Father Sthokal passed away this week on August 11th, 2020. He will be missed and never forgotten by the thousands of men who passed through Demontreville over the years that Father Ed was there. Such a remarkable man. This story deals with my first retreat and my first meeting with Father Sthokal way back in 1986. I have since completed 37 retreats.
34 years ago, I made my first retreat at Demontreville. Demontreville is a Jesuit Retreat Center in Lake Elmo Minnesota. I was not a Jesuit or even a practicing Catholic when I made my first retreat. In fact, I hailed myself as an atheist or sometimes an agnostic. I like agnosticism since it is a “just in case” religion. Just in case there is a heaven, hell, devil or god, I can always claim that I did not totally disavow him/her. This might give me a chance to get by the pearly gates. Anyway, I did not go to Demontreville for the religious experience.
It was January of 1986. I had finished all my course work for my Ph.D. degree. It had already been a long and cold and snowy Minnesota winter. I had finally collected all the data I needed to finish my dissertation. Four years in school, working…
I wrote this over a year ago. The Democrats have accomplished one of the three points I outlined. I am still waiting to see the other points addressed.
There is a simple truth that seems to be ignored about politics and elections. The reason we vote for someone is because of what we think they will do for our country, our family, our friends and our own lives. We do not vote for someone simply because they are Black, White, Indian, Asian or Latino. We do not vote for someone just because they are old, young, middle aged or because they are poor, middle class or rich. We do not vote for someone because they are Catholic, Evangelical, Muslim, Jewish or Protestant. Some of these factors may play an ancillary role in our voting preferences but the two major reasons we vote for someone are these: First, as I have said already: “Is the message that we hear from the candidate in terms of what they will plan to do if elected and how we see those…
Actually, the name of this speech is the “West India Emancipation Speech.” However, the line from Douglass’s speech that “If there is no struggle, there is no progress” is one of the most memorable lines in the history of speech. I first read about the life of Frederic Douglass sometime around the end of the sixties. As you may know, this was a time of social unrest and many assaults on the systems that governed the USA. I had become involved with a number of leftist groups and was reading Marx, Marcuse, Anarchist, Socialist and other writings belonging to what might be called a genre of “radical” literature. I became interested in anyone who championed change in our government, and this of course led me to a number of black authors.
I first read about the life of Douglass (1818–1895) in his autobiography (“Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass”, 1845). When I finally decided to go to college at the age of 25, I was required to take a speech class. The year was 1971 and I was 25 years old. The school offered me the opportunity to test out of the class. I was required to do a speech in front of a professor who then would decide if I could bypass the class. I decided to do an excerpt from Douglass’s “West India Emancipation Speech.” I was enamored of this speech years ago and today it is still one of the most memorable speeches that I have ever heard. Evidently, I did a good enough job on the speech since I was given credit for the class and I did not have to take it.
Context:
Frederic Douglas gave this speech on August 3, 1857 at Canandaigua, New York. It was an address concerning the history of the West Indian slaves in their own struggle for freedom. After years of slave revolts and civil disorder, England had abolished slavery in the British West Indies in 1834. Douglass used the anniversary of this event as leverage for speaking out against slavery in the United States. It epitomized his views concerning the role of struggle in the battle against slavery. The slaves in the West Indies achieved their freedom only after many years of struggles and reprisals against the British slave owners.
Twenty-three years later, when Douglass gave his speech, the turmoil in the United States over the issue of slavery was growing. It had always been a major source of dissension in the United States, but things were coming to a boiling point. The Dred Scott decision had recently been rendered by the US Supreme Court. This decision held that black people were not citizens and that slaves could not sue for freedom. In March of 1857, James Buchanan was sworn in as the 15th President of the USA. Buchanan was no friend of the abolitionists and he joined the Southern leaders in attempting to admit Kansas as a slave state. He strongly supported the Dred Scott decision and today he would be considered an ardent racist. The contrast between Lincoln who was elected four years later and Buchanan in terms of their policies towards slavery was the final straw that led to the Civil War.
Frederic Douglass was born a slave but escaped from Maryland to the north in 1838. Douglass was 20 years old at the time. He had taught himself to read and write. He had natural skills for oratory and writing and it did not take him long to establish himself in the Abolitionist Movement as a leader and speaker against slavery. Frederic was a man of deep compassion and empathy for others. Douglas not only supported the rights of all minorities including Native Americans and Chinese immigrants to freedom and equality, but he also championed the rights of women to vote and to have full participation in government and civic affairs.
West India Emancipation Speech:
“The general sentiment of mankind is that a man who will not fight for himself, when he has the means of doing so, is not worth being fought for by others, and this sentiment is just. For a man who does not value freedom for himself will never value it for others, or put himself to any inconvenience to gain it for others.”
Reading this speech again after many years reminds me of how much I still adore the words and thoughts that Douglass has voiced. I would not want a man as a friend who will not stand up for himself or others. I loathe sycophants such as those who surround Trump. I hate (yes hate) people who will abuse, denigrate, or attack other people. I have fought physically and verbally to defend people who were helpless or were being bullied. I would do so now and tomorrow. The meek may inherit the earth but they will need the angry antagonistic people like me to acquire their inheritance. I am glad that I do not profess to be a Christian because I do not believe in turning the other cheek. Not once, not ever. If there is a hell, I will go proudly to it knowing that I have fought to defend the rights of others.
“Who would be free, themselves must strike the blow.”
No nation or people in history were ever given their freedom by others. Those who want freedom must take it for themselves. Douglass was well aware of the struggles of other nations to achieve their independence. He noted the struggles of the Turks and the Hungarians and the Irish to achieve their independence.
“I know, my friends, that in some quarters the efforts of colored people meet with very little encouragement. We may fight, but we must fight like the Sepoys of India, under white officers. This class of Abolitionists don’t like colored celebrations, they don’t like colored conventions, they don’t like colored antislavery fairs for the support of colored newspapers.”
The sentiments that Douglass voiced here are hard for many white people to understand or accept. When Stokely Carmichael (Kwame Ture) the 4th Chairman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee wanted black people as the leadership of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee in the sixties many white people were indignant. How could they want to kick us out? “We have marched, we have rallied, we have sat side by side with black people to help overcome racism and now they are turning on us?”
When Ture supported the concept of “Black Power” many former white supporters were threatened. In a “Black Power” speech in 1966 Ture said: “It is a call for black people in this country to unite, to recognize their heritage, to build a sense of community. It is a call for black people to define their own goals, to lead their own organizations.” Black Power reflected the anger and pent-up disappointment with a system of white power that was forever promising blacks’ freedom and equality but never delivering on the promise. Many white liberals thought that black folks were now going to far.
White leaders in the Civil Rights Movement did not and could not understand the needs of black people to lead their own struggle and fight for freedom and liberty. Black people knew and understood that freedom achieved by others or given by others was no real freedom. The fight against racism meant that blacks must lead the fight and white supporters must follow. Frederic Douglass understood this concept one hundred year before the term Black Power was first used.
“Let me give you a word of the philosophy of reform. The whole history of the progress of human liberty shows that all concessions yet made to her august claims have been born of earnest struggle…. If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.
His words have never been truer. Greece fought the Persians. Rome fought the Carthaginians. England fought the Spanish. The US fought the British. The Chinese fought the Europeans. Throughout history, countries have only achieved their independence by a struggle that as Douglass noted: “This struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, and it may be both moral and physical, but it must be a struggle.”
Today we see protests against racism that are led under the banner of the Black Lives Matter movement. Some of these protests and rallies remain peaceful while at times others have become violent. Many decry the violence, looting and physical attacks on the police that sometimes break out during these rallies. I don’t defend the violence as necessary not do I defend the attacks on police as warranted unless they are in self-defense. However, I do understand the difference between cause and effect. When you are in a shell game, they tell you to “Keep your eye on the ball.” This is almost impossible to do. It is also impossible during the middle of the racism and prejudice that surrounds us to remember who the enemies and oppressors really are.
The police that are supposedly there to “Serve and Protect” seem more likely to be there to “Preserve and Protect” the status quo and the interests of big business. Too often, the mere presence of police in SWOT uniforms and riot gear at rallies serves to antagonize and provoke more violence. The very nature of SWOT uniforms and riot gear is both threatening and violent in and of itself. To stand there peacefully holding a sign while surrounded by people with batons, mace, tasers, automatic rifles and handguns takes a fortitude that not many people have. If you want to criticize a Black Lives Matter rally, you should first come out from your gated community and join a rally. See how you feel when law enforcement is present and looking over your shoulder with a rifle.
Should the rallies result in physical harm to others or to property? The answer is obvious, and it is no. But when I hear the outcries against such violence, I think back on Douglass’s words that:
“Those who profess to favor freedom and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing up the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters.”
I repeat these words from above since I think they bear reflection. Douglass knew that many abolitionists thought that slave revolts were “prejudicial to their cause.” The same is often heard today when rallies turn violent. But I want to ask, who is making this claim? It is easy to stand on the sidelines and applaud but not so easy to stand up to violence being inflected physically on those who are protesting peacefully as has happened during Trumps recent Bible photo op outside the White House.
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.
Today we are witnessing a descent into tyranny and demagoguery the likes of which have never before been seen in America. We have a President who lies whenever he speaks. We have a Republican party that abhors social justice and will do everything they can to suppress the rights of Americans to vote. We have a base of supporters for Trump that are racist, fascist, and anti-democratic. Lured by whatever sirens they listen to; they support the right of Trump to do whatever he wants to do. They call him their Messiah and voice unconditional support for his attacks on the press, minorities, immigrants, women, blacks, Latinos, disabled, foreign countries and even the disabled. A President who is willing to sacrifice thousands of lives to support his quest for a second term.
On a recent trip, I passed a sign in front of a house that read “Apathy is not an option.” I am sure I know what the person meant who posted this sign. Douglass would know what it meant and would fully understand that anyone professing a desire to stand on the sidelines would soon find themselves ruled by a tyrant. There is no option today except to fight. To paraphrase Patrick Henry, the chains of Americans are being forged in the White House. They are being forged in the Senate. They are being forged in the Supreme Court. They are being forged wherever the Republican Party has attained a majority. Quietly submit and you will attain the full measure of tyranny and injustice that your acquiescence has earned.
I wrote this about five years ago. Some of the people I label as racists may no longer hold office, but you can bet that in some states a racist replaced them. We now have a major upheaval in this country as more people want to see the uncashed checks that Martin Luther King talked about finally get cashed and deposited.
“Einnie, meanie, miney moe, catch a nigger by the toe. If he hollers, let’em go. Einnie meanie miney moe.”
Between 1868 and 1969, 3,446 African Americans were lynched in the United States. Some for looking at a White woman, some for being uppity, some for not getting off the sidewalk when a White person was coming, some for smiling, some for laughing and some for no other reason than they were Black. Today of course, we point with measured pride to the fact that the President of the United States of America is an African American man. I say with measured pride because President Barack Obama is perhaps one of the most reviled and hated men to ever hold the office. Gun sales have gone through the roof since his election along with an increase in hate groups. If Obama says the “Sky is blue today,” he is called…
Let’s start with the most obvious reason. Without the Chinese there would be no Chinese restaurants. No egg rolls. No chop suey. No fortune cookies. No egg foo young. No dim sum. No cute little sayings to make me think about my life. No Confucius. No wonderful tea. No China plates. But the biggest reason, is that without the Chinese we would have no one to hate.
China being half-way around the world, makes an ideal enemy and scapegoat. Let anything go wrong in the USA and we can blame China. We can blame China for the Corona Virus. We can blame China for a system where communism seems to work fairly well. We can blame China for having the audacity to become a world power. We can blame China for Tik Tok. We can blame China for a complicated language that seems difficult to learn. We can blame China for huge buffets with unknown foods that taste wonderful. Have you ever been to one of the Chinese restaurants where they have a gigantic buffet full of great Chinese food? Makes my mouth water just thinking about it. Of course, I always eat too much. The third go-around is what usually kills me.
We can blame China for all our economic problems. If things are going bad in the USA, it must be because they have stolen all of our ideas. If our stock market declines, it must be because they have stolen all of our patents. If our GDP is in the tank, it must be because they have stolen all of our great innovations. If our country is in deep debt, it must be because the Chinese have a flourishing successful economy. And now they want to steal a cure for the Corvid-19 virus. How selfish these Chinese can be? Don’t they realize that we will be more than happy to sell them a cure for the virus at billions of dollars of profit for our drug companies.
A major reason why I love the Chinese is based on the old saying that “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” My biggest enemy on the face of the earth is a man so despicable, so immoral, so degenerate that he has no scruples or conscience about destroying thousands of lives as long as he can get what he wants. The man has identified the Chinese as America’s biggest enemy. That is reason enough for me to love the Chinese. Not only are they the enemy of my biggest enemy, but if a man who lies every time he breathes is now telling me that the Chinese are my enemy, I can seriously doubt that anything he tells me about them is true. If he says that they cannot be trusted or that they are trying to destroy our country, I am not about to believe one single word of what he tells me.
Another reason I love the Chinese is based on something that Muhammad Ali once said when he was asked why he did not want to be drafted during the Vietnam War. To quote Ali:
Muhammad Ali. Speaks With Journalists After The Sentence For Refusing To Enlist. 1967. (Photo by: EyeOn/UIG via Getty Images)
“Why should they ask me to put on a uniform and go 10,000 miles from home and drop bombs and bullets on Brown people in Vietnam while so-called Negro people in Louisville are treated like dogs and denied simple human rights? No, I’m not going 10,000 miles from home to help murder and burn another poor nation simply to continue the domination of white slave masters of the darker people the world over. This is the day when such evils must come to an end. I have been warned that to take such a stand would cost me millions of dollars. But I have said it once and I will say it again. The real enemy of my people is here. I will not disgrace my religion, my people or myself by becoming a tool to enslave those who are fighting for their own justice, freedom, and equality. If I thought the war was going to bring freedom and equality to 22 million of my people they wouldn’t have to draft me, I’d join tomorrow. I have nothing to lose by standing up for my beliefs. So, I’ll go to jail, so what? We’ve been in jail for 400 years.”
Times have not changed since Ali refused to fight a war that we now know in hindsight was unjust and immoral. A war with China would serve no more purpose than the war in Vietnam served or the war in Iraq served. Except to kill millions of people who are doing no more than we are in the USA and just trying to make a living. I have no desire or need to fight China. China is not destroying Democracy in my country. The Chinese have expressed no hatred for me or desire to come over and kill Americans. The Chinese have not started any wars with the USA, nor have they threatened to start a war with us.
In 1989, Karen and I obtained permission to visit mainland China. The occurrence of our visit coincided with the death of Communist General Secretary Hua Yaobang in April 1989. The uprising associated with what has been called the “1989 Democracy Movement” had already begun when we arrived. We stayed in China for three weeks. We left a few days before the Tiananmen Square Massacre on June 4. In fact, we left just a day before the airports in China were closed for foreign travel.
We traveled to China by ourselves. We were not on a tour nor did we have a guided itinerary. We arrived in Shanghai. We went south to Huang Zhou, then we went northwest to Huangshan or the Sacred Mountains. We then went east to Nanjing and then finally back to Shanghai. We traveled by foot, train, bus, bicycle, and rented car. On our trip we met many wonderful Chinese people. Some took us on local tours of their cities. Some hiked with us. Some invited us over for dinner. Some became our long-time friends. Some even emigrated to the USA and have become citizens here. No one expressed any hostility towards us during our travels. No one cursed us. No one insulted us. Many desired to speak to us about our country and some simply to practice their English. Let me tell you one funny story that happened while we were walking about.
One day while Karen and I were out sightseeing, a bunch of soldiers saw us and came over to engage us in conversation. Everywhere we went, people wanted to talk to us. There were about fifteen soldiers in the group who were all heavily armed. They jostled to take turns talking to us. We had been warned about staying away from politics while in China but somehow the conversation drifted to our respective political leadership. Someone asked who our president was. I noted that George Herbert Walker Bush was our current president. Immediately, the person who had asked me this question replied in clear English that “Your president is an asshole.” Now, I had not voted for Bush nor did I particularly like him. However, my immediate reaction was defensive as my country had been attacked. I replied without thinking “Your chairman Deng Xiaoping is an asshole too.” Karen caught her breath. I thought she might have a heart attack. Suddenly, a voice said “You are right. He is too.” Everyone started to laugh ridiculously hard. We went our way amidst many hand shakes and pictures that they wanted to take with us.
I bought Karen her wedding ring in China. We were married three months after we returned from our trip. Several years after we returned from China, Fu Xibo, a man we met in Shanghai who helped us to arrange some of our travel while in China contacted us. We had met Fu and his wife Mary and his daughter Dan Dan in Shanghai. We had been invited to their apartment for dinner and we had traveled on part of our trip with Xibo. We had many things in common and we quickly established a bond together. We kept in touch via email after we returned from China. Nevertheless, I was surprised at the request Xibo made.
Xibo expressed a desire to immigrate to the USA with his wife Mary. He wanted to know if we would sponsor him as a US citizen. Despite our friendship, I had my doubt or perhaps qualms. I would be financially responsible for Xibo and Mary if they had no visible means of support. I had to submit three years of my tax returns to show that I had the financial ability to support Xibo. Karen and I discussed this and the resultant problems it could cause us financially. I am not a rich man. We lived in a house that Karen bought in 1970 for thirty thousand dollars. I was working as a consultant and educator. We had about a $100,000-dollar yearly income between the two of us. Nevertheless, we decided to support Xibo and Mary in their desire to become US citizens. It was perhaps one of the best decisions we have ever made in our lives. We have never had any regrets.
Xibo and Mary now live as retired senior citizens in San Francisco. Their daughter Dan Dan (Diana Fu) married a wonderful Chinese man in the states and has become a full US citizen. Dan Dan and Woo have two sons and a daughter. Xibo and Mary have become the day care providers for their grandchildren. It is a job they undertake with joy and passion. They are ensuring that the children learn Chinese and appreciate their cultural heritage. We have visited them in San Francisco twice during the past few years and they have come to Wisconsin to visit us. Xibo still has an apartment in China and wants us to come again to Shanghai and see the many changes that have taken place since 1989. I love Xibo and Mary. We have become Aunt Karen and Uncle John to Dan Dan and honorary Grandma Karen and Grandpa John to Aidan, Braydon and Corrina, the three grandchildren. They are in the picture below with Dan Dan and her husband Wou.
I do not see the Chinese as the enemy of our country. I see a country that in 2020 has 1,439,323,776 people according to UN data. The Chinese population is equivalent to 18.47% of the total world population. It is a country whose immigrants have helped to build the United States. It is a country that fought with us against the Japanese in WWII. It is a country of hardworking industrious people who all want the same things we do in the USA. Freedom, equality, and justice. I can think of nothing more despicable than using the Chinese as a scapegoat for our own economic problems.
I have been a business educator and management consultant for over thirty years now. I have advised some of the largest organizations in the world on process management and quality improvement. I have worked with leading experts in the field of business management. If there is a single thing that I have learned in my thirty years of consulting, it is that we make our own problems. Business leaders will tell you this. We are responsible for our economy. China is not responsible. We claim to embrace capitalism because competition is vital to a growing robust economy but then we attack China because they are a competitor. Business leaders look for solutions to problems. Politicians look for easy answers and scapegoats.
Blame China for the virus that our leaders have helped to spread.
“Despite ample warning, the U.S. squandered every possible opportunity to control the coronavirus. And despite its considerable advantages—immense resources, biomedical might, scientific expertise—it floundered.” — “How the Pandemic Defeated America,” The Atlantic, Ed Yong, September 2020.
Blame China for our national debt that relies on loans from China.
“Japan and China own about 5.2% and 4.6% of the U.S. debt, respectively. Japanese-owned debt doesn’t receive nearly as much negative attention as Chinese-owned debt, ostensibly because Japan is seen as a friendlier nation and the Japanese economy hasn’t been growing at a 7% clip year after year.” — How Much U.S. Debt Does China Own?
Blame China for cheap imports that Americans readily buy.
“Suppose, overnight, Americans stopped buying Chinese products. Some store shelves would be empty, and prices would be higher. One way or another, our economy would shrink.” Forbes, May 2020
Blame China for stealing trade secrets but trade secret theft is a common occurrence among US companies.
“The National People’s Congress of China amended the Anti-Unfair Competition Law (AUCL) in April 2019 to protect the trade secrets of companies doing business in China. We consider these changes to be major improvements to Chinese trade secret law, giving more protection to companies doing business in China.” — Trade Secrets 2019 Year in Review
Its about time we stop blaming the Chinese for our problems. Think very carefully before you point any fingers at the Chinese. No doubt they engage in some unfair trade practices. No doubt they steal some trade secrets from us. No doubt they have spies in the USA. But you are a complete fool if you do not think that we are not doing the same thing to them and other countries.
Trump Administration Proposes $86 Billion Spy Budget to Take On Russia and China — New York Times
“When we understand people;
when we understand situations;
when we understand what matters;
when we understand the why’s, the what’s and the how’s;
when we understand the trigger of actions, we least inflict pain on ourselves and unto others.” ― Ernest Agyemang Yeboah
During the time of the slave trade, it is estimated that some 13 million African natives were captured and sent by ship to the Americas to work plantations in both North and South America. They were sent because they represented cheap labor. Not free labor because slaves had to be fed, clothed, and bought. Of these 13 million individuals, somewhere between 2-3 million men, women and children perished on the voyage over. They died from malnutrition, disease and outright murder by hangings, drownings, and beatings. Consider if you will the shrinkage rate. In merchandising shrinkage of a product is the loss of a product through “unavoidable” circumstances.
A good merchandiser does everything they can to avoid shrinkage. The loss of a product represents loss of profit for a company. Such was not the case with the slave trade. Every slave was regarded as property but with a difference. They were regarded as “expendable.”
“Black lives did not matter.”
A slaver or slave owner could “write” off the loss of a slave as simply a cost of doing business. The market for slaves was never predicated on a 100 percent transfer of live merchandise. If only 75 percent of the African natives made it over to the Americas, the cost of slaves would be based on that percentage. The rest might today be called “collateral damage.” They never could have been called an “unavoidable” expense since murder and starvation are hardly unavoidable.
Much has been made of the fact that slaves were regarded as “property” by the plantation owners in the south. Confederate apologists say that slaves were well cared. Logically, any property would be regarded as valuable. Thus, slaves were well fed, well clothed and well housed. History again is a lie. The lower the cost of maintaining a slave, the more profit for a slave owner. Thus, little expense was allocated towards feeding, clothing, or improving the life of a slave. In any business, the future success of the business, is related to the further development of the workers in that business. Companies spend billions of dollars a year on Human Resource Development (HRD) activities designed to train, educate, and improve the knowledge, skills, and abilities of their workers. This was not the case with slavery. There were no HRD programs for slaves.
Slaves had to clothe, feed, and take care of their own medical problems. If they died, they were expendable. Slaves could be replaced by breeding more slaves or by raping slaves and replacing any that died. Slaves were not educated, and laws prohibited the teaching of reading or writing to slaves. Knowledge has always meant power and that was one thing that must be denied to slaves. Some slaveholders would teach select slaves reading or writing skills because they needed someone to run errands for them, but this was the exception in the USA and not the rule.
1819, Missouri: Prohibited assembling or teaching slaves to read or write. 1829, Georgia: Prohibited teaching blacks to read, punished by fine and imprisonment. 1832, Alabama and Virginia: Prohibited whites from teaching blacks to read or write, punished by fines and floggings. — Anti-literacy laws in the United States
“The United States is unique in that it is the only country known to have prohibited the education of slaves.” — Wikipedia
“Black lives did not matter.”
Several versions including movies and stories have portrayed the life of a slave as one of happiness and joy. This version of history shows slaves as well cared for, well treated, and generally satisfied with their station in life. Happy to be working for their white masters, happy to be caring for the children of their white masters and happy to be singing and dancing for their white masters. One wonders then why there were over 250 slave rebellions before slavery was abolished in 1865. This figure does not count the number of slaves who tried to escape by running away. The famous “underground railroad” is estimated to have helped as many as 70,000 individuals (though estimations vary from 40,000 to 100,000) escape from slavery in the years between 1800 and 1865. — Fugitive slave
The most famous slave rebellion took place in Virginia in 1831. The rebellion was led by Nat Turner. After a considerable number of white people were killed the revolt was finally suppressed. As an aftermath of the revolt, 56 slaves were officially executed but over 120 other slaves and free blacks were murdered in retaliation. Valuable black property was not so valuable when it came to revenge. To prove that black lives were not regarded as compensable property is the fact that after the rebellion at least seven slaveowners sent legislative petitions for compensation for the loss of their slaves. They were all rejected.
“Black lives did not matter.”
Again, one wonders why the happy singing slaves would go to the risk and peril of staging a slave revolt knowing full well that the consequences would mean a terrible death. The slaves executed were often tortured and put to death with as much pain and suffering as possible. There was no effort made to provide a humane method of execution.
“Black lives did not matter.”
In 1932, The United States Public Health Service (PHS) conducted the infamous “Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the African American Male.” This so-called study took place between 1932 and 1972.
“Investigators enrolled in the study a total of 600 impoverished, African American sharecroppers from Macon County, Alabama. Of these men, 399 had latent syphilis, with a control group of 201 men who were not infected. As an incentive for participation in the study, the men were promised free medical care, but were deceived by the PHS, who disguised placebos, ineffective methods, and diagnostic procedures as treatment. The men who had syphilis were never informed of their diagnosis, despite the risk of infecting others, and the fact that the disease could lead to blindness, deafness, mental illness, heart disease, bone deterioration, collapse of the central nervous system, and death.” — Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment
“Black lives did not matter.”
The Vietnam war was in full swing from 1964 to 1973 in terms of major US troop involvement. During this period, many of the men who served in front line combat units were enlisted from the draft rolls.
“By lowering the education standards of the draft, an estimated 40% of the 246,000 draftees of Project 100,000 were Black. Some activists in the US speculated that the uneven application of the draft was a method of Black genocide. Black people were starkly under-represented on draft boards in this era, with none on the draft boards of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, or Arkansas.” — Military History of African Americans During the Vietnam War
“African American troops were more likely to be assigned to combat units. Twenty-three percent of combat troops in Vietnam were Black. The combination of our selective service policies, our testing of both drafted and volunteers, the need for skilled enlisted men in many areas of the armed forces, all conspired to assign blacks in greater numbers to the combat units of the Army and Marine Corps. Early in the war, when blacks made up about 11.0% of our Vietnam force, black casualties soared to over 20% of the total.” — Vietnam War Statistics
“Black lives did not matter.”
A recent Harvard Study (2020) found that blacks were up to six times more likely to be killed by police during an encounter than whites. They analyzed 5,494 police-related fatalities using data from Fatal Encounters a database of people killed in encounters with police. There was a great deal of variation across the country but on average, blacks were three times more likely to be killed during a police encounter than whites.
The Harvard study did not show how many more times blacks are going to be encountered by police for routine matters. A Stanford University study of nearly 100 million traffic stops from around the US has concluded that, on average, black drivers are 20% more likely to get pulled over than a white driver. More likely to get pulled over and then more likely to get killed. A black man or woman stopped for drunk driving is (on average) up to three times more likely than a white man or woman stopped for drunk driving to be killed during the encounter.
“Black lives still do not matter.”
A few weeks ago, up here in the North woods of Wisconsin in our rural Polk County we had a “Black Lives Matter” protest rally. Mostly white rural people up here in our county. About fifty or more people showed up carrying signs supporting the “Black Lives Matter” movement. Karen and I made two signs and joined the rally. Looking at the numbers of white people in the country supporting this movement, I can’t help but wonder if white people are finally “woking” up. If they are “woke” how long will they stay “woke.”
Liberal whites are for many blacks more despicable than conservative racists. Malcolm X noted in one of his talks that:
“The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro’s friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political “football game” that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.” — Malcom X Speech 1963.
A recent example of white hypocrisy concerns the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). A Center long heralded for their attacking racist groups like the Aryan Brotherhood and the KKK, they recently came under attack for racial discrimination within their own ranks. The liberal champion at this organization was a lawyer named Morris Dees. Famed for his standing up to the Klan and for the number of threats on his life, he resigned during the turmoil over the charges against him and the SPLC. Some employees claim that the civil rights nonprofit group suffers from a “systemic culture of racism and sexism within its workplace.”
I have had many arguments with liberal friends over the issue of racism in the USA. I generally find that they agree with me – up to a point. We disagree on methods of dealing with racism often with large gaps in our strategies. There is no way a liberal will ever agree to or countenance violence against oppression. This is the reason that Martin Luther King was championed over Malcolm X. Malcolm X did not believe in “turning the other cheek.” Liberals believe that you can “Reason” with racists and help them to see the error of their ways. In 1857 Frederic Douglas gave a speech now called “If There is No Struggle, there is No Progress.” (I will “reconstruct” this speech in my next blog)
After I argue with my liberal friends (often I defend some of the violence associated with protests) they will go home to their suburban white gated communities with their security walls and security guards who make routine patrols through their neighborhoods. Driving through these communities, you will not be surprised to find few if any minorities living within the gated walls. When Karen and I bought a home in Arizona we had to argue with the realtor because she insisted we buy a home in a gated community where we “would be safer.” We refused and we have Latino and Black neighbors on our street. We have children running up and down the street and we have no walls to block our view of reality.
Before the “Black Lives Matter” Rally began in Centuria, a small town in Polk County, an “All Lives Matter” group assembled across from us. Sporting MAGA hats, Trump Signs and signs promoting “All Lives Matter” they watched us from across the street. Later during the rally, they “buzzed” us with a pickup truck to harass us. The police stationed themselves to watch for any potential violence and to keep the two groups apart. I decided to walk down and talk to some of the guys standing near a pickup truck and ask them a few questions.
I approached two men. One guy had a long beard, several tattoos and was probably in his sixties. The other man was tall, muscular, a muscle t-shirt, several tattoos and was probably in his forties. I told them that I was a member of the “Black Lives Matter” rally. I then asked them if they supported us (I kept a straight face). I had my Air Force veterans’ hat on. They seemed somewhat surprised at my question and replied that “They believed all lives mattered.” They then wanted to know why we singled out only the lives of black people. I noted the large number of blacks recently killed by police with little or no motivation. They replied with some statistics concerning the large number of white people who are often killed by police during encounters.
I asked if either of them was a veteran. The older guy said he was. He said that he had served in the Army and that he was a Vietnam Veteran. I asked if he had ever served with any black soldiers and if he thought they covered his ass when needed. He told me that he had a great deal of respect for the black soldiers he served with. We talked some military stuff for a few minutes and about the violence associated with some of the recent protest rallies. I finally decided to ask one last question that I had been thinking about. I asked “Why did you wait to protest ‘All Lives Matter’ until the ‘Black Lives Matter’ protests started?” I did not get an answer.
I think the “All Lives Matter” slogan is a disingenuous white method of promoting racism. It is easier to discount the effort to make black lives important by aggregating all lives into one anonymous amorphous coagulation of people who die. Then we can ignore the black people who are subjected daily to racism and discrimination in American society. What they are really saying is that:
Black Lives Still Don’t Matter!
“For to be free is not merely to cast off one’s chains, but to live in a way that respects and enhances the freedom of others.” —Nelson Mandela
“This fall, public school districts should prioritize full-time, in-person classes for grades K-5 and for students with special needs.” So says a new report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. Many are using this report to endorse opening all education institutions FULL-TIME and even decrying distance learning as a failure. If you want to read the full report, you can download it in PDF for no cost. Go to: Reopening K-12 Schools During the COVID-19 Pandemic
This is one of the worst pieces of research I have ever seen in my life. It is claimed in the report that “The report includes an updated review of the evidence from around the world and a set of recommendations on mitigation strategies for the corona-virus in school settings.” In actuality, there is little factual data supporting a reopening strategy but a great deal of conjecture. Some of the so-called findings would seem to support NOT opening. For instance:
“there is no definitive evidence about what suite of strategies is most effective for limiting transmission within a school setting when students, teachers, and other staff are present.”
(145 Pages of this report is mostly information you could get online about the effects and history of the Covid Pandemic.)
“The existing guidance documents offer an extensive list of potential strategies but little guidance on how districts and schools can or should prioritize them.”
(Little guidance but they are making their recommendations to open the schools anyway).
“Many of the mitigation strategies currently under consideration (such as limiting classes to small cohorts of students or implementing physical distancing between students and staff) require substantial reconfiguring of space, purchase of additional equipment, adjustments to staffing patterns, and upgrades to school buildings.”
(When and how will this happen? In the next month? Does this seem realistic?)
“The research community should immediately conduct research that will provide the evidence needed to make informed decisions about school reopening and safe operation. The most urgent areas for inquiry are: • children and transmission of COVID-19, • the role of reopening schools in contributing to the spread of COVID-19 in communities, • the role of airborne transmission of COVID-19, and • the effectiveness of different mitigation strategies.”
(This is a so-called research study but it recommends we make more research to find “evidence” about school reopening that they are already recommending to reopen.”
“Second, the committee determined that, given the short timeline for producing this report, an exhaustive, systematic review of all available guidance documents for schools and districts was not feasible.”
“The committee met virtually five times over a 4-week period.”
(The time spent doing “research” is ridiculous. It is nothing but a cut and paste job that looks like it came from the White House.”
“If children do transmit the disease efficiently, as they do with influenza, for example, physically reopening schools could accelerate the transmission of COVID-19 in a community. Data needed to answer this and other important questions are unlikely to be available by the time the decision to reopen will have to be made.”
(The Data will not be likely to be available, but we recommend anyway?”)
“Twenty-eight percent of public school teachers are over 50, putting them in the higher risk age category for serious consequences of COVID-19 (Taie and Goldring, 2020). On a survey of teachers, principals, and district leaders administered by the EdWeek Research Center in June, 2020, 62% reported that they were somewhat or very concerned about returning. Any plans for reopening will need to address these concerns.”
(So how do we protect the teachers? Administrators and Parents?)
There are five major reasons this study offers for reopening the schools, but they give little evidence to support a true analysis of the costs/benefits for reopening. Nor do they offer any alternatives. They are as follows:
Many families rely on schools for daycare.
Schools provide meals
Schools provide mental health counseling and health care
Schools are a center of social life
Minorities and disadvantaged youth will fall behind wealthy children who have better home access to the internet and distance learning.
My response to the above issues:
We need national daycare as well as national health care for all. No question. But are schools the right place for day care services? Is reopening going to solve our daycare problem?
Many schools have already made arrangements to help provide needed meals. We do not need to reopen the schools to do this.
In Wisconsin there is 1 counselor for about every 470 students in the state. (See data from “https://www.schoolcounselor.org/asca/media/asca/Publications/ratioreport.pdf) It does not seem very likely to me that much mental health counseling is actually going on. This ratio is even worse in many other states.
Schools may be a center of social life, but kids will not die from a slightly diminished social life. I doubt many high school kids suffer much during summer months from a lack of social life.
Suddenly, they are concerned with minorities and disadvantaged youth? This is a quite disingenuous argument. Educators have been asking for years for more funds to help address this issue and suddenly it is given as one of the primary reasons for reopening the schools. The report even notes the pervasive systemic racism in the education system. Now they want to reopen the schools to address the issue of racism?
After reading this 145 pages piece of garbage, I may never have any respect again for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.
I can only suspect that the White House threatened to cut off their funding if they did not publish something to support Trump’s determination to open the schools. This is clearly part of Trump’s agenda to get the economy to reopen before the elections. The result of his pressure on states to reopen and his lack of support for efforts such as masks to mitigate the spread of this virus are nothing short of criminal. The administration is willing to sacrifice “old people” for the sake of the economy and now they are willing to sacrifice “young people” as well.
The battlefields ring with the cries of the dead and dying.
The soil cries out as it is poisoned with a stew of rot and pollutants
The air cries out as it is smothered with a brew of fumes and gases
The water cries out as it is fouled with a soup of oil and garbage
The earth shudders and heaves as it cries itself to sleep each night.
God looks down upon the earth and crying says, “What did I do?”
A note on this small bit of prose:
At my retreat this week, one of the exercises given by Father Shea SJ was to imagine that we could look down upon the earth. Using our senses of sight, sound, smell, taste, and touch, what do we observe? I closed my eyes and imagined that I was on some distant star. I looked down upon the earth, but I could not see anyone. What suddenly came to my attention as the blue ball of earth rotated beneath my gaze was the sound of crying. All over the earth, I could hear crying. From every part of the earth I was conscious of the sound of crying. Hence, I wrote this small bit of prose to capture the lamentations of our planet.
I have attended over 35 Jesuit retreats at Demontreville Retreat Center. Every year at the end of each retreat, I have received a Plenary Indulgence bestowed by the Pope on people who complete a retreat. Unlike in the day of Martin Luther, I do not have to pay for these indulgences. My understanding is these indulgences will knock some of the time off that I have to spend in purgatory as reparations for my less than mortal sins. You still cannot get time off for mortal sins without going to confession.
I am not sure how much time will be knocked off and since I am an atheist or sometimes an agnostic, I am not sure whether or not they will be valid. I once wondered if I could put them up on eBay and maybe get some money from them. This would be more in line with the uses that were associated with these plenary indulgences in the time of Martin Luther (1483 to 1546).
There are many who would consider Martin Luther the father of the Protestant Reformation. Growing up Catholic, we regarded Protestants as heretics. We all knew that the one true religion was Catholic, and Protestants did not know what they really wanted. What does the name Protestant even mean? Taking it at face value, it would seem to mean to protest against. The dictionary defines a Protestant as someone who has broken from the Roman Catholic church. If you are a Protestant you practice a form of Christianity in protest to the Catholic form. There are over 200 major Protestant denominations in the USA and over 35,000 independent or non-denominational Christian churches which are ostensibly Protestant. During the past few decade, we have seen numerous splits in Protestant churches over such issues as gay marriages, gay clergy, women ministers. Even though I am a non-Catholic myself, I can’t help but be amazed at the dissension and disunity among Protestants. I wonder what Martin Luther would have thought if he were alive today.
In any case, Luther protested against the selling of Indulgences by the Catholic Church and the Pope. He published his famous 95 Theses (which were polemics primarily against the monetary abuses of the Church) by nailing the theses on the door of All Saints’ Church and other churches in Wittenberg, Germany. An extremely dramatic way to advance his opposition. The theses were quickly reprinted and spread like wildfire throughout Europe. And thus, began what is known as the Protestant Reformation (1517 – 1648). It actually started even earlier but Luther’s theses were the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.
Martin Luther’s position and actions were quite bold, even audacious. Luther’s ecclesiastical superiors had him tried for heresy, which culminated in his excommunication in 1521. This retaliation on the part of the Catholic Church was quite serious. Luther risked life and limb with his attack on the Church. The following is a list of people executed for challenging Catholicism during the period from 1500-1600 CE.
Ipswich Martyrs († 1515–1558)
Jean Vallière († 1523)
Jan de Bakker († 1525), 1st martyr in the Northern Netherland
Wendelmoet Claesdochter († 1527), 1st Dutch woman charged and burned for the accusation of heresy
Michael Sattler († 1527), Rottenburg am Neckar, Germany
Patrick Hamilton († 1528), St Andrews, Scotland
Balthasar Hubmaier (1485–1528), Vienna, Austria
George Blaurock (1491–1529), Klausen, Tyrol
Thomas Hitton († 1530), Maidstone, England
Richard Bayfield († 1531), Smithfield, England
Thomas Benet († 1531), Exeter, England
Thomas Bilney († 1531), Norwich, England
Joan Bocher († 1531), Smithfield, England
Solomon Molcho († 1532), Mantua
Thomas Harding († 1532), Chesham, England
James Bainham († 1532), Smithfield, England
John Frith (1503–1533), Smithfield, England
William Tyndale (1490–1536), Belgium
Jakob Hutter († 1536), Innsbruck, Tyrol
Aefgen Listincx († 1538), Münster, Germany
John Forest († 1538), Smithfield, England
Katarzyna Weiglowa († 1538), Poland
Francisco de San Roman († 1540), Spain
Étienne Dolet (1509–1546), Paris, France
Henry Filmer († 1543), Windsor, England
Robert Testwood († 1543), Windsor, England
Anthony Pearson († 1543), Windsor, England
Maria van Beckum († 1544)
Ursula van Beckum († 1544)
Colchester Martyrs († 1545 to 1558), 26 people, Colchester, England
George Wishart (1513–1546), St Andrews, Scotland
John Hooper († 1555), Gloucester, England
John Rogers († 1555), London, England
Canterbury Martyrs († 1555–1558), c.40 people, Canterbury, England
Laurence Saunders, (1519–1555), Coventry, England
Rowland Taylor († 1555), Hadleigh, Suffolk, England
Cornelius Bongey, († 1555), Coventry, England
Dirick Carver, († 1555), Lewes, England
Robert Ferrar († 1555), Carmarthen, Wales
William Flower († 1555), Westminster, England
Patrick Pakingham († 1555), Uxbridge, England
Hugh Latimer (1485–1555), Oxford, England
Robert Samuel († 1555), Ipswich, England
Burning of Latimer and Ridley, Oxford, 1555
Nicholas Ridley (1500–1555), Oxford, England
John Bradford († 1555), London, England
John Cardmaker († 1555), Smithfield, London, England
Robert Glover († 1555), Hertford, England
Thomas Hawkes († 1555), Coggeshall, England
Thomas Tomkins († 1555), Smithfield, London, England
Thomas Cranmer (1489–1556), Oxford, England
Stratford Martyrs († 1556), 11 men and 2 women, Stratford, London, England
Bartlet Green († 1556), Smithfield, London, England
John Hullier († 1556), Cambridge, England
John Forman († 1556), East Grinstead, England
Pomponio Algerio († 1556) Boiled in oil, Rome
Alexander Gooch and Alice Driver († 1558), Ipswich, England
Augustino de Cazalla († 1559), Valladolid, Spain
Carlos de Seso († 1559), Valladolid, Spain
María de Bohórquez († 1559)
Pietro Carnesecchi († 1567) Florence, Italy
Leonor de Cisneros († 1568), Valladolid, Spain
Dirk Willems († 1569), Netherlands
Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), Rome, Italy
The famous scientist Galileo was forced to recant his idea that the earth revolved around the sun. This was widely known among many scientists, but it was opposed by the Catholic Church which held to the view that the sun revolved around the earth. Thus, in 1521 Galileo was charged with heresy. After a rather lengthy trial, Galileo retracted his theory preferring to live rather than to be right. Nevertheless, he spent the rest of his life under house arrest. Publication of any of his works was forbidden, including any future works.
Martin Luther’s Speech at the Imperial Diet in Worms (18 April 1521)
On 18 April 1521 Luther stood before the presiding officer, Johann von Eck at the ongoing Diet in Worms. Luther was called before the political authorities rather than before the Pope or a council of the Roman Catholic Church. Eck acting on behalf of the Catholic Church informed Luther that he was acting like a heretic. Pope Leo X had demanded that Luther retract 41 sentences included in his original 95 Theses. Luther had been questioned the day before, but he had requested time to think about his response to the charges. Thus, began Luther’s short but famous speech. His life depended on his response.
“I this day appear before you in all humility, according to your command, and I implore your majesty and your august highnesses, by the mercies of God, to listen with favor to the defense of a cause which I am well assured is just and right. I ask pardon, if by reason of my ignorance, I am wanting in the manners that befit a court; for I have not been brought up in king’s palaces, but in the seclusion of a cloister; and I claim no other merit than that of having spoken and written with the simplicity of mind which regards nothing but the glory of God and the pure instruction of the people of Christ.”
Luther begins his speech with humility and with apologies for any lack of etiquette or procedure, but no apologies for his actions. He is certain that he is right.
“I have composed, secondly, certain works against the papacy, wherein I have attacked such as by false doctrines, irregular lives, and scandalous examples, afflict the Christian world, and ruin the bodies and souls of men. And is not this confirmed by the grief of all who fear God? Is it not manifest that the laws and human doctrines of the popes entangle, vex, and distress the consciences of the faithful, while the crying and endless extortions of Rome engulf the property and wealth of Christendom, and more particularly of this illustrious nation? Yet it is a perpetual statute that the laws and doctrines of the pope be held erroneous and reprobate when they are contrary to the Gospel and the opinions of the church fathers.”
Luther’s words could not be stronger here. He accuses the Pope of offense that are scandalous, immoral, and perhaps even criminal. He softens his words here not one bit. He is not on the defense but on the offense. Here is a man not dissembling or hedging his words. If he is afraid for his life, his words show no fear or caution. He is doing no political two step or making effort to appease the Pope. Perhaps Luther knew that he was in little danger of being executed but the fact that he spent the next nine months of his life in hiding would suggest differently.
“In the third and last place, I have written some books against private individuals, who had undertaken to defend the tyranny of Rome by destroying the faith. I freely confess that I may have attacked such persons with more violence than was consistent with my profession as an ecclesiastic: I do not think of myself as a saint; but neither can I retract these books. Because I should, by so doing, sanction the impieties of my opponents, and they would thence take occasion to crush God’s people with still more cruelty.”
Luther does not back down one bit. He confesses to more passion than might have been required but he will not retract anything he has written. I am no saint he says but I will not be a hypocrite. Just think of the people surrounding President Trump and contrast their lies, obfuscations, and baffling oratory with the quite clear words of Martin Luther: “What, then, should I be doing if I were now to retract these writings?” “What if I said my president was lying? What if I said my president was engaging in double speak? What if I admitted that my president actually said the words which he claimed that he did not say? Would I be subject to trial by fire or would I be burned at the stake?”
What makes someone lie on behalf of someone else?
The ending of Luther’s defense was epic. Perhaps no more forceful words have ever been spoken in history.
“I neither can nor will retract anything; for it cannot be either safe or honest for a Christian to speak against his conscience. Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise; God help me! Amen.”
Emperor Charles V passed the Edict of Worms, which banned Luther’s writings and declared him a heretic and an enemy of the state. Luther fled and although the Edict mandated that Luther should be captured and turned over to the emperor, it was never enforced. Bear in mind the list of heretics who came after Luther and was executed.
Luther was a German professor of theology a composer and a priest. He was no warrior or fighter. In many ways, he was average, except in one especially important way that mattered and would make him a hero for all time. He was not afraid to stand up to tyranny and to stand up for his beliefs and to speak out on behalf of what he believed.
Imagine if more citizens were courageous enough to stand up for what they believed and to speak out forcefully and not meekly on behalf of these same beliefs. It has been said that “Evil triumphs when good people do nothing.” Doing nothing or saying nothing are one of the same cloth. If you want to allow a dictator, bully, or tyrant to take power, simply stay quiet and bemoan the fact that you can do nothing. Or you can write, speak, march, protest and organize against injustice wherever it can be found. Any less makes us guilty of a conspiracy of silence.
“A conspiracy of silence, or culture of silence, describes the behavior of a group of people of some size, as large as an entire national group or profession or as small as a group of colleagues, that by unspoken consensus does not mention, discuss, or acknowledge a given subject. The practice may be motivated by positive interest in group solidarity or by such negative impulses as fear of political repercussion or social ostracism.” — Wikipedia
It was said that Socrates was the “Wisest Man” in the world. Actually, Socrates was not that smart. If he had been smart, he would have realized that teaching people to question authority was not such a good idea. Socrates was the epitome of Greek philosophy. He was born in 470 BCE and died in 399 BCE at the age of 71. He died or rather was executed by taking the poison hemlock after being found guilty of “corrupting” the youth of Athens. Corrupting should be thought of as a euphemism for actually getting the youth to “think for themselves.” A characteristic no more desired two thousand and five hundred years ago than it is today. (See my blog “Are Americans Brainwashed.”)
Hundreds of years later and schools are still not able to teach critical thinking skills to students. I have been in education for over 45 years and I can testify to fact that rote learning is valued ten times more than critical thinking in any school in America. True, there are many educators who will tell you how important critical thinking skills are. However, when push comes to shove standardized tests, SAT tests, ACT tests, GRE tests, GMAT tests, LSAT tests, MCAT tests, diploma requirements and graduation exams all demand facts and data. The quest for the holy grail of critical thinking goes down the toilet.
Socrates might not have actually been the smartest man or even the smartest philosopher, but he certainly knew the value of critical thinking. The Socratic Method is still widely revered as perhaps the best method for teaching critical thinking. Socrates did not leave a large body of writings or principles or admonitions for success and greatness. Socrates simply left us the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions, also known as a dialectic. The Socratic method accomplished this by questioning everything. Wikipedia defines the method as follows:
“The Socratic method (also known as method of Elenchus, elenctic method, or Socratic debate), is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presuppositions.” —- Wikipedia
If I am sounding critical of Socrates, this is not my intent. If any man in history was my hero, it would be Socrates. Not only did Socrates value critical thinking and actually practice it with his pupils, but he had the audacity and courage to stick to his guns right up to the end. To understand the integrity of the man, you must read and understand his Defense Speech given at his trial.
The Trial of Socrates and His Defense Speech:
The fathers of Athens and the Athenian leaders had finally had enough of Socrates. Socrates had created many enemies along the way. Other philosophers resented his methods and his denigration of their supposed wisdom. Prominent leaders thought he challenged democracy because Socrates believed that democratic decision making did not always result in the best decisions. When it came to their children questioning them and their authority, this was the final straw.
Socrates was hauled into an Athenian court and charged with two counts. Corrupting the youth of Athens and impious acts. His impious acts involved questioning the Greek gods. The Athenians did not have a strict separation of church and state. Socrates really pissed them off by failing to respect their gods. Even today, such disrespect will get you killed in many countries across the globe.
Now of course, no one has an exact transcript of Socrates trial. It has also been generally acknowledged that despite Socrates being found guilty by five hundred Athenian jurors of both charges and sentenced to death, they were willing to let him escape to another country or face a voluntary exile. This is where it gets really interesting and where you see the courage and integrity of Socrates. His speech is a defense of everything Socrates finds important in life including his self-respect.
Most of what we know about Socrates and his Defense Speech is found in the following documents:
“Primary-source accounts of the trial and execution of Socrates are the Apology of Socrates by Plato and the Apology of Socrates to the Jury by Xenophon of Athens, who had been his student; contemporary interpretations include The Trial of Socrates (1988) by the journalist I. F. Stone, and Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths (2009) by the Classics scholar Robin Waterfield.” —- Wikipedia
I highly recommend the “Apology of Socrates” by Plato and “The Trial of Socrates” by I.F. Stone. The following speech excerpts are taken from “The Apology” by Plato. The Translation is by Benjamin Jowett.
“Someone will say: And are you not ashamed, Socrates, of a course of life which is likely to bring you to an untimely end? To him I may fairly answer: There you are mistaken: a man who is good for anything ought not to calculate the chance of living or dying; he ought only to consider whether in doing anything he is doing right or wrong – acting the part of a good man or of a bad.”
Socrates is declaring that virtue in life comes not from living or dying but from doing what you think is right or wrong. Virtue does not come from living a long life but from living a good life. If you suffer ill consequences from doing the right thing, it should not matter. Your conscience is more important than your body. Imagine for a second if the US Congress was full of men and women who adhered to this belief.
“They in their fear (of death) apprehend to be the greatest evil, may not be the greatest good. Is there not here conceit of knowledge, which is a disgraceful sort of ignorance? And this is the point in which, as I think, I am superior to men in general, and in which I might perhaps fancy myself wiser than other men, – that whereas I know but little of the world below, I do not suppose that I know: but I do know that injustice and disobedience to a better, whether God or man, is evil and dishonorable, and I will never fear or avoid a possible good rather than a certain evil.”
Years before Caesar noted that “Cowards die many deaths and heroes die only once”, Socrates was admonishing the Athenians to not fear death but to fear ignorance and to fear a hubris that was overly proud of knowledge and wisdom. Socrates asserted that if he was wise, it was because he did not try to act as though the knew everything. He was humble in the face of his own ignorance of the world.
Consider today the experts that surround us and try to act like they are miniature gods. Doctors, lawyers, engineers, military planners, intelligence experts and of course academicians all like to parade their wisdom and knowledge that in actuality is far surpassed by what they do not know. Nevertheless, advice is rendered, fees collected and the sheep among us march passively towards a perhaps ignominious fate buoyed by a firm belief in whatever nostrum has been sold to them.
“O my friend, why do you who are a citizen of the great and mighty and wise city of Athens, care so much about laying up the greatest amount of money and honor and reputation, and so little about wisdom and truth and the greatest improvement of the soul, which you never regard or heed at all? Are you not ashamed of this?”
Socrates knew that money, honor, and fame often had little to do with wisdom and truth and the improvement of the soul. Several centuries later, and we have a populace that has elected a leader because many of the voters believed that “A rich man was a wise man.” Socrates knew this was false and so has every major prophet quoted in both the Old Testament and the New Testament and every holy book every written in history from the Hindu Vedas to the writings of Abdu’l-Bahá.
“He who hath knowledge and power will rather seek out the glory of heaven, and spiritual distinction, and the life that dieth not. And such a one longeth to approach the sacred Threshold of God; for in the tavern of this swiftly-passing world the man of God will not lie drunken, nor will he even for a moment take his ease, nor stain himself with any fondness for this earthly life.” — Abdu’l-Bahá
It is amazing to me that the greatest works in history all tell us the same thing. We must seek out the truth. We must live a virtuous and moral life. We must take success with a grain of salt. We must not be seduced by greed and fame. We must not judge others by how much they own or do not own. Jesus said we must feed the hungry and take care of the sick. Major religions all over the world are predicated on these basic ideas. Yet, everywhere we look, we see adherents to these same religions practicing the very opposite of what their prophets have espoused.
“If this was the condition on which you let me go, I should reply: Men of Athens, I honor and love you; but I shall obey God rather than you, and while I have life and strength I shall never cease from the practice and teaching of philosophy.”
Socrates was more afraid of being a hypocrite than he was of dying. He would not forfeit his integrity for his life. Contrast that with the cowards and sycophants we see every day in the news, on TV, in the Congress and in the White House willing to forfeit their soul and anything they say they believe in to support lies, misinformation, disinformation and immoral intrigues that surpass anything imaginable. People with more money than they can ever spend but still willing to accept bribes for power and position and more money rather than look for the truth or support a goal of knowledge driven leadership.
Socrates did not leave Athens even when his supporters offered to spirit him away. Socrates saw such flight as cowardice and a repudiation of everything he believed in. Socrates was a martyr to integrity. Fame for Socrates was not a fifteen-minute exercise in tweeting or attacking someone with less power than he had. Socrates attacked the very heart and soul of all evil. He attacked ignorance and offered a search for truth instead.
Hi, if you have comments, please post them in the comments section. However, if you have questions, please send me an email. I have been getting too many comments to respond to all of them. However, if you have questions about blogging or my website, send them to me at persico.john@gmail.com. This is a WordPress site and the theme is KOI. It is free. I welcome your questions. Feel free to reblog or cut and paste any of my stories or blogs. John
It was January of 1986. I had finished all my course work for my Ph.D. degree. It had already been a long and cold and snowy Minnesota winter. I had finally collected all the data I needed to finish my dissertation. Four years in school, working…
Twenty-three years later, when Douglass gave his speech, the turmoil in the United States over the issue of slavery was growing. It had always been a major source of dissension in the United States, but things were coming to a boiling point. The Dred Scott decision had recently been rendered by the US Supreme Court. This decision held that black people were not citizens and that slaves could not sue for freedom. In March of 1857, James Buchanan was sworn in as the 15th President of the USA. Buchanan was no friend of the abolitionists and he joined the Southern leaders in attempting to admit Kansas as a slave state. He strongly supported the Dred Scott decision and today he would be considered an ardent racist. The contrast between Lincoln who was elected four years later and Buchanan in terms of their policies towards slavery was the final straw that led to the Civil War.
Today we are witnessing a descent into tyranny and demagoguery the likes of which have never before been seen in America. We have a President who lies whenever he speaks. We have a Republican party that abhors social justice and will do everything they can to suppress the rights of Americans to vote. We have a base of supporters for Trump that are racist, fascist, and anti-democratic. Lured by whatever sirens they listen to; they support the right of Trump to do whatever he wants to do. They call him their Messiah and voice unconditional support for his attacks on the press, minorities, immigrants, women, blacks, Latinos, disabled, foreign countries and even the disabled. A President who is willing to sacrifice thousands of lives to support his quest for a second term.
There are many who would consider Martin Luther the father of the Protestant Reformation. Growing up Catholic, we regarded Protestants as heretics. We all knew that the one true religion was Catholic, and Protestants did not know what they really wanted. What does the name Protestant even mean? Taking it at face value, it would seem to mean to protest against. The dictionary defines a Protestant as someone who has broken from the Roman Catholic church. If you are a Protestant you practice a form of Christianity in protest to the Catholic form. There are over 200 major Protestant denominations in the USA and over 35,000 independent or non-denominational Christian churches which are ostensibly Protestant. During the past few decade, we have seen numerous splits in Protestant churches over such issues as gay marriages, gay clergy, women ministers. Even though I am a non-Catholic myself, I can’t help but be amazed at the dissension and disunity among Protestants. I wonder what Martin Luther would have thought if he were alive today.
“Primary-source accounts of the trial and execution of Socrates are the Apology of Socrates by Plato and the Apology of Socrates to the Jury by Xenophon of Athens, who had been his student; contemporary interpretations include The Trial of Socrates (1988) by the journalist I. F. Stone, and Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths (2009) by the Classics scholar Robin Waterfield.” —- 
Aging Capriciously 