When the TRUTH Will Not Set You Free!  Part 2 of 3 Parts  

Last week we started a search for Truth which took us from the Trial of Socrates to The Extermination of Native and Indigenous Peoples.   At the end of this journey, I am sure you were no closer to the Truth than I was.  Thus, I think we should continue our search through history and through the next five egregious injustices in my list to see if somewhere within these abominations of human behavior we can find the Truth.   We seek a Truth that is so compelling, so momentous and so significant that it has allowed our leaders and greatest thinkers to commit such heinous crimes against humanity in the name of Truth and justice.  (Click on the title to listen to Aye Khuda’s Song The Ballad of Inhumanity)   turth picture

Surely, with the wisdom of hindsight, there is no one who would disagree that every one of the items on my list is a sad commentary on the human race.   Let us move on then and see what insights the next events we examine might shed on the ultimate Truth which we all seek.  We move forward in history, with the hope that perhaps in this journey, we will find the ultimate Truth.  Just like Diogenes, we must have patience and keep seeking.  By the way, did Diogenes ever find an honest man?  I don’t think he did.

  1. Reign of Terror
  2. Scottsboro Boys
  3. The Holocaust
  4. The Khmer Rouge Genocide
  5. Roman Catholic Sex Abuse Scandals

The Reign of Terror:  Part of the French Revolution

The Reign of Terror lasted from 1793 to 1794.  Can you think of a more horrible epithet for a period of time that should have been characterized by unbridled optimism?   It was a period of time in France that (though it took place about 14 years later in France) was born of dreams and aspirations that were similar to the American Revolution.  In final outcomes, no two events could have turned out more dissimilar.  In the beginning though, there were similarities.  In both France and America, a king and tyrant would be overthrown.  In both nations, the goal was to establish a democracy.  In both the USA and in France, it was to be a rule of the people, by the people and for the people.  And in both cases, it was a revolution that started out based on the liberal and enlightened ideals of such thinkers as:  Rousseau, Locke and Voltaire.  And that is where the similarities end.   5_-the-reign-of-terror-1

In America, we ended up with a democratic system of government and no king or dictator.  France went on to establish a dictatorship under Napoleon Bonaparte and lopped off the heads of over sixteen thousand people and another twenty five thousand by other means.  Whereas in the USA, we exported the Tories (those who sided with England) to Canada and elsewhere, during the French Revolution, anyone not labeled a “patriot” was subject to arrest and execution whether they were “citizens’ or not.  The very leaders of the French Revolution were one by one called out for treason and executed.  This included such famous names as:  Saint-Just, Carnot, Danton, Marat, and Robespierre.  No one in France was safe from the guillotine.  Here was an erstwhile revolution for liberty, fraternity and equality that turned into a debauchery of power hungry madmen secretly harboring dreams of glory and fame.  Want happened to the Truth?  Who knew the Truth?  The basic Truths of the philosophical founders of the French Revolution include the following:

John Locke:  “All mankind… being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions.”

Jean Jacques Rousseau:  “What wisdom can you find that is greater than kindness?

Voltaire:  “What is tolerance? It is the consequence of humanity. We are all formed of frailty and error; let us pardon reciprocally each other’s folly – that is the first law of nature.”

These hardly seem like Truths that would lead anyone to rampant executions but perhaps the Truths of the leaders of the Revolution did not really derive from the Truths of their philosophical founders.  Let us look at the Truths of some of the French leaders and see what their Truths were:

Louis Antione de Saint-Just:  “The vessel of Revolution can arrive at port only on a sea reddened by torrents of blood.”

Lazare Carnot:  “The General Order is always to maneuver in a body and on the attack; to maintain strict but not pettifogging discipline; to keep the troops constantly at the ready; to employ the utmost vigilance on sentry go; to use the bayonet on every possible occasion; and to follow up the enemy remorselessly until he is utterly destroyed.”

Georges Jacques Danton:  “In revolutions authority remains with the greatest scoundrels.”

Maximilien Robespierre:  “To punish the oppressors of humanity is clemency; to forgive them is cruelty.”

