey through life, the more apparent the interconnectedness of all life is.

Donald Trump will soon be ancient history and like Joe McCarthy will be relegated to the garbage bin of American political life.  His supporters will disappear as the political landscape is placed back into a better equilibrium with life and nature.  Hillary Clinton will become the first woman in American history to be elected president.  The clown that called her a crook and liar will become a laughing stock and an embarrassment to the people that supported him.  Few people will admit that they voted for this bottom feeder.

Life will go on.  Baby Boomers will continue to age.  Many will suffer from some form of Dementia.  The major problem of American life will turn from dealing with economic issues to how we can take care of so many elderly people who have no money and cannot take care of themselves.  It is a question that politicians, economists and caregivers must all have passion about or we will have a national catastrophe of epic proportions.  If we do not pay attention to these issues, we will have a Great Depression but it will not be an economic depression but a Depression of Care and Love for our growing elders.

Time for Questions:

What did you do this week?  Was it a good week or a bad week for you? Did you learn anything new this week?  What did you learn?  Do you enjoy life or find it boring?

Life is just beginning.

I guess we have all heard that tired old bromide “Today is the first day of the rest of your life” but if it is not then what is it?  Today may not be the first day of life for some people, it may just be the last day.

 

Bigots, Liars and Right Wing Radio Talk Show Hosts

20 Sep 2016 41 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , ,

There is a perfidious odoriferous evil in this country that is labeled as “Radio Talk Show Hosts.”  This panoply of would be patriots and dispensers of sage wisdom includes such infamous names as Michael Savage, Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Glen Beck, Bill O’Reilly and most infamous of all Rush Limbaugh.  Each of these commentators is supported by millions of naive and gullible people, who listen, believe and follow the guidance and supposed advice of these slick Goebbels like hucksters.  goebbelsHucksters who purport to share truth, knowledge and insight on the everyday happenings of politics and society.  Only in America, with our First Amendment rights would such liars and hypocrites be tolerated.  Ironically, these slanderers are 100 percent supportive of the Second Amendment but have mixed tolerance for the First Amendment.  They love the First Amendment when it protects their right to lie, exaggerate, falsify and spread vicious innuendos (Obama is not an American, Obama is not a Christian, Autism is a fraud, etc.), but they hate it when it supports the rights of others to speak out against injustice and deception.

Let me digress for a moment.  You might be thinking:  “John is labeling and using pejorative terminology to describe these people whom he obviously does not respect, how is this any different from what he is accusing them of doing?”  Good question.  Here is the simple answer.  I am not getting paid or making any money from what I am telling you.  Read this if you want to or not.  It’s not going to put any money in my pocket.  Rush Limbaugh’s annual salary is seventy million dollars.  These radio talk show hosts are making millions of dollars by sowing rancor, discord and disillusionment.  Furthermore I condemn their behavior and I hope to show the key principles that we should all follow when engaged in public discourse of any type.  Principles that I believe would return civility and respect to our government and airwaves.

If the ranting’s of these vicious individuals were strictly entertainment and was recognized as such, I would have no problem.  However, when lies are mistaken for truth, when innuendoes are mistaken for facts and when hyperbole substitutes for civility, we all have a problem.  Too many of these radio talk show hosts are listened to and trusted by millions of Americans.  They use the same tools of propaganda developed by the Nazis to spread “big lies” which are believed by their listeners.  What should a listener be asking and expecting of those who are highly paid to dispense such advice and information?  I think there are three principles which should be in the forefront of any audience’s mind when tuning into a radio talk show host or for that matter any so-called expert or talking head.   Failure to follow these principles results in misinformation, misdirection and all too often a general miscarriage of justice.

  1. Search for facts and truth
  2. Civility and respect for the opposition
  3. Win-win and the Golden Mean.

Before we begin to look at these three principles, just a few of the type of vitriolic and extremist comments made by these talk show hosts will serve to illustrate my points about degrading, hyperbolic and vicious speech.

“The shutdown was so magnificent, run beautifully.  I’m so proud of these Republicans, and that is because they have branded the Republican party as the anti-Obamacare party.” – Ann Coulter

“If homosexuality being inborn is what makes it acceptable, why does racism being inborn not make racism acceptable? … We are born that way. We don’t choose it. So shouldn’t it be acceptable, excuse — this is according to the way the left thinks about things.” – Rush Limbaugh

“My main point remains true, It is an over diagnosed medical condition. In my readings, there is no definitive medical diagnosis for autism.” – Michael Savage

“The government is full of vampires, and they are trying to suck the lifeblood out of the economy.” – Glenn Beck

Sean Hannity claimed that White House science and technology adviser John Holdren “advocated compulsory abortion” and sterilization.  PolitiFact had previously rated a similar claim — made months earlier by Fox News’ Glenn Beck — “pants on fire” false. 

Barbara Espinoza took to her website and boldly admits that she called the president a “monkey,” and then defends the racist statement by noting that, “Unless there has been a takeover of America and free speech is no longer allowed and I can be put to death for making a remark, I refuse to take the fifth.”

Finally, a comment by Ed Schultz that pretty much sums up much of the rhetoric used by the right wing talk show pundits.

“There’s something very ugly and dangerous going on in this country,” Schultz said. “Right wing talk show hosts seem to be amping up racist and reckless rhetoric like never before … the level of racist and violent rhetoric on hard-right wing radio today is off the charts.”

A brief caveat before we look at the three principles I am advocating for public and civil discourse.  I have omitted any recognition of extreme, incendiary, racist or outrageous comments on the part of “left” wing talk show hosts, such as Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Keith Olbermann, Thom Hartmann and others (See List of progressive talk radio hosts in the United States).  I readily admit my bias is liberal and progressive.  I also admit that I am frequently entertained by the comments of Jon Stewart, Bill Maher and other liberals.  I find them less violent, less inflammatory, less racist and less reactionary than any of the right wing commentators I have noted.  Nevertheless, the rules I am going to discuss apply to them as well.  Whether or not they are right wing or left wing commentators, these principles should apply.  I believe “We the People” should hold commentators to the same standards of dialogue and discourse regardless of political persuasion.  Whether or not you are right leaning or left leaning, let us all expect that people who are paid to elucidate and illuminate the rest of the country, will and must be conservative and cautionary with their rhetoric.

Search for facts and truth:

The first principle for honest discourse is a search for Truth based on facts.  True, facts can be elusive.  For instance, what is the height of Mt. Everest?  What is the population of New York City?  Who is the richest woman in the world?  What movie star is the most popular?  Facts change since the world is not a static entity.  Many things that were once facts are now in the dust bin of antiquity.  The search for truth is a process that relies on facts to confirm decisions that are then judged to be true or false.  For instance, a trial revolves around evidence that either supports a verdict of guilty or not guilty.  The elusiveness of truth is well illustrated by the famous Rashomon story wherein a robber, a bridegroom, a bride and an innocent bystander all give widely differing versions of an alleged rape and murder.  The famous lawyer Clarence Darrow once said that “there is nothing as unreliable as an eye witness.”  Dr. W. E. Deming, the noted quality expert often said that there is nothing in life that can be determined with 100 percent accuracy.  He noted that “it all depends on how you measure something and that all measurement relies on a process.”  One process will reveal one set of metrics or “facts” and another process will reveal another set of metrics and facts.

If facts are indeterminate and truth must be based on facts, is there any truth in the world?  The answer is that truth exists if we think of it as a “range of possibilities.”  For instance, was Jodi Arias guilty or innocent?  The probability is high that she is guilty but not a 100 percent certainty.  Jurors are warned that they must be certain of their verdict beyond a “Reasonable” doubt.  But what is reasonable to one person might be wild conjecture to another.  Can we depend on a written confession?   How many innocent people have been coerced into “false” confessions?  Can we depend on anyone telling the truth?  Confessions often depend on how much the person has to gain or lose by “telling the truth.”  Workers in many organizations quickly learn whether telling the truth is a valued asset or a major liability.

Thus, the search for truth must be an ongoing pursuit.   Richard Feynman, the Nobel Prize winner in physics said that the highest obligation of a scientist is to prove they are wrong.  The search for truth in science is a series of successive approximations.  We learn more, we accumulate more facts, we find more reliable and valid data and our theories of reality become stronger or they are jettisoned in favor of new paradigms that better fit the facts.

Imagine then, if talk show hosts treated the “Truth” as a pursuit of knowledge and not as an absolute reality that belonged to one party or one individual.

Civility and respect for the opposition:

The second principle for civil discourse is Civility.  Unfortunately, every day brings new instances of incivility and a culture of narcissism and self-absorption.  In many cases, we see rampant greed and a total disregard for the welfare of others.   In the worst cases, we see school shootings, murders for money, road rage resulting in violent encounters and a hostile culture where few people feel safe at night on any major city street in the USA.  Do I attribute this to talk show hosts?  Did incivility come first and lead to the selection of such commentators as Michael Savage and Ann Coulter or did the latter talk show hosts contribute to the wide spread increase of disrespect and hostility in our culture?   My guess is it’s a two way street.  There are no doubt many other major factors. However, when you look at the number of people that are tuned into these talk show hosts, you cannot deny the impact that their vitriol and hate has had on those who look to them for advice and inspiration.

I spent over three years regularly listening to the so called “Patriot” radio station when I lived in Minnesota.  Daily diatribes by people like Mike Medved and Hugh Hewitt each trying to outdo Mike Savage in terms of gross invective and vile comments about the presidents, liberals, gays, democrats, college professors, college educated people, women, minorities, disabled and even elderly.  Day after day, hour after hour of endless demeaning, hateful and malicious comments made about anyone who they did not deem sufficiently patriotic by their narrow definition of patriotism.  Time and again I was reminded of Samuel Johnson’s comment that “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”

Civility is defined as: “Formal politeness and courtesy in behavior or speech.”    Civility does not exist in talk radio.  Most of these talk show hosts are abject cowards.  They hide behind their microphones and distance from others to insult and demean those whom they want to attack.  They are bullies of the worst kind, since they will not even come out to face their opponents.   These bigots want to equate patriotism with military service and heroism with serving on the front lines, but look at the record for most of the top bigots.

  • Mike Savage, did not serve
  • Sean Hannity, did not serve
  • Rush Limbaugh, did not serve
  • Bill O’Reilly, did not serve
  • Michael Medved, did not serve
  • Glen Beck, did not serve

I won’t even mention Ann Coulter (Cornell University) or Laura Ingraham (Dartmouth) both of whom are Ivy League graduates and never served a day in their life except as high paid business or legal consultants.

The more cowardly these phony patriots are the more they fly the flags of patriotism, jingoism, chauvinism, racism, xenophobia and intolerance.  Ralph W. Sockman once noted that “The test of courage comes when we are in the minority.  The test of tolerance comes when we are in the majority.”  These pitiful excuses for humanity neither demonstrate tolerance or courage.  Indeed, they demonstrate the exact opposite.  They are intolerant when they feel they are in the majority and then attack those who are weaker and more defenseless.  When in the minority, they are silent cowards who hide behind the First Amendment, the American Flag and hollow calls to their servile brand of patriotism.

Let the American people start judging politicians, TV hosts and Radio Talk show hosts by their civility and respect for their opponents.  Americans who value respect, politeness and civility need to tune out anyone, right or left who has no respect for others, unless of course, the others have demonstrated time and time again that they have no respect for those who disagree with them.

Win-Win and the Golden Mean

My third principle for civil discourse concerns the Golden Mean and the concept of win-win.  The Golden Mean was a principle first noted by the ancient Greeks to denote the idea that moderation was the guiding principle of a successful and happy State and human existence.

 In philosophy, especially that of Aristotle, the golden mean is the desirable middle between two extremes, one of excess and the other of deficiency.  For example, courage, a virtue, if taken to excess would manifest as recklessness and if deficient as cowardice.  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_mean_(philosophy)

The win-win concept first became popular with Steven Covey’s book “The Seven Habits of Highly Successful People.”  Other writers such as Alfie Cohn and Edward De Bono also wrote about the power of the concept and its unique position to make allies out of former enemies.  In a win-win scenario, would be antagonists move from an adversarial negotiation to a problem-solving mode in which the goal is to find an outcome or outcomes that are highly desirable to both parties.  Win-win theory stresses the importance of a joint decision that supersedes even compromise.  Unlike compromise, wherein everyone sacrifices to attain a mutual decision, in win-win, the parties seek to avoid decisions that are less than optimal for either party.  Compromise is always a fallback position but win-lose is not admissible in the set of desired outcomes.

Now imagine for a minute, a group of Republicans and Democrats, or a group of pro-choice and anti-abortion advocates or a group of conservatives and a group of liberals all sitting down to a win-win scenario.  Instead of bargaining, fighting, positioning, game playing and slimy tricks to get better position, the participants sit down in a spirit of cooperation and good will.  Each one knowing that the principle of the Golden Mean entails finding an optimum solution that lies somewhere between the two extremes or perhaps even in a different frame.  Now you can imagine what the Founding Fathers were able to do and why the documents that this country were built on are so magnificent.  As Abraham Lincoln said:

“The true rule, in determining to embrace, or reject any thing, is not whether it have any evil in it; but whether it have more of evil, than of good. There are few things wholly evil, or wholly good.  Almost everything, especially of governmental policy, is an inseparable compound of the two; so that our best judgment of the preponderance between them is continually demanded.”

Conclusion:

I am talking about “EVIL” people here.  The Nazis were evil.  Why, because they sowed hatred, intolerance, injustice, contempt, racism, genocide, murder and destruction.  They used the machinery of democracy to establish a reign of terror like the world had never seen before or since.  Many Americans have asked “Could it happen here.”  Goring said:

“Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship.”

The Nazis laughed as they led Germany into destruction and as their propaganda machine convinced millions of innocent Germans that they were protecting Aryan supremacy and the German way of life.  Millions of Americans are being led down the a similar road of hatred and intolerance by these Nazis style commentators who call themselves Radio Talk Show hosts.  Hitler said: “I do not see why man should not be just as cruel as nature.”  Himmler said: “The best political weapon is the weapon of terror. Cruelty commands respect. Men may hate us. But, we don’t ask for their love; only for their fear.”  Talk shows feed on the fear and cruelty that they not only exacerbate but they also create.

In my 67 years on this earth, I have been to Presbyterian, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Catholic, Unitarian, Baptist, Methodist and several non-denominational churches.  I have attended over 30 Jesuit Retreats at Demontreville Retreat Center in Minnesota.  I do not claim to be a great Christian.  I do not claim to turn the other cheek as often as I should.  I do not claim to help my fellow man as often as needed.  What I do claim is that in not one of these houses of worship, have I ever seen Jesus portrayed as a racist or a sower of hatred and intolerance.  In the famous parable of the adulterous woman, Jesus said: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”  In Jesus’s parable of the Good Samaritan, he said “Who is the neighbor to him who fell among the robbers?”  In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus said “And why beholds thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but consider not the beam that is in thy own eye?”  Over and over again, Jesus preached love and forgiveness.  Where does Jesus say “Go and preach hate?”  “Go and preach intolerance.”  “Go and preach bigotry.”

Time for Questions:

Has fear blinded too many Americans to the symptoms of bigotry and intolerance and incivility that are symptomatic of many Talk Show Hosts?  Are you going to church on Sunday and applauding Rush Limbaugh on Monday?  Are you silent in the face of hypocrisy, racism, sexism and homophobia?  Do you take a stand on your principles whether you are Christian, Catholic, Muslim or Jewish?  Are you following principle of love and forgiveness or an “Eye for an Eye?”  What can we do to abolish the pervasive malice, hostility and meanness that are symptomatic of Radio Talk Shows today?

Life is just beginning.

 

Evolution in Reverse:  From Homo Sapiens to Trump Deplorables.

11 Sep 2016 14 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Dancing Racists-2I ponder at a quote by the author Stephen King in which he notes that Donald Trump will never get elected but “he has certainly exposed the ugly underbelly of conservatives in America today.”  I think about this comment because (by recent polls) Trump has a large percentage of voters in his camp who qualify for the “Deplorables” label than Clinton so recently used.  Ironic that the King of Insult and Slander now says “anyone who makes such comments about Americans is not fit to be president.”  The truth is that anyone who fits into this underbelly or “deplorables” category is not fit to be an American.  They share nothing in common with the values that our Founding Fathers had for this country.

This “underbelly” that King refers to and that Hillary calls “Deplorables” is a group of racist, xenophobic, sexist, ignorant bigots who belong to such fringe groups as the Tea Party, KKK, Aryan Brotherhood and Sons of the Confederacy.  Many who do not belong to these groups simply espouse racist and bigoted ideologies hiding in the sanctuary of their own homes. These are largely uninformed and uneducated people attracted to the glamour and promises that Trump seems to hold out.  Vote for Trump and you can be great again.  No more mortgages!  No more taxes!  No more government telling you what to do or not to do!  No more immigrants taking your job and standard of living away!  Be able to tell it like it is and don’t worry about political correctness!

“The Ku Klux Klan is using Donald Trump as a talking point in its outreach efforts.  Stormfront, the most prominent American white supremacist website, is upgrading its servers in part to cope with a Trump traffic spike.  And former Louisiana Rep. David Duke reports that the businessman has given more Americans cover to speak out loud about white nationalism than at any time since his own political campaigns in the 1990s.” — White supremacist Groups See Trump Bump – 12-10-15

Racists+not+oc_0826f0_4310362Today, we now know (thanks to Trump) that we have at least ten million US citizens who think that Donald Trump could deliver on such promises as noted above.  This latter fact simply astounds the rest of us (180,000,000) registered voters who would sooner drown ourselves than see Donald Trump as president.  The majority of US voters know that Trump is a buffoon and a bigot playing on the heart strings and delusions of a minority of people who have no clue what the USA stands for or what our Founding Fathers envisioned for this country.

We_want_white_tenantsI am not worried about Trump.  King is right. He will never be elected.  I am worried about the disillusioned and hapless people who are supporting him.  These people are the real threat to America not Donald Trump.  Cast out by an economic system that rewards the most competitive, the Trump supporters are the least competitive and most hard hit by the recent economic recession.  Statistics tell us that Trump’s supporters make up a large segment of the population who are unemployed and unemployable.  I should say unemployable at a wage sufficient to support a family.  Just like in Germany during the recession, it was this same type of people who were most attracted to Hitler.  They were the unemployed, uneducated and people who felt life had been unfair to them.  When Hitler came to power, they became his willing disciples and minions.  The parallels between the hate and xenophobia espoused by both Hitler and Trump would be uncanny, if not for the fact that it is and always will be predictable.  The formula to create such hate and bigotry has been the same for four thousand years.

Here is the formula:  Lack of education + lack of economic opportunities + a notable minority population + one hate filled leader = Prejudice, Discrimination and Violence.  

neo nazisLeaders throughout history have used the above formula to incite their followers to acts of hatred which have taken such forms as the inquisition, pogroms, mass deportations, genocide and the Holocaust.  It has always been the same formula and it has always worked.  The hapless, ignorant and hopeless are lured by the sirens of revenge and retribution to take action against a targeted minority group who are portrayed as having stolen their hopes and dreams.  The solution is to eradicate the despicable group and thereby restore the future that was stolen from the hapless and ignorant.

Listen to the V for Vendetta “Revolution” speech:  Speech

Protest At Ground Zero

NEW YORK – JULY 4: Shirley Phelps-Roper holds up signs as she joins fellow members of the Westboro Baptist Church, from Topeka, Kansas, as they protest across the street from Ground Zero July 4, 2004 in New York City. The church members believe that because of homosexuals and America’s rebelious and immoral conducts, God has brought on acts of terrorism as a way of punishing society. (Photo by Monika Graff/Getty Images)

I often listen to right-wing religious fundamentalists and one of their favorite refrains is “The end is near.”  In their minds, the just will be rewarded with a life of happiness and prosperity.  The unjust (anyone who does not subscribe to their particular religious orientation) will be condemned and punished to a life of pain and hell fire.  Many of these fundamentalists deny the concept of evolution in favor of what they call “Intelligent Design.”  This is a creed that subscribes to a literal interpretation of the Bible in which an all-powerful God created the world in 7 days.  No primordial soup, no dinosaurs, no Homo sapiens predecessors.  Adam was created by God and Eve was created out of one of Adam’s ribs.

It is interesting that after about two hundred years of science proving the Theory of Evolution that we seem to have more people than ever before who endorse the idea of “Intelligent Design.”  Darwin’s theories suggest that more intelligent people would have a better chance of surviving, hence propagating even more intelligent people as the gene pool favors those with a higher I.Q.  However, when we look at Trump and his supporters, this concept does not seem to be working.  The number of people who support Trump is simply astounding.  Could we be de-evolving?  Could we be regressing mentally?  Will the dumb inherit the earth?

paineOne would have thought that most of the Neanderthals who succumb more easily to bigotry and hatred would be on the decline.  Instead, in the last few years throughout much of the world, it seems as though the fanatics, racists, and bigots are on the incline.  Witness the rise of ISIS and its supporters all over the world.  What is happening?  Was Darwin wrong?  Is the world witnessing a devolution instead of an evolution?  Donald Trump and his followers seem to be evidence that not all of the population has been evolving according to Darwin’s Laws.  A sizable portion of US citizens seem to be going from intelligent thinking rationale Homo sapiens to stupid unthinking racist bigoted Homo rednecks.  Where will this end and what will we do with these Neanderthals?

Listen to Charlie Chaplin’s “Great Dictator” speech:   Speech

hitler and trumpMost of the US is supportive of the idea of destroying foreign Muslim terrorists.  But what of domestic right-wing terrorists?    What about the home grown nutcases, terrorists, Nazis and extremists in the USA?  If we assume that the KKK, racists and sexists in the USA are of the same ilk and just as dangerous to liberty and freedom as Islamic terrorists, then when do we wage war on our domestic terrorists?  When will we enlist the Army, National Guard, police and other liberty protectors to jail and wipe out these home grown extremists?  Should we allow American Neo-Nazis the right of free speech and the right to vote, when we lost nearly a half a million citizens in a war to save the world from the Nazis and Japanese warlords only seventy years ago?

homophobesWhy are we tolerating groups wearing swastikas, Nazi armbands and Hitler slogans?  Groups parading around against immigrants.  Groups who make a mockery of the values that this country was built on.  This tolerance is a disgrace to the Founding Fathers.  It is a disgrace to the Union soldiers who fought for the freedom and equality of African Americans.  It is a disgrace and affront to the soldiers that lost their lives fighting the Fascists.  It is a disgrace to the people in this country who are first and second generation Americans.  Finally, it is a disgrace to all people who believe in the idea of “liberty and justice for all” which is a part of the Pledge of Allegiance to our country.

“If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace.  We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”  — Samuel Adams

As patriotic citizens, we need to stop applying double standards.  We need to treat domestic enemies as ruthlessly as we do foreign enemies.  We need to stop tolerating extremists in this country just as we despise extremists in other countries.  Goldwater was wrong.  Extremism is not a virtue.  Extremism of any sort is an evil insidious disease that if left untreated will spread and infect an entire nation.  We need to speak out against extremists, whether left, right, foreign or domestic.  There can be no room for extremists in a country based on Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. There are many who forget that freedom for oneself is based on freedom for all.  Anyone who would take away freedom from others has no right to freedom for themselves.

“Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves” — Abraham Lincoln

I want to remind some of you of a recent history in the USA.  It was a time between about 1950 and 1990 when smokers had rights and non-smokers had no rights.  Smokers could light up wherever they wanted to from offices to parks to restaurants to hospital waiting rooms.  If you were a nonsmoker, smokers could blow smoke in your face, put the ashes out in your car and throw their butts wherever they wanted to.  Nonsmokers had no rights to challenge this behavior.  Smokers were simply executing their constitutional rights to pollute the air and help the rest of us develop pulmonary lung conditions.

Well, the times finally changed.  The large corporations that tried so hard to make smoking glamorous and dispute the idea that cigarettes were a major contributing cause of lung cancer, finally succumbed to a combination of lawsuits, anti-smoking campaigns and citizen awareness.  Non-smokers have rights to.  The right to clean air and the right not to have to be around people who indiscriminately smoke.  In what was a long battle against smokers, smokers finally became the “bad” guys and non-smokers are now the good guys.

What does this have to do with Neanderthals?  About a week ago, a disgruntled smoker was asked to put his cigarette out in a Waffle House restaurant.  He pulled out a 9-mm handgun and shot the waitress to death.  An aberration?  An anomaly?  A freak occurrence?  I think not.  Rather, we have an example of an individual who believed his right to do whatever he wanted to, whenever he wanted to “TRUMPS” the rights of the rest of us.  This is the same behavior that is exhibited by racists, sexists, bigots and right-wing fundamentalists.  They are all infected with the idea that their beliefs and ideology are so important that those of us who do not subscribe to their nut case philosophies have no rights.  In the worst of cases, such as the Waffle House, they believe that we have no right to live.  This must change.  How you might well ask can it change?  How do we erase bigotry and hatred?

Waffle House Customer Shoots and Kills Waitress over No-Smoking Policy

against racismThe only way it will change is for good people to speak out.  Speak out against racism.  Speak out against sexism.  Speak out against homophobia.  Speak out against intolerance.  Speak out against injustice and discrimination.  You don’t know what to say?  It’s simple.  WWJD?  A meme that I see on a lot of t-shirts provides one reply that all Christians should endorse.  If you are not a Christian, simply practice the Golden Rule or some other rule that shows respect and love for others who are not like you.  That’s what Jesus, Gandhi, King and many other great leaders would do.

“You must be the change you wish to see in the world.” — Mahatma Gandhi

BTY:  I still like to smoke a pipe or a cigar once in a while.  I do not smoke where others will be subjected to the smoke or smell.  My father and sister were both heavy smokers and both died from lung cancer. My father was 60 when he died after two lung operations and my sister was 58 when she died.  I stopped smoking regularly when I was diagnosed with a pre-cancerous lung condition about 9 years ago.  Hoping a very infrequent pipe or cigar will not kill me before I get run over crossing the street.

Time for Questions:

Why do you think so many people seem to hate others?  What causes intolerance and bigotry?  Do you have friends who are bigots, sexists, racists?  What do you do about their attitudes?  Do you challenge their ideas or do you simply ignore them?  When should we challenge bigots and extremists?

Life is just beginning.

“Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature…. If the next centennial does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.”  — James Garfield, the twentieth president of the United States, 1877

“Toute nation a le gouvernement qu’elle mérite” — Joseph de Maistre

 

 

Irony, Paradox and Serendipity or why a Donkey knew best!

07 Sep 2016 19 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Once upon a time, back when animals could talk and people did not rule the world, there was a donkey named Isaiah.  Isaiah was the wisest animal in the land.  He knew everything about life and death.  All of the animals, even the owls came to Isaiah when they had a question they could not answer or when they had a key decision to make.  The most intelligent people in the world would also come to Isaiah when they had a problem they could not figure out.   Isaiah was not only  intelligent but he was kind as well.  Now that might seem like a paradox to some.  Can we be intelligent and also kind?  Were not managers at Enron the “smartest men in the room?”  Maybe, but Enron’s senior management would hardly seem to qualify as kind when you consider the damage they did to the lives of their employees.   In truth, it often seems that the greatest paradoxes of all time, involve the harm done by “highly intelligent people.”  The world is full of examples of smart people who do great harm because they care little for the feelings or welfare of others. Fortunately for the world, Isaiah was not this kind of creature.  He was the epitome of wisdom because he combined intelligence with feelings and empathy for others.

No matter what the problem, Isaiah would always consider the potential damage and impact on others of his decisions and choices.  Whenever he reasoned out a problem, the morals and ethics of the problem were just as important to Isaiah as the solutions.  A solution which caused damage to anyone was not seen as a good solution.   Many of the people and animals were skeptical that Isaiah could always find a win-win solution but somehow Isaiah always did.  Most people find that the key decisions they make result in ironic outcomes that they would not have been able to predict.  This was not the case with Isaiah’s solutions.  His outcomes were never ironic.  Isaiah seemed to have the ability (like Merlin) to foresee the future.  Within the unlimited possibilities of various time-lines that the future laid out, Isaiah could always find the optimal path.

Once when one of the animals asked Isaiah how he managed to construct such robust solutions, he attributed his ability to serendipity.  According to Isaiah, his ideas were often happy accidents which surprised him with their elegance and simplicity.  But how could serendipity be the answer when his batting average was 100 percent.  Thus, another paradox, how could serendipitous decision-making result in outcomes that are always beneficial?   Luck may favor the prepared mind but even luck has its limits.  Isaiah’s abilities seemed to be more of the miraculous nature than of a serendipitous nature.  If so, this is truly ironic, since Isaiah did not believe in ghosts, gods, angels or miracles.

However, as with all good things, they must eventually come to an end.  Isaiah grew old in years and tired in body if not sometimes in spirit.  He had less energy for solving the problems of the world and gradually the animals and humans stopped coming to him for solutions.  The various species retreated further and further from each other.  Humans started building houses and walls and fences to keep themselves in and animals out.  Ironically, the further they went from each other, the more they mistrusted each other. Fear led to mistrust, mistrust led to suspicion.  The once harmonious relationship that existed between animals and humans dissolved in a mist of animosity and betrayal.

Friends started killing and eating friends and inexorably neither side could trust the other side.  Excuses for killing others became the norm and a human declared a theory called “Survival of the Fittest.”  Within this theory, might became right, power made the rules and the “fittest” could dominate those deemed as less fit.  Whole species were seen as suitable for consumption or slavery by other species.  Everyone was a commodity.  Anyone with no commercial value went to the bottom of the economic pie.  Human Resources became the norm in business and English Majors, History Majors, Art Majors and Philosophy Majors were paid less than high school dropouts.  Those who were loyal to the economic engines of society were given status and high paying jobs.

Sadly, Isaiah saw all this, but could find no solutions to the problems or trends.  Eventually, though he lived for many hundreds of years, people just regarded him as that “dumb old donkey” who did not say much.  As time passed, most people and animals even forgot that Isaiah had a brain or could speak.  Isaiah did not feel the need to disabuse anyone of their conceptions and so he just kept to himself.  At the age of 5887 years Isaiah died.  His body was sent to a glue factory to be processed.  He left no legacy of writings, nor any erudite body of knowledge, nor any great poetry nor any glorious music to be remembered by.  Just another old donkey that croaked, so who cares!

Some, if they had known Isaiah might have chided him for not posting his ideas and thoughts on Facebook or YouTube.  At least that way, he might have achieved some measure of fame if not fortune.  Ironically, or paradoxically, or serendipitously, (choose one), it never occurred to Isaiah to become Internet or Google savvy or famous or rich.  History may someday rediscover his genius and perhaps he will yet be remembered in homage to his major contributions to world peace for thousands of years.  Stranger things than that have happened of late on the Internet.

By the way, it is generally believed or was at least “once upon a time” that Isaiah (and not Euripides or Aeschylus or Sophocles) was the Father of Irony, Paradox and Serendipity and that these concepts were widely used by him in his conversations and discussions with other humans and animals. Thus, while the words today bear an etymology that derives from Greek vocabulary, their usage in practice and ideology must be attributed to Isaiah the Donkey.

Time for Questions:

Can you give me an example of irony or serendipity or paradox in your life?  What do ideas matter anyway or do they?  What if everyone was a philosophy major?  What would happen if more people practiced kindness instead of hate?  What value do animals have?  Are they just commodities?  What if we were all vegetarians?  Would it make any difference to the world?

Life is just beginning. 

Republicans:  Why They Were Once a Great Party but are Now the Party of Hate, Bigotry and Greed – AKA Donald Trump– Part 1

15 Aug 2016 2 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

dumb-republicansToday the Republicans have become the party of Dumb and Dumber.  The likes of Palin, Bachmann, Inhofe and Sessions are not so mute testimony to the fools that now dominate the Republican Party.  Add Donald Trump to the hand and you have a five ace hand of losers.  Every day, we read of some new evidence that shows how bigoted, hypocritical and vile the core beliefs of the Republican Party have become.  The leadership of the Republican Party seems to have no integrity.  Half of them spend their time trying to explain the inane and dangerous comments spewed out daily by their party nominee. A candidate so devoid of any character or morality that many in his own party are trying to dissociate themselves from him.  What is left of the party leadership are running around like chickens with their heads cut off.  There is no longer any true leadership in the party. Trump and his supporters are destroying what once was a grand old Party.  The party of Lincoln, which stood for freedom and equality has now become a party of fear, greed, intolerance and hatred.

Today, the Republicans even hate themselves.  They are now trying to destroy their star candidate for the 2016 Presidential elections.  A gross Neanderthal who equates money with character and morality named Donald Trump has upstaged the Party’s chosen one to rally the extremists who have now come to dominate the Republican Party.  The grand old Party which once attracted many progressives who believed in the power of the individual over the power of the state now is controlled by a clique or power structure which has no connection to the traditional core Republican values. (I will say more about these values in this blog)

“Republican voters view Donald Trump as their strongest general election candidate, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that highlights the sharp contrast between the party’s voters and its top professionals regarding the billionaire businessman’s ultimate political strength.”  – Steve Peoples and Emily Swanson  

In addition to those who I would call the traditionalists, the Republican Party has attracted a large contingency of supporters that we can divide into the following five blocs:

  • Bigoted Voters
    republican messages
  • Uneducated White Male Voters
  • Greedy Voters
  • Fearful Voters
  • Religious fundamentalist Voters

I will say more about each of these in Part 2 of this blog.   Suffice, it to say for now, that the voters in these five blocs have now taken over the Republican Party (I will also explain in Part 2 how and why this happened.)  Just like the Nazis took over Germany, the traditionalists in the Republican Party made a pact with the devil and the devil has now tinfoilhatrush3come to collect his dues.  The Traditionalists know that the candidacy of Trump will destroy the party.  There are indeed a large contingent of voters who will support Trump but by and large, the people in the USA are not so stupid or ignorant that Trump will be elected.  Mark my words on that!  Trump, who hates women, minorities, immigrants and anyone with a brain, will go down in defeat in the biggest landslide in history for our next Democratic president and he will take the entire Republican Party with him.  The stalwart traditionalists in the Republican Party understand this and that is why every day we see headlines like:

“The Republican Party Tries to Take Out Its Front-Runner”

“Trump has proven highly successful in manhandling a parade of bland Republican politicians. To him, Carson and Fiorina present different challenges because they both possess the outsider status that elevates them over Republican officials who have to deal with reality of some sort, and they symbolize demographic groups that are some of the biggest stumbling blocks for Republicans. The party wants to show the world that it has a black friend and a lady friend.”  — The National Memo

Returning to the concept of traditional core Republican values, you may well be wondering what they are.  The first core Republican value is freedom from intrusive government interventions.  The traditional Republican is not so much against big government as they are against a government that might try to dominate the will of the individual with the will of the state.  Hence, traditional Republicans hate the idea of gun control, federal regulations, government red tape, and government watchdog agencies.  However, they are not against “Big Military” since the military is seen as protecting those very values that Republicans cherish most.

“Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty.”  — Barnhill, John Basil (1914)

A second core Republican value is the right to earn and keep as much money as possible.  “You earned it; it is yours to spend.”  This is a value that still resonates with much of our society.  The idea being that if I work hard, I should be entitled to spend my money anyway I chose.  What Republicans and many people in the USA hate most is the thought of working hard to earn a pot of money and then having that money taken away by a government agency to distribute to some unnamed “others.”

“That government is best which governs least;” — Henry David Thoreau

A third core Republican value is the value of a capitalistic economic system.  This value overlaps to some extent the two named values above but I believe it is a distinct value of its own.  In the USA, we are and have been a country strongly against communism and to some extent socialism.  The values of these two economic systems are seen to be in direct contradiction to the value of free enterprise and a capitalist economy.

“A market economy based on private property, buttressed by the rule of law, is truly the best environment for mankind. People will work harder and with ingenuity if they know they have earned rewards from that labor. When the rewards are given to them for nothing, there is frustration and despair. Capitalism benefits more people than any other economic system. To work for oneself and reap the rewards is a basic human aspiration.” –Sally Julian, Writer of ‘The Case for Capitalism’

The fourth core Republican Party is a conservative approach to adopting new laws or changes to the US Constitution.  Traditional Republicans have long resisted change to the US Constitution as well as new laws that they see as infringing on the rights and dictates of the US Constitution.  Hence, the Republicans have resisted many changes in the Constitution which were intended to create a more equitable society for women, minorities, disabled and those below the poverty line in this country.

Part of this resistance lies in the belief that a government cannot and should not dictate how people chose to live their own lives.  If you want to be a racist, that is your right.  If you do not want to hire women and minorities and the disabled that is also your right.  This core value has resulted in a fundamental contention between those who say that the constitution must be changed to reflect new times and new circumstances and those who do not want to see changes that might infringe on rights or responsibilities prescribed in the US Constitution.

“Don’t interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties.”  — Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Kalamazoo, Michigan, August 27, 1856

The fifth core Republican value lies in the doctrine of fiscal conservatism (There are other important Republican values but I think these five are the most important).   Fiscal conservatism finds its roots in the theory of scarcity.  Money and time are both scare commodities and must be carefully managed.  Trends like cheap credit, government bailouts, deficit spending are anathema to a fiscal conservative.  A fiscal conservative wants a flat tax, balanced budget and strict guidelines for loans and government spending: “Thou shalt not run budget deficits.”  “Thou shalt not spend more money than thou maketh.”

Its-not-Obamas-faultI must confess, that I am not critical of these five core values.  I have long ago learned the value of juxtaposing opposite viewpoints so as to provide a clearer roadmap to truth and progress.  Every “ism” needs a counter “ism” and a system where the two opposing viewpoints can debate each other and Aristotle’s “Golden Mean” needs a democracy.  Capitalism must be balanced against socialism.  Liberalism must be balanced against conservatism.  Individualism must be balanced against collectivism.  One of the strengths of the United States has been its ability to allow opposing viewpoints and to strive to find a consensus among dissenting political perspectives.  Sadly, of late the constructive dissent of old has given way to a practice of destructive warfare between the two dominant political parties that has put the good of each party over the good of the country.

However, to return to the theme of this blog, the dumbing down of the Republican Party, the majority of the Republican Party now no longer seems to understand or care about these five core values.  Instead, the narrow-mindedness and shear obstructionism of the five voting blocs that I noted above have taken precedence over political compromise and searching for 1193-20120917-NoSmartPeoplethe Golden Mean.  The “Stupid Voters” are hijacked by the anti-intellectualism that has always characterized much of the political right.  The “Ignorant Voters” already believe that voting-republican1they know the truth and there is no persuading them otherwise.  The “Greedy Voters” want to keep as much of their wealth as they can and have no concern for the poor or needy.  The “Fearful Voters” are worried about crime, immigrants, health care, growing old and losing what they have already worked hard to obtain.  The last of the five Republican blocs, the “Religious Fundamentalist Voters” are worried that their biblical Christian God will be taken out of the USA and replaced by an obscure assortment of new Gods from various religions that are confusing and esoteric.

The Traditionalist Republicans (many of whom I know and hope still tolerate my views enough to call me a friend) are aghast at this assortment of new Republicans and their extreme uninformed viewpoints.  The Traditionalists could reach across the aisle and talk to their Democratic counterparts.  The Traditionalists realized the need for dialogue, discussion and compromise.  Furthermore, the Traditionalists also appealed to many independent voters (Which I am and remain to this day).  They appealed to us because we while we could ally ourselves with Democrats over many social issue, we could also see the value in the economic policies and positions often adhered to by the Traditionalist Republicans.

I can see the value in all five of the core Republican values I described above.  God Forbid, I would ever live in a country that totally extirpated even one of these core values.  Nevertheless, while I am for a balanced budget and against deficit spending, I can see making some concessions to Keynesian economics during times such as the most recent recession.  I am also for less government intrusion in our lives.  However, unlike Perry who could not name even three government agencies he would abolish, I can name ten I would abolish tomorrow if I were able to.  I am also against government bailouts.  I did not think GM should have been bailed out although I could concede with the value of hindsight that it may have been the right thing to do at the time.  And while I am against big government, I can and am equally critical of big unions.  Nevertheless, in my USA, unions and government would still have a place at the table.  I would like to paraphrase a part of Martin Luther King’s famous “I Have a Dream Speech.”

Let the Golden Mean ring from the hallowed halls of Congress!

Let the Golden Mean ring from the esteemed corridors of the US Senate!

But not only that; let the Golden Mean ring from the benches of the Supreme Court of the USA!

Let the Golden Mean ring from State Capitals in the east to State Capitals in the west!

Let the Golden Mean ring from every school and university of America.  From every village, city, town and hamlet in this great country, let the Golden Mean ring.

In my blog next week, I will explore how the Republican Party let stupidity, ignorance, fear, greed and intolerance come to dominate its political agenda.  If you are a Republican, you might not like what you are going to hear.  However, if you are a Republican, perhaps the truth that I have to tell could help you to understand what you must do to restore the Republican Party to its rightful place in the US political system.

Time for Questions:

Are you a Republican? What did you find that you disagreed with in my blog today?  What did you agree with?  Which of the Republican voting blocs are you in? Why?  Do you think the Republicans will take the next presidency?  Why or why not?  If you are a Democrat, what did you like or dislike about this blog? Why?  What do you think I should have added?

Life is just beginning. 

Republicanism is the guiding political philosophy of the United States. It has been a major part of American civic thought since its founding.[1] It stresses liberty and “unalienable” rights as central values, making people sovereign as a whole, rejects aristocracy and inherited political power, expects citizens to be independent in their performance of civic duties, and vilifies corruption.  Wikipedia

What are the Myths and Realities of Marriage? — Part 2

08 Aug 2016 Leave a comment

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Last week we looked at what I called the “Cons” or negative assumptions about marriage.  This week, we will look at some “Pros” or positive assumptions that one can make about marriage.  I offer both sets of assumptions with the thought in mind that “The truth will set you free.”  Marriage is not all sweet and sugar but neither is it all sour and vinegar.  A good marriage has its ups and downs but a really happy marriage will have more ups than downs.  Most happy marriages are based on a set of realistic assumptions concerning what marriage is all about and what it takes to make a good marriage.

  1. Marriage is a means by which two people can in time learn the true meaning of love.

Most of us are pretty young when we get married.  With the exception of second marriages, where naiveté can be attributed to a rebound effect, most naiveté in a first marriage is due to youth and inexperience.  Many second marriages show that often older people are no wiser than younger people.  Love in a first marriage is more about passion and infatuation than about true love.  Saying “I love you” about someone you hardly know means about the same as saying “I love my new car.”  You cannot really love anything or anyone until you have some history with that person.

Love is a learned trait.  Most of the time, we use love in a very simplistic and general manner.  Jesus said “True love is the willingness to lay down your life for another.”  I disagree with this definition.  I think this kind of love can be a form of courage or bravado even without any notion of love whatsoever.  How can you love anyone whom you do not know?  I might be willing to risk my life to save someone who is drowning in a frozen lake, but it would be ridiculous to think I love that person.

True love is closer to a passion that is based on respect and admiration and gratitude.  When you first marry anyone, all three of these traits may only exist in very rudimentary states.  Time and shared experience help bring more perspective to each of them.  Over time, we begin to respect each other as we learn more about each other and how we treat life.  We begin to admire our partners more as we see how they cope with problems and as we both sacrifice our own needs for the good of each other.  Gratitude is the highest state of love in a marriage.  When you are truly grateful for your partner and when you feel this gratitude in your entire being, you have arrived at the shore of true love.

“True love doesn’t happen right away; it’s an ever-growing process. It develops after you’ve gone through many ups and downs, when you’ve suffered together, cried together, laughed together.” — Ricardo Montalban

  1. Marriage is a system for raising a new generation that will carry on the best values of the old generation.

Parents have a responsibility to raise children who have sound moral, ethical and personal values.  Each new generation builds on the shoulders of previous generations.   It would be foolish to think that the values of the past should all be the values of the next generation.  The needs of each new generation demand new values to cope with problems and issues that could not have been foreseen by previous generations.  Nevertheless, there are many values and ideas from the past that an emerging generation should have knowledge and insight of.  Lessons from the past can help to inform the future and mistakes from the past can still have meaning and relevance to issues that are current today.

Parents have an obligation to help insure that any children that they are responsible for, whether adopted, natural birth or foster children, learn a set of values that will help them to be people who understand the concepts of discipline and integrity.  Too many parents see their children as means to their own end or as “mini” friends.  Helicopter parents, soccer moms and sports dads are all manifestations of parents who have little idea about their real obligations towards their children.   Such parents want to be “best” friends with their children instead of fathers and mothers.  Even worse, are the parents who want to live vicariously through their children and dream that their kids will live the lives that they wanted to live.

“To let them go on believing that the world is safe, that they will be provided for and achieve worthwhile things even if they remain stupid, shirk integrity, despise courtesy, and act only from self-interest, that they ought to rely on those stronger, smarter, and more able to solve their problems, would be the gravest disservice: to them, and to society as a whole.”  —  J. Aleksandr Wootton

  1. Marriage is a potpourri of passion, ecstasy, happiness, sadness, grief, anger and challenge.

I may be repeating myself here, but I want to emphasize that all marriages will have good days and bad days.  Some of the bad days will be due to poor judgement, selfishness and poor planning.  They are days that could have been in the range of your ability to change.  Other bad days will have little or nothing to do with you.  Friends will die.  Relatives will get sick.  Accidents will happen.  You and your partner will grow old.  You will have no control over any of these things.

Whether or not you can change things, what matters the most is that you and your partner can support each other through the ups and downs.  You need to expect that bad things will happen to good people.  When they do, how will you support the other person?

A number of years ago, my wife and I went scuba diving for the first time.  We had both received our PADI certification and done a few lake dives.  We decided to visit the Caribbean and do some scuba diving there.  We went to an island off the coast of Belize called Caye Caulker.  We found a dive shop on the island and scheduled a day of diving for a day or so after we arrived.   Karen had not had any experience with ocean diving.  I had done quite a bit of diving but it was many years before.

We suited up and went down.  We were partners on this dive and that meant that we would have each other’s back.  Karen has more problems with buoyancy control than I do but we finally got her weights adjusted correctly and down we went.  We descended with six or so other divers and the dive master.  We had a great time though Karen kept trying to bob up instead of down.  When it was clear that we had little oxygen left we decided to come up.  We signaled the dive master and most of the group also headed back to the dive boat.  We had stayed above 120 feet so the bends were not really a concern.  We still wanted to ascend slowly though as it always is a good idea to observe this protocol.  I rose with Karen until we reached the surface.  The water was pretty choppy on top.

When we hit the surface, I was feeling tired and I headed to the boat.  I totally forgot Karen and I took my tanks up and got on the boat. When I looked back to see how Karen was doing, she was still in the water. She was tired and having a hard time getting her tanks off.  Some of the other people were in the water and they came to help her.  She finally made it back in the boat very tired and exhausted and somewhat scared.  I felt really bad.  I had deserted her and thought only about myself.  It was somewhat hard for me to get out of the water and on the boat by myself but it was next to impossible for Karen.  I did not think about her and I felt guilty for the rest of the day.  I promised her and myself that from then on, I would make sure she was on the boat before I tried to get out.

It is not always easy to look after another person.  It is very easy to put our needs first and our partners needs second.   A key dilemma of marriage is how to put both needs first or how to know when one needs to go first and the other can go second.  Marriage presents us with endless possibilities to work on this problem.  Sometimes we will succeed and sometimes we will fail.  However, as with any worthwhile endeavor, the trick is to keep trying, keep working on things and when you fail to try again and to never give up.  The effort to care for another person builds trust in a relationship and this trust is the foundation for a good marriage.  Layer it with respect, admiration and gratitude for each other and you will live “happily ever after.”

“Love never gives up, never loses faith, is always hopeful, and endures through every circumstance.”  — I Corinthians 13:7

Time for Questions:

Have you ever been in love?  How many times?  What do you think love is?  What do you think true love is based on?  How does one create true love?

Life is just beginning.

“You can trust us to stick to you through thick and thin – to the bitter end.  And you can trust us to keep any secret of yours – closer than you yourself keep it.  But you cannot trust us to let you face trouble alone, and go off without a word.  We are your friends, Frodo.” — ― J.R.R. Tolkien,

 

What are the Myths and Realities of Marriage? — Part 1

01 Aug 2016 2 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized Tags: , , , , ,

Recently Pope Francis said that “The great majority of our sacramental marriages are null. Because they say, ‘Yes, for the rest of my life!’ but they don’t know what they are saying. . . . They say it, they have good will, but they don’t know.”  This struck a chord with me because I see a great deal of naiveté, confusion and even hostility surrounding the idea of marriage.  Many people scoffed at and disregarded Pope Francis’s comment.  People want to continue their illusions and hate it when anyone tries to bring some clarity or truth out that might disturb their ongoing fantasies.

I think the Pope is correct though.  People do not really understand what marriage is about.  My blog this week and next week will look at the pros and cons of marriage in terms of the negative and positive constructs that determine what marriage is.  These constructs are much more important in terms of understanding what marriage is than the idea that it is strictly a union between a man and a woman.  This latter point only tells us who has traditionally been allowed to marry but not the reality of “what” marriage will actually involve.  Understanding marriage means understanding much deeper and less evident truths.  It means examining the myths that too many of us have regarding marriage.  These myths create a distorted view of marriage that makes it difficult to find true happiness with a partner.

Let us start with the cons or perhaps the negative realities of marriage.  Next week, I will cover the pros or the positive aspects of marriage.  It is important to recognize that life is always full of both Yin and Yang aspects of existence. The same is true of marriage.  By better understanding both, we can create marriages that are happier, more fulfilling and longer lasting.

Negative Realities of Marriage:

  1. Marriage is an asymmetrical relationship between two people that is most often thought of as a symmetrical relationship. 

Too many people think that marriage is a “union of equals.”  There is little about marriage that is ever equal.  No too people on the face of the earth are equal.  Equality sounds good in theory but falls flat in practice.  Each partner in a marriage brings different strengths and abilities.  Unless each partner is able to appreciate the nuances of these differences in themselves and their spouse, the marriage will be like an orchestra that only plays with a few of its instruments.  It is important that each partner in a marriage be able to honor, respect and cherish the idea of differences in each other and to help their partner manifest these differences.  This leads to growth and development rather than boredom and stagnation of a marriage.

“You know it’s never fifty-fifty in a marriage. It’s always seventy-thirty, or sixty-forty. Someone falls in love first. Someone puts someone else up on a pedestal. Someone works very hard to keep things rolling smoothly; someone else sails along for the ride.”   — Jodi Picoult,

  1. Marriage is a union of opposites designed to keep the human race viable.

Despite the Bible story of the Garden of Eden, if humans had not been able to procreate, there would be no human race.  Fundamental biological principles point to the inescapable and inevitable fact of procreation.  Evolution or God (take your choice) created humans able to reproduce themselves.  Normally, this takes an egg and a sperm that are donated by each parent.  The resulting zygote will with proper care and nurturing grow into a facsimile of both parents.  The baby has the genotype of both parents in their DNA and at some point in their future can also reproduce and thereby continue the development of the species.

The above process sounds very clinical but it is also accompanied by a great deal of fun and pleasure which no doubt helps to insure that humans find sex enjoyable and desirable irrespective of the goal of perpetuating the species.  This latter fact has not been overlooked by both governments and religions which have often tried to yoke this sexual desire and passion to their own goals.  Thus, Hitler for instance gave medals to women having babies that would help grow the Third Reich.  The Chinese instituted a one baby per couple policy to control population growth.  The Catholic Church denigrates the idea of sex without the goal of procreation and masturbation is still considered a sin.  The Church’s goal is to channel sexual energy into creating more Catholics and thus ensuring that the religion as well as the race will continue.

You may well ask: “Well, what is the negative here with this issue.  Do not most humans look forward to the idea of sexual reproduction? Are not children one of the great joys for humanity?”  The answer to both questions is yes and will be discussed later.  Nevertheless, the negative issues are twofold.  First, the one I already mentioned in respect to the manipulation by both church and state of the function for their own purposes.  The second issue is more widespread and more problematic.  Many couples and individuals often do not put the well-being of their offspring as their first priority.  Too often, children are born to people who have no desire or ability to give proper care to them.  It has been said that you need to have a license to have a dog but any idiot can have a child without the means, motives or ability to take proper care of them.

Children deepen, complicate, and test the “I do’s” of marriage. — Dr. David Stoop and Dr. Jan Stoop

  1. Marriage appears as a mirage of love, joy and harmony to outsiders.

How often have you known a couple who went through a divorce and your reactions were “I thought they were so happily married.  They seemed like the perfect couple.”  As we get older, you would think that most of us would have learned the truth.  There are no perfect marriages and there are no perfect couples.  The fantasy stage of marriage lasts for about six months and then the reality sets in.

The problem is that most people want to hide the authenticity of their marriage from their friends, relatives and even from each other.  “Everything is perfect.  We never fight.  We have no problems.  We agree on everything.”  Such seems to be the truth to those who are looking in from the outside.  The real truth should be obvious.  Any marriage without discord is doomed to failure.  Those who would protect themselves from disagreements and dissension will sooner or later be in divorce court shouting and screaming obscenities at each other.  The pent up frustrations of years of obsequience and servitude now become a torrent of disgust and animosity.

“All married couples should learn the art of battle as they should learn the art of making love. Good battle is objective and honest – never vicious or cruel. Good battle is healthy and constructive, and brings to a marriage the principles of equal partnership.”  — Ann Landers

  1. Once we are married, we will live happily ever after.

No you will not.  Only in a fairy tale do people live happily ever after.  In a marriage, you will go through, suffering, heartache, jealousy, vindictiveness, lust, shame, anger and more sadness than you have ever thought possible.  You will (if you are married long enough) watch your spouse die and perhaps even some of your children.  My Godmother (my Aunt Mary) turned 102 on July 26th of this year.  She has seen her parents, grandparents, husband, three children and all of her six siblings die.  She is not a sad woman but instead rejoices at the long and mostly happy life that her god has granted her.  Many of us would wonder how she can be so positive for someone who has been through so much sorrow.

She once told me that she simply went on each day with a positive attitude to appreciate all that life would bring.  This meant being a good person, helping others and reaching out to make new friends and experience new things.  At 90+ years she was still volunteering at a senior center to serve meals and help in the kitchen.  If you want to live happily ever after, be prepared to accept the ups and downs of life and never quit.  Marriage is not a sprint but a marathon.

“Marriage is neither heaven nor hell, it is simply purgatory.”  — Abraham Lincoln

  1. Marriage is a legal contract that binds us until death do us part.

Pope Francis was right on the money here.  The marriage contract only binds most marriages until one or the other is sick and tired of the marriage.  Then, in less time than it takes to get a wedding certificate, you can get a divorce certificate.  You do not even need to specify hardships or malignant conditions in most States.  It is simply a matter of saying “I don’t” instead of “I do.”  The tired and clichéd vow spoken at most wedding ceremonies has become a thing of the past.  Like the dinosaurs, the idea of “until death do us part” is both obsolete and irrelevant.  The “in sickness and in health” part also falls flat.  Few in their early years have any real understanding of what taking care of a senior citizen will entail, particularly doing so when they become a senior citizen themselves.

People have always been able to opt out of a marriage through divorce.  Divorce was known in the time of the Egyptians, Greeks and Romans prior to 800 BCE without written contracts.  In 800 BCE, written marriage contracts first appeared.  The reasons for divorce were probably very similar in ancient times to the reasons for most divorces today.  One study showed the following as the most common reasons for divorce in modern times:

The following chart shows divorce trends in the USA from 1860 through 2000.  As you can see, the frequency of divorces increased dramatically from a low of less than 2 divorces per thousand marriages to a high of 22 divorces per one thousand marriages.  My guess would be that the major difference in divorce statistics from ancient to modern times would probably be in the frequency of divorces rather than in the reason for divorces.

divorce rates

Today if you are tired or bored or annoyed with someone, you just go and get a divorce.  The idea of a vow is now considered quaint.  Love and honor have been replaced by narcissism and enlightened self-interest.  “What can I do for you” has been replaced by “what can you do for me.”  Loyalty and faithfulness are replaced by “what they don’t know won’t hurt them” and “It was just a little fling.”  When you can get a divorce in a Cracker Jack box, why work on things.  It is easier to play musical divorce and find a new partner and start over again from scratch.

The cycle is very clear:  “infatuation, passion, ecstasy, marriage, disagreement, disillusionment, hostility and divorce.  This cycle plays itself out over and over again in at least fifty percent of the marriages in the USA.  In these marriages, neither partner has ever learned the meaning of responsibility, commitment and hard work.  Until these concepts are grasped, the partners have no hope of finding a long term relationship.  Instead, these individuals fall into what has been called serial monogamy and hookup relationships.

“The remedy for most marital stress is not in divorce. It is in repentance and forgiveness, in sincere expressions of charity and service. It is not in separation. It is in simple integrity that leads a man and a woman [Or two people who love each other] to square up their shoulders and meet their obligations. It is found in the Golden Rule, a time-honored principle that should first and foremost find expression in marriage.”   — Gordon B. Hinckley

  1. Marriage is a cause of more anger, pain, misery, jealousy and unhappiness than perhaps any other institution on the face of the earth.

Did you know that when a spouse goes missing or is found murdered, the number one suspect is the other partner.  This is not profiling on the part of law enforcement.  It is a simple fact worked out from experience because the evidence shows that at least one third of all female homicide victims in the U.S. are killed by male intimate partners — husbands and ex-husbands, boyfriends and estranged lovers. While both men and women experience domestic violence, women are far more likely to be murdered than men.  — http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/09/men-killing-women-domesti_n_5927140.html

DomesticViolenceKILLED7

These murder statistics do not even begin to describe the vast amounts of domestic violence that take place under the umbrella of so-called love and marriage.  Given the amount of abuse that women suffer, it is unbelievable that any of them would trust something as flimsy as a marriage contract or want to even take part in the ritual.  For many women, love, honor and obey means that they will have their brains beaten out if they fail to respect the macho image of their spouse.  I find it amazing that any woman in her right mind would want to enter into a marriage that has a high probability of resulting in her being battered and even murdered.  I suppose the old adage is very true that “hope springs eternal in the human breast.”

“Sometimes I wonder if men and women really suit each other. Perhaps they should live next door and just visit now and then.” — Katharine Hepburn

Time for Questions:

Have you ever been married?  How many times?  What do you think makes a good marriage?  What have been the major problems in your marriage?  What did it take to overcome these problems?  If you have never been married, why not?

Life is just beginning.

“To say that one waits a lifetime for his soulmate to come around is a paradox. People eventually get sick of waiting; take a chance on someone, and by the art of commitment become soulmates, which takes a lifetime to perfect.”  — Criss Jami

 

 

Once Upon a Time Humans Created God in Their Image

25 Jul 2016 6 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized

god imageOnce upon a time, there was a group of creatures called humans.  They evolve and live out their lives on a place they call Earth.   Earth is basically a spheroidal rock that revolves around a Class 3 star (called a sun) in a galaxy named the Milky Way.  No humans know where they came from, how they developed or why.  This is a subject of endless debate and speculation that has led to a plethora of social organizations which humans call religions.

Humans have a limited capacity to think and a very short life span, given the eons that the universe has existed.  Most humans live less than 100 earth years.  A year is the length of time it takes the Earth to revolve around the sun.  Humans seem to have two major characteristics that are shared throughout all members, clans and tribes of the species.  The first is called Xenophobia.  This can be described as a propensity to fear anyone or anything that is unique, novel or different.

In terms of their propensity for xenophobia, it has created many problems for humans.  If the slightest genetic difference (an inevitable evolutionary probability) emerges between any groups in the species, it will lead to aggression, death and widespread destruction.  Thus, such superficial differences as skin pigmentation, eye color, height and brain capacity have all resulted in combat between humans.

Xenophobia is even more marked when it comes to social differences between humans.  Murders, wars, massacres and genocides routinely take place over issues like religion, geography, sports and a wide spread assortment of ideologies.  One war went on for over thirty years wherein one group liked red roses and other group liked white roses.  Another war went on for nearly one hundred years due to arguments over who would be in charge of French wines.  Wine was a very popular beverage in the “middle ages” of Europe.  These two examples only scratch the surface of the violence that has taken place in human history.  They are not even the worse of the examples that could be given.  A full catalog of the transgressions and violence between humans would be well beyond the scope of this paper.  (See Fields of Blood: Religion and the History of Violence by Karen Armstrong)

Since the dawn of mankind, humans have never evolved out of their xenophobia and even as I write, the most powerful country in the history of the species has selected a character called Trump to rule them.  He promises to help eradicate anyone who is not White, rich or from a place called Europe.  Trumps clan includes a group of humans who share money, power and prestige.  This group has commonly not got along with other groups who have less of these characteristics.

So called “Rich” people have derived a variety of interesting approaches to marginalize and even eradicate those not of their tribe.  One technique that has been remarkably successful has been called “The Trickle Down Economic System.”  This strategy relies on convincing poor people (those who do not belong to the rich clan) that if they only give everything they own to the rich people, the rich people will eventually give it back with interest.  (Interest implying that the poor people will get back more than they give)

A human once said that “a sucker was born every day” but truth be told, the numbers are much greater since the majority of the poor people in the richest country on the planet have bought into the “Trickle Down System.”  Many other techniques such as taxes, rents, interest, loan rates and mortgages have all been designed by rich people to help bleed poor people to death.  These strategies have worked quite well over the years as rich people now have more money than they know what to do with.  Poor people are still waiting on Trickle Down to kick in and give them back some of what they gave to the rich.  They will have a long wait.

The second commonality among humans is their ubiquitous Superstition.  Superstition can be defined as: “A widely held but unjustified belief in supernatural causation leading to certain consequences of an action or event, or a practice based on such a belief.”  Thus, humans formulate outlandish, extraordinary and even bizarre explanations for anything that they do not understand.  Humans believe in things like ghosts, spirits, zombies, vampires, miracles, angels, devils, purgatory, limbo, heaven and hell.  None of these things have ever been photographed or captured on video but humans insist they all exist.  However not one of these superstitions can compare to the idea of a divine omnipotent being that humans call God.

Almost all humans believe in the idea of a supreme being who for some unknown reason supposedly created humans in his image.  I use the word “His” to define this “God” since for the most part, he tends to be male.  Most humans have no trouble accepting this explanation for their origin as long as God is their god and not someone else’s God.  This jealousy may explain why few of the religions on the planet get along with each other.  The God of most people does not seem to have an infinite capacity to tolerate the ideological or spiritual beliefs characterizing the diversity that exists in the human species.

To understand the supreme ironies and contradictions that this superstition of a god entails for humanity, we must dissect the qualities of their God to see how they play out in the minds of humans.  The following are nine of the more powerful attributes or qualities that humans associate with God.

  • God loves humans more than any other species
  • God gave humans free will and that is why we can continue to destroy each other with impunity.
  • God will come at some time in the end to judge humans
  • God is all merciful
  • God is all powerful
  • God is all knowing
  • God will answer your prayers
  • God sent his only son to save mankind
  • God created everything in the universe

God loves humans more than any other species:

The big question here is why?  What did humans do to earn Gods love?  Why would God love anyone who is greedy, mean, bigoted, prejudiced and disposed to kill creatures that their God has created?  Furthermore, what did cows, pigs, chickens, fish and many other species do that would relegate them to second place in the universe?  Animals do not kill each other strictly for the joy of killing.  If I were going to love one species above all others, it might be the cuckoo bird, since it accurately reflects the beliefs of humanity.

God gave humans free will and that is why we can continue to destroy each other with impunity:

This belief fostered by most religions to explain the contradictions between a loving god and a vengeful god really falls flat if you think about it with any degree of intelligence.  God wanted us to have free will so that we could choose whether or not to love him.  However, if he were all powerful, why would he need love so badly?  Secondly, if he really wanted to be loved, why not create a creature that inherently loved instead of a creature that had a great difficulty to consistently love anything except itself and money.

God will come at some time in the end to judge humans:

Why does there have to be an “End” time?  If Jesus said “Judge not others less you be judged yourself” why is God going to be hypocritical and judge humanity?  What criteria will God use to judge humanity? Why cannot he share that with us now so we can save money on trials and lawyers?  Are things going to get better or worse for humanity?  If worse, why wait? If better, why end it all?

God is all merciful:

Read the Bible (supposedly the word of God) if you think he is all merciful.  I quote:

“The LORD is a jealous and avenging God; the LORD takes vengeance and is filled with wrath. The LORD takes vengeance on his foes and vents his wrath against his enemies.” —Nahum 1:2

God is all powerful:

We are repeatedly told that God is omnipotent.  He is all powerful.  The obvious question is why he did not do a better job creating an earth and its species.  Usually the weather is either too hot or too cold. There is too much rain or not enough rain.  The planet has tornadoes, fires, earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tsunamis, snow, hail, freezing rain, volcanic eruptions and now global warming.  If God is so damn powerful, he did a really poor job of making a planet where one can live happily ever after.

He also did a very poor job of creating humans.  We live short lives and most of us die too soon of accidents, disease or sickness.  If God was so great, why did he not create us with more robust and resilient features?  Why do I need a raincoat to go out in the rain?  Couldn’t God have made me waterproof?  Would that have been too much to ask that an all-powerful God have done?  Or how about making us more resilient to sunburn?  I won’t even start on deer flies, wasps, mosquitos and horse flies.  I think God needed a better architect.

God is all knowing:

If God is all knowing, why did he not foresee that Adam and Eve would eat an apple and that Cain would kill Abel and that his promised people would have centuries of persecution and that hundreds of wars would take place between humans and that people would destroy the earth he created and that everyone would alternate between love and hate for the very God who created them?  God seems to have some blind spots in his omniscience that you could drive a truck through.

God will answer your prayers:

This does not seem very likely unless no one has ever prayed for peace on earth let alone to win the lottery.  Humans have seen few years without war, terrorism or some other form of violence.  During the Holocaust, I am sure that many of his promised people prayed to him but it did not do much good.  I wonder what prayers God does answer.  He does not seem to be much good at answering prayers that might help humans live happier and more fulfilling lives.  I know, he has given us free choice.  I have been praying that he takes it away but I guess he has not heard me yet.

God sent his only son to save mankind:

Supposedly God sent his “Only begotten Son to save the world.”  This belief also beggars the intellect of any rational thinking being.  Why send anyone?  However, if the first effort did not work, why not send another?  How come God can only have one son?  Did God not foresee that sending Jesus would result in Jesus dying on the cross?  What kind of a father would send a son on such a mission?  Since God was all powerful, why not send Superman to kick ass and straighten out the Scribes and Pharisees?  Even better, why not send an army of Supermen and Superwomen to earth and really get the problems solved?

God created everything in the universe:

When I was in the five grade in Catholic School, I asked the following series of questions and never received a good answer:  “If God created the universe, who created God?”  The reply I received was “God always was and always will be.”  To which I replied with a second question: “If God always was and always will be, how come humans could not always was and always will be?”  The reply to my second question was usually silence.  It was about this time that I started to question the suppositions that many people had for how the earth was created.  This meant that God and his angels and his saints all went out the window.  I soon rejected organized religion for its many superstitions and hypocrisies.  This was not very hard, since most of organized religion I did not see doing any favors for the human race.

By the way, since I obviously rejected creationism, I am still not a proponent of the big bang, small bang or any other scientific theory I have yet heard for the creation of the universe.  Scientists can be as narrow minded and as superstitious as any member of any clergy I have ever known.  Colin Tudge notes that:  “Science has become increasingly narrow-minded—materialistic, reductionist, and inveterately anthropocentric: still rooted, philosophically, in the 18th century.”  — Science Is in Danger of Becoming the Enemy of Humankind

image of godConclusions:

You may well ask what I believe or how I explain the fact that I am now writing this.  You may wonder if nihilist or atheist would describe my philosophy of life or religion.  You may ponder how I account for love, evil, hope and/or what role I ascribe to faith in living a good life.  You may question whether or not I have a belief in life after death or whether I subscribe to the Hindu idea of reincarnation.  My answer would be to paraphrase the great lines from Ecclesiastes:

“Superstition! Superstition!”
says the Teacher.
“Utterly superstitious!
Everything is superstitious.”

Time for Questions:

Haven’t you had enough questions for today?

Life is just beginning.

“I do not pretend to be able to prove that there is no God. I equally cannot prove that Satan is a fiction. The Christian god may exist; so may the gods of Olympus, or of ancient Egypt, or of Babylon. But no one of these hypotheses is more probable than any other: they lie outside the region of even probable knowledge, and therefore there is no reason to consider any of them.”  — Bertrand Russell

So You Say You Are a Christian?

19 Jul 2016 9 Comments

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

Hate Gays, Hate Transsexuals, Hate Bisexuals, Hate Lesbians.

Christ did say:

“You yourselves know how unlawful it is for a Jew to associate with or to visit anyone of another nation, but God has shown me that I should not call any person common or unclean.” — Acts 10:28

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

Support War, Support Violence Against Others, Support a First Strike Capability.

Christ did say:

“If someone strikes you on the cheek, turn the other cheek and if someone takes your cloak, do not withhold your tunic as well.”  – Luke 6:29

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

Vote for Greed, Vote for Bigotry, Vote for Avarice.

Christ did say,

“For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul?” — Matthew 16:26 

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

Blame the Poor, Blame the Downtrodden, Blame the Sick, Blame the Hungry.   

Christ did say,

“If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” – Matthew 19:21

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

Practice Intolerance, Practice Exclusion, Practice Narrow Mindedness.

Christ did say:

“If you love those who love you, what reward will you get?  Are not even the tax collectors doing that?  And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that?” — Matthew 5:43-47

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

Go to Church, Read the Bible, Make Pious Remarks.  

Christ did say:

“Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.” — Matthew 7:24 / “Be doers of the word, and not hearers only. Otherwise, you are deceiving yourselves.”— James 1:22

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 

You say you are a Christian, but did you know that Christ did not say:

The Ten Commandments Are All You Need. 

Christ did say:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

 Blessed are they who mourn, for they shall be comforted.

 Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.

 Blessed are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.

 Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.

 Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall see God.

 Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God.

 Blessed are they who are persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”  — Matthew 5:3-10

Do you still say you are a Christian?

 Time for Questions:

What religion do you practice? Are you a hearer of the word but not a doer of the word?  Would Jesus Christ vote for Trump?

Life is Just Beginning.

“You can safely assume you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott

Singing the Right Wing Blues or When Fear and Paranoia Rule Our Lives

10 Jul 2016 Leave a comment

by Dr. John Persico Jr. in Uncategorized

Oh Lord, Please don’t let them take my guns away,

I’m just a soul whose intentions are good,

Please don’t let me be misunderstood.

 

Oh Lord, Please don’t let them take my country away,

I’m just a soul whose intentions are good,

Please don’t let me be misunderstood.

 

Oh Lord, Please don’t let them take my woman away,

I’m just a soul whose intentions are good,

Please don’t let me be misunderstood.

 

Oh Lord, Please don’t let them take my God away,

I’m just a soul whose intentions are good,

Please don’t let me be misunderstood.

I was thinking the other day about the hysteria connected to the concept of gun control.  The more I thought about it the more it seemed that there was a pervasive paranoia prevalent among members of the Right including Tea Partiers, Republicans, KKK, White Supremacy Groups and Anti-Immigrant groups that some of their “stuff” would be taken away. When it comes to gun control the Right Wing do not believe that anyone really wants responsible gun ownership, what they (the Liberals) really want is “their” guns.

There are four key things that Right Wingers fear will be taken away from them by the leftie radical pinko intellectual do-gooders, otherwise known as “Liberals.”  These four things are:

  • My gun
  • My country
  • My woman
  • My god

No one can deny the value of each of these “things” and certainly one can empathize with anyone losing anyone of them.  However, the fear among Right Wingers concerning losing these things seems grossly out of proportion to the reality that exists.  I have no Liberal friends who really want an AK 47 or an AR 15.  None of my friends would know what to do with another wife and most don’t believe in God so I doubt they would want a new god whether Hindu, Christian, Baptist or whatever – Finally, I cannot comprehend how anyone could take someone’s country away.  This problem understanding the fears and paranoia of the Right was becoming very perplexing to me.

I decided that the only way to understand this phenomenon of (shall we say) “fear of losing” would be to interview some people on the Right to see why and what they are really afraid of.  If Freud was correct, their objects of desire and a fear of losing them are really a mask that is hiding even greater desires and feelings.  By looking deeper, we can find the real core of the hysteria and paranoia that is so prevalent among Right Wingers.  My interviews would help me to unlock the true meaning and cause of the fears that seem so prevalent among those on the Right. Perhaps I thought, with a better understanding I could help some of my paranoid friends to see that everyone was not out to take things away from them.

I conducted the following series of interviews near where I live.  I decided to deal with one specific subject with each interviewee rather than range among a variety of issues.  Thus, I would deal with guns with someone who strongly supported gun rights and deal with the subject of god with someone who was a strong supporter of a particular God assuming that there could be many gods.  It was easy to find all of the people for my interviews.  I simply looked for bumper stickers with the appropriate comments.  I will start with the issue of gun control which is number one on my list above and work down the list.

My first interview was with Dwayne:  A young man of thirty three.  He works as a machinist in a local manufacturing company.  Dwayne likes to hunt and fish and has a wife and two small children.  Dwayne is an ardent supporter of the NRA and is a vocal opponent of any form of gun control.  I found Dwayne by noticing his bumper sticker which read:

Dwayne

JOHN – Why do you need your guns?

DWAYNE – A variety of reasons:  Hunting, home protection, defense of my country, personal protection,

JOHN – Don’t we have the army and police to protect us?

DWAYNE – Well, they can’t always be there when you need them.

JOHN – When was the last time you or anyone you knew had a home invasion or had to protect your country with your personal weapons?

DWAYNE – Well, as the Boy Scouts would say, it is better to be prepared.

JOHN – So how worried are you that you or your family might be attacked?

DWAYNE – Very worried. You can’t pick up a paper without reading about someone who was shot, knifed or mugged.  The streets have become very dangerous.

JOHN – Did you know crime and homicide rates are actually down significantly from twenty years ago and you are probably safer now than you have ever been?

DWAYNE – That may be true but statistics don’t apply to individuals and I feel a lot safer with my concealed carry than I would with your statistics.  Maybe crime rates are going down because more people are carrying guns.

JOHN – Doesn’t the thought of everyone having a concealed weapon on them bother you in the least?  Do you think your children and spouse would be equally able to protect themselves?

DWAYNE – I have taught my wife how to shoot and I will teach my kids the same when they are old enough.  If everyone had a gun, maybe there would be less crime.

JOHN – Thanks Dwayne for your time and your honest answers.  I hope you never have to use your weapons for self-defense.

My second interview was with Billy:  Billy is 26 years old.  Billy served three years in the Marine Corp upon leaving high school.  After leaving the Marines, Billy went to a community college for two years.  He now works as a car salesman at a local Chevy dealership.  He is presently single but has a girlfriend and they are planning to get married in a year – Billy is very patriotic and I found him by a bumper sticker on his car which read:

Billy

JOHN – Are you afraid that we are losing America?

BILLY – No, but I think we are in danger of losing our lifestyle and our culture.  We are letting too many immigrants in who do not share our values.  You can’t assimilate as many people as we are letting in.

JOHN – But wasn’t America built by immigrants?

BILLY – Yes, but they were mostly Europeans and they had similar cultural values.

JOHN – Well, we had Indians and African slaves when we invaded this country.  We built a powerful nation with many people from many cultures who could not speak the same language.

BILLY – But they were not anti-democratic like many of the Arabic countries seem to be.

JOHN – The majority of immigrants for the past few years have been from Mexico and South America.

BILLY – These people are willing to take shitty low paying jobs.  They lower the wage levels for the rest of us.

JOHN – Maybe, but eventually they will work their way up the economic ladder like the Italians, Irish, Polish and many other cultures did; if they can get a fair break and some opportunities for education.   For the past eight years, the Right Wing Republicans have blocked and refused to discuss any immigration bills.

BILLY – Maybe none of the bills were very good.

JOHN – Then shouldn’t we all work together to pass a fair immigration bill?

BILLY – I just don’t know if that is possible.

JOHN – Well thanks for your time Billy.  Good luck with your work and upcoming wedding.

My third interview was with Roger:  Roger is 47 years old and has been divorced twice.  Roger has four children but is presently unmarried.  He has good relations with his first wife whom he had three children with.  His relations with his second wife with whom he had one child are nonexistent.  Their marriage was short but not sweet.  Roger works as a software developer for a local IT company.  He went to college for four years and has worked in IT since graduating twenty years ago.  I met Roger when I saw the following bumper sticker on his car:

abortion_is_murder_decal

JOHN – Why do you think abortion is wrong?

ROGER – It’s killing unborn children

JOHN – If they are unborn, how can they be children?

ROGER – All of this crap started with the women’s lib movement.

JOHN – What crap?  Do you mean women working and having a choice for their lives rather than just the bedroom and the kitchen?

ROGER – Women and men are different.  A woman’s role used to be to have children and raise a family.  No one talked about abortion years ago.

JOHN – But many abortions were still being done in back alleys by hacks who often killed the woman and the child.

ROGER – Abortion is killing.  I don’t think God created women with the idea that they would abort their own children.

JOHN – But a legal abortion takes place in the first trimester and the child is not formed yet or functioning cognitively.   It is more like killing a sperm than a human being.

ROGER – Many people would disagree with you.  You make it sound very clinical but what about the soul and spirit?  What if the unborn child has a soul and spirit that is already there?

JOHN – I could perhaps buy some of your argument except is it very hypocritical since most anti-abortion people have also opposed birth control and women’s rights.  Is this really about protecting life or controlling a woman’s choices?  I have also seen few if any birth controllers opposing capital punishment or for that matter any of our last few wars.  Isn’t this hypocritical?

ROGER – You are very good with words but I think we are talking about children who have not made a choice.  A criminal has made a choice and deserves what they get.  A soldier must make a choice and a nation authorizes a soldier to kill to protect others.  I do not think that these situations are the same as killing an unborn child who has never made a choice and who has not been asked whether they want to live or die.

JOHN – Thanks for your time and opinions Roger –

My final interview was with Cecelia:  Cecelia is a 40 year old Evangelical Christian from an independent church where its members all talk in tongues and are regularly visited by the “holy spirit.”  Cecelia went to college for four years and teaches special needs children in a grade school.  Her church is her family.   She attends service regularly and wears her religion as a badge of honor – She believes that “her” God is the right God and that he looks over the members of her church who are the true believers.  I found Cecelia when I spotted the following bumper sticker on her car:

pro god

JOHN – You seem to be pro a lot of things.  Wouldn’t God be pro-immigrants and pro-Muslims?

CECELIA – Muslims are not true believers.  They do not believe in our God.

JOHN – Isn’t there only one God?

CECELIA – God is God.  We believe in the one true God.  Non-believers do not accept God and thus God does not accept them.

JOHN – But I thought Christians believed in the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Did not Jesus teach us to be kind and to love everyone as brothers and sisters?  Why do you seem to hate immigrants, gays, minorities and other religions so much?  Would Jesus have acted this way towards others?

CECELIA – Jesus is our lord and savior- Whatever we do, we do in his name.  All honor and praise to the one true God who is our father.

JOHN – Are you saying that God would be for capital punishment, for hatred towards gays, for discrimination towards minorities and for excluding immigrants from a better life?

CECELIA – You are a non-believer, so you do not truly understand our lord.  Jesus cast the money lenders out of the temple because they were blaspheming the name of God.  We believe in casting out those who profane or disrespect our lord and sovereign.  We work in his name.  When Jesus comes again, he will save those who believe in him and he will banish the non-believers to eternal hell fire.

JOHN – Your idea of Jesus and what he stands for does not match my idea of his teachings and philosophy.  Why is it, your church always seems to talk about the Ten Commandments and God smiting the evil doers but I never hear any mention of Jesus and his 8 Beatitudes.   Does your God only love you?

CECELIA – Our God loves all true believers.

JOHN – Well, thank you Cecelia for your time.  May your God bless and watch over you.

After completing my interviews, one may well ask “What is your takeaway?”  There must be some sort of summary or moral point that you and I can glean from these brief conversations.  Aesop fables always have a moral point.  Most fairy tales and good novels always have a moral point.  Old TV shows always had a moral point.  What then is the point of these interviews?  What can we learn from them?  That is the question.  I am still pondering an answer –

Time for Questions:

What did you think about these interviews?  Did you get anything out of the conversations?  What questions should I have asked that I did not?  Were my responses to sharp or too weak?  Should I have challenged them more?

Life is just beginning.

“My mission in life is not merely to survive, but to thrive; and to do so with some passion, some compassion, some humor, and some style.”  — Maya Angelou
 

 

 

Previous Older Entries Next Newer Entries