Is it just me or does there seem to be a major disconnect between the Truths of the philosophers and the Truths of the political leaders?  Does it seem funny that a revolution that was started to pursue a rule of law for the common everyday person was soon taken over by fanatics and extremists?  In this day of rampant terrorists, it would appear that the worst terrorists of the French Revolution became their leaders.  Is it everywhere the same that Truth gets coopted by the fanatics and terrorists or is the French Revolution simply an aberration?  Could it be that the Truths of Rousseau and Locke were actually lies and the Truths of Carnot and Danton were the real Truths?  Must Truths ever be colored in blood and gore?  Let us move on to look at another regrettable episode in human history and see what light if any on the Truth it may shed.

The Scottsboro Boys:

ScottsboroNine African American youths tried and convicted for the alleged rape of two White women while on a train ride to find work in 1931.  This travesty of American justice took place in Alabama during the height of Jim Crowism.  Many people recognized that these “boys” as they were called were being railroaded to justice.  They were tried a total of three times.  Twice by all White juries and once by a jury that included a single African American member.  (How would you like to have been that minority juror?)  In each case, they were all found guilty.  Some of the “boys” were subsequently pardoned, yet all but two served lengthy prison sentences.

What was their crime?  Rape you say?  The rape of two white tramps who were probably screwing the daylights out of every male they met regardless of color?  Or was it two white Women who represented the flower of Southern gentility?  The chivalry of the Southern gentleman coming to the aid of his White magnolia blossom to insure her continued unblemished purity.

Yes, this trial was more than a trial for the rape of two women, this trial represented the rape of the entire South.  Every White male in a Southern state was raped by these “colored boys.”  Such a mockery of Southern chivalry could not go unpunished.   The Truth of the color line must be established once and forever and what was this Truth?  For the Blacks and for the Whites, the Truth was very different.  Here were the Black Truths:

Black Truth:  Southern White slave masters have been raping Black women since the first slaves were offloaded to American shores.

Black Truth:   A large number of White women were more than willing to go to bed with an African American male.

Black Truth:  A White jury would never free a Black person of a crime against Whites.

The Truths for Southern Whites looked like this:

White Truth: If we could lynch these Black bastards, we would.

White Truth:  It’s alright for a White man to screw a Black woman but it’s not alright for a Black man to screw a White woman.

White Truth:  We have two sets of justice down here, one for White people and one for niggers.

Times have changed. Black people have made progress right?  Of course they have you say!  Does not the USA now have a Black president?  Although, he is also half White so why is he not a White President?  However we also have Ferguson Missouri, Eric Garner and thousands of African American males in prison for drug crimes that a White person would not have been convicted for.  We daily witness protest marches against police profiling and the shooting of poor young African American “boys.”  Time marches on and the Truth still remains somewhat murky.

The Holocaust:

holocaust childrenThe Holocaust was the systematic murder of Jews by the Nazis for the sole reason that they were Jewish.  They were not a burden on the society.  They were not a primitive culture.  They were not a class of deviates or criminals.  Indeed, they were shopkeepers, bankers, manufacturers, educators, musicians, philosophers and scientists. The Jews in Europe were probably the best educated and most prosperous ethnic group that existed in Europe.  Why the Holocaust?  Why the crematoriums?  Why the Gas Chambers?  Why? Why? Why?  This question has been asked thousands and thousands of times.  Hundreds of books have been written asking and looking for an answer to this question.

Now it may be noted that a “Holocaust” does not strictly apply to the Jewish slaughter and that there have been other holocausts in history.  Earlier I noted the massacre of Armenians by the Turks.  The systematic murder of Cambodians by the Khmer Rouge, the Rwandan Massacres and the genocide that took place between the Bosnians and the Serbs.  So what is the difference between the Jewish Holocaust and these no less horrible episodes?  Let us look at the definitions that have been applied to the following terms:

Genocide is defined as:  “The deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.”  (Dictionary.com)

Holocaust is defined as:  “The systematic mass slaughter of European Jews in Nazi concentration camps during World War II (usually preceded by the).” (Dictionary.com)

The Holocaust has been labeled as a unique instance of genocide.  It is certainly a specific example of genocide that was perpetrated against a targeted group of people.  One might argue that there is no commonality between the Holocaust and these other examples of genocide, however I think they would be on shaky grounds.  In all cases, it could be argued that the perpetrators felt somehow threatened by their victims and decided that only by killing their chosen victims could their threat be eliminated.  Nevertheless, in no other examples except for the Jewish Holocaust was the entire legal, judicial, legislative, military and political apparatus of an entire State brought to bear against the victims.  Furthermore, the furtive and secretive nature of the Nazi slaughters were without precedence.  They clearly recognized that their mass murders were immoral and evil and they took major steps to prevent the world from learning about these atrocities.  So did the Nazis have a set of Truths that they were following in the murders of their victims?  What were the Jewish Truths that they followed as they attempted to take part in the German culture?  Let’s listen to some of the Nazis leaders to see their Truths:

Hitler:  “The personification of the devil as the symbol of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew.” 

Himmler:  “We know that these clashes with Asia and Jewry are necessary for evolution.”

Goebbels:  “I am of the opinion that the greater the number of Jews liquidated, the more consolidated will the situation in Europe be after this war.”

Rosenberg:  “Since Germany with its blood and its nationalism has now broken for always this Jewish dictatorship for all Europe and has seen to it that Europe as a whole will become free from the Jewish parasitism once more, we may, I believe, also say for all Europeans: For Europe the Jewish question is only then solved when the last Jew has left the European continent.”

We must look to some of the Jewish leaders and spokespeople to see what their Truths were.  What beliefs and ideologies could have persuaded the Jew to live, work and die for a country that would eventually seek to totally and permanently eradicate their very existence?  But of course, only after stealing everything they owned and even taking their victims hair and teeth to recycle for the greater good of the true German Master Race.

Robert Weltsch:  “They accuse us today of treason against the German people: The Nationalist-Socialist Press calls us the ‘enemy of the Nation,’ and leave us defenseless. It is not true that the Jews betrayed Germany. If the Jews have betrayed anyone, it was themselves. Because the Jew did not display his Judaism with pride, because he tried to avoid the Jewish issue, he must bear part of the blame for the degradation of the Jews.”

Mordechai Chaim Rumkowski:   “I thought that would be the end of it, that after that, they’d leave us in peace, the peace for which I long so much, for which I’ve always worked, which has been my goal. But something else, it turned out, was destined for us. Such is the fate of the Jews: always more suffering and always worse suffering, especially in times of war.”

Jewish Saying:  “If a Goy strikes you, bow your head and he’ll spare your life

Anne Frank:  “In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart. I simply can’t build up my hopes on a foundation consisting of confusion, misery, and death. I see the world gradually being turned into a wilderness, I hear the ever approaching thunder, which will destroy us too, I can feel the sufferings of millions and yet, if I look up into the heavens, I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again.”

Simon Wiesenthal:  “For me the Holocaust was not only a Jewish tragedy, but also a human tragedy. After the war, when I saw that the Jews were talking only about the tragedy of six million Jews, I sent letters to Jewish organizations asking them to talk also about the millions of others who were persecuted with us together – many of them only because they helped Jews.”

The Jewish Truths seem to me to bear absolutely no resemblance to the Truth of the Nazi Fascists.   In America, we lost over 400,000 soldiers in our efforts to wipe the Nazi butchers off the face of the earth.  Nothing infuriates me more than seeing some miscreant wearing a Nazi swastika or sporting a Nazi tattoo.  The Nazis made a sacrament out of murder and torture and created altars where they could worship their blasphemous sacraments at.  Their altars were their crematoriums and death chambers.  It is a sad Truth that we still have Nazis and Nazi sympathizers walking the face of the earth.  But let us journey on through history.  With only two events left in my list, it would be irresponsible to forego the lessons that they might still hold for us.

The Khmer Rouge Genocide

The Khmer Rouge regime arrested and eventually executed almost everyone suspected of connections with the former government or with foreign governments, as well as professionals and intellectuals. Ethnic Vietnamese, ethnic Thai, ethnic Chinese, ethnic ChamCambodian Christians, and the Buddhist monkhood were the demographic targets of persecution. As a result, Pol Pot is sometimes described as “the Hitler of Cambodia” and “a genocidal tyrant.” Martin Shaw described the Cambodian genocide as “the purest genocide of the Cold War era.”

Ben Kiernan estimates that about 1.7 million people were killed.[6] Researcher Craig Etcheson of the Documentation Center of Cambodia suggests that the death toll was between 2 and 2.5 million, with a “most likely” figure of 2.2 million. After 5 years of researching some 20,000 grave sites, he concludes that, “these mass graves contain the remains of 1,386,734 victims of execution.”  (From Wikipedia)

khmer-rouge-skullsThe most startling fact or perhaps we should say Truth about the Khmer Rouge Massacres is that they went on virtually unheralded and unnoticed by the Western world.  There was little outcry or call for intervention by any Western government.   In the USA, virtually no press covered these events while they were happening.  How could nearly two million people be exterminated without the United Nations, The United States or any other Western country raising an outcry against such an atrocity?   The Truth, which few dare say, seems to be that Asian lives (much live African lives) do not matter as much in the West as European or American lives.  Witness the recent Charlie Hebdo murders.

On January 7th 2015, two masked men entered the offices of the journal paper Charlie Hebdo and murdered in cold blood twelve of the staff.  The reason for the murders is alleged to be retailiation for the depiction of the prophet Mohammed in unseemly portrayals by the satirical magazine.  The manhunt went on for three days for the killers and resulted in thousands of newscasts, broadcasts, newspaper articles, radio announcements etc. that continued 24/7 non-stop until the killers were found and eliminated.

The Western press had a field day with the event.  It became a bigger star than the Super Bowl.  I looked at CNN on my IPAD one day and the first 16 of 55 articles all had to do with the Charlie Hebdo murders.  The 26th article that CNN published two days ago noted the massacre of 2000 Nigerian men, women and children by the terrorist group Boko Haram.  Sixteen articles on the murder of 17 French citizens and one article on the massacre of over 2000 Nigerian citizens.  Does this suggest a different Truth for the murder of Africans versus Europeans?  On Sunday, heads of state from across Europe, Africa and the Middle East flew into Paris to take to the streets alongside an estimated 1 million people in the city — including the entire French government to protest the Charlie Hebdo killings.  Republicans in the USA are criticizing President Obama for not having sent a high enough official to attend the march.

“I’m for truth, no matter who tells it. I’m for justice, no matter who it’s for or against.”Malcolm X

Where is the march and protests for the Nigerians who have been murdered?  Where is the outcry for the massacre in Nigeria?  Where is the manhunt for the Boko Haram terrorists?  Where are the thousands of articles and newscasts doing a minute by minute and hour by hour summary of the search for the Nigerian killers?  Dare I suggest the Truth that African lives do not matter as much as European lives?

African lives, Asian lives, Mexican lives, European lives, American lives, we can put them on a scale and measure the value to the news and media.   Do the news report the news or do they make the news?  If the news paid more attention to the rest of the world, would we see the importance of “other” lives?  Would “other” lives ever matter as much as European and American lives?  What is the Truth here?  Perhaps our last case to be examined will finally allow the Truth to emerge.  One more to go before we discover the “final” Truth!

Roman Catholic Sex Abuse Scandals

I confess that I grew up in an Italian Catholic family.  I went to a Catholic boarding school for 4 years and went to Catholic Church until I was sixteen.   I have since regularly attended a yearly Jesuit Retreat for the past thirty three years.  During all of this time, my experiences with the Catholic Church have been positive.  I am an agnostic by way of coming to have a different understanding of faith and religion but not because I was ever abused or mistreated by any clergy.  I state these facts so no one will misunderstand my intentions in discussing the issue of the Catholic Church hiding its pedophiles.

“There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact.”Arthur Conan Doyle

catholic-church-priest-sexual-abuse-scandal-cartoon-vatican-action-pinata-blind-leading-blind-hypocrisyWhile there are some who argue that the number of priests identified as pedophiles is about the same as in the general population, this argument entirely misses the point.  The key point of the issue for those who were abused is that they were relating to a select group of individuals who ostensibly were selected, trained and promoted to positions of authority because they could be trusted.  The fact that this was not the case was only one half of the problem.  The other half of the problem was that the Catholic hierarchy refused for years to acknowledge the problem and indeed grossly exacerbated the problem by hiding and protecting the deviant priests.  Thus, not only the pedophile priests were guilty of a crime but the Church leaders themselves were guilty of deception, fraud, immorality and the concealment of major crimes.

When we look closely at this situation then, we have three sets of Truth.  The Truth of the Pedophiles.  The Truth of the Catholic leadership and the Truth of the abuse victims.  Where should we start?  Let’s look first at the truth of the victims.

Rita Milla – Victim: 

“The 28th of January 1978 was when I was first raped,” said Milla, now 51, as she sat Thursday in the Wilshire Boulevard office of civil rights attorney Gloria Allred.

“Every year on that day it kind of freaks me out,” she said. “I started feeling like when I was 18 when this stuff was going on – the same feelings, the guilt and the hating myself.” I became very depressed and for three or four days I just wanted to hide out. I just wanted to throw up.

Mark Murray – Victim:

“They know that the abuse that happened by priests at Roe Head was then covered up. They know that the priests that abused children were moved on to other positions. Positions where they would not cause concerns or problems for those that moved them.”

Boy X – Victim at the Comboni Mission:

“Sometimes I think what would have happened if Fr. Pinkman had not turned his back on me that day on that railway platform. What if he had approached me and put his arms around me and told me he was sorry.  It would have meant the world to me. I would have forgiven him there and then. It would, to a great extent, have lightened that burden on my back, that devil I’ve been carrying all my life.  I really believed that Fr Pinkman cared for me, maybe I needed to believe that. Even after he had turned away from me that day. I still believed he cared. I realize now that he never cared at all.”

The Truths of the victims are rather hard to understand.  Unless one has gone through what they have, it is difficult to fathom the pain and anguish that the pedophiles reeked on their victims.  But let us be fair.  We must also listen to the Truth of the pedophile priests.  Perhaps their Truth will be all that is necessary to set the victims free.

Father Shawn Ratigan

“Prison is hell,” Ratigan said. “I know I deserve 15 years, but 50 years? Come on, I don’t think so.” 

Father Oliver O’Grady

“I want to promise myself this is going to be the most honest confession of my life,” O’Grady said in the film. “And in doing that, I need to make a long journey back, understanding what I did and to acknowledge that.  And in some ways make reparations for that.”  [O’Grady was the subject of the 2006 Oscar-nominated documentary Deliver Us from Evil.  In the film, he admits to molesting dozens of children and writes apology letters to some of them.]

 Fr Curtis Wehmeyer:  (Wehmeyer pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years)

The priest had quietly admitted to touching one boy’s genitals on more than one occasion, masturbating in front of them and possessing pornographic photos and movies showing nude prepubescent boys alone and engaged in sexual acts with each other.  ( Minneapolis Star Tribune:  February 1, 2013) 

Finally, there is the Truth of the Roman Catholic Leadership in terms of what they believe about these cases of abuse and rape.

Todd Tamberg – The Archdiocese of Los Angeles:

Speaking about the film (Deliver Us From Evil), Archdiocese spokesman Tod Tamberg, who viewed the film prior to its debut, sent a statement saying it is “primarily based on anti-Church assertions by plaintiff’s attorneys who stand to gain financially and on the self-serving comments of former priest O’Grady, a sick, twisted monster and, like most molesters, a master manipulator.”

Bishop Robert Finn:  (Sorry no direct quotes here, but actions may speak louder than words).

A computer technician working on Father Rattigan’s laptop in December 2010 found hundreds of troubling images of young girls and reported it to officials with the Catholic Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph.  Instead of turning the photos over to police or reporting suspicions about Ratigan, Bishop Robert Finn of the Kansas Diocese sent Ratigan away for psychiatric evaluation and later ordered him to stay at a convent where he could say Mass for the sisters and stay away from children.

The Vatican:

“Regarding accusations against a cardinal, we remind everyone that, in the Church, only the pope has the authority to accuse a cardinal,”   (Pope Benedict had censured Cardinal Christoph Schönborn of Vienna, who last month publicly accused another cardinal of covering up sexual abuse)

I think it is fairly easy to sum up the truths of the various parties.  I wish I could have included all of the comments and dialogue that were possible but the comments I included reflect to some extent the overall tone of the parties involved.

The victims felt betrayed, abused and guilty.   Perhaps the victim’s Truths were as follows:

  • I must have done something to deserve this abuse
  • I really thought they loved and cared for me
  • Why didn’t anyone come to my aid?

The guilty pedophile priests engaged in active denial or a sense of indignation that they needed to be found guilty for something that to them was an inalienable right.  The right to abuse, molest and rape young girls and boys.  Their Truths would sound like this:

  • I did not do anything to really hurt anyone
  • Why is everyone upset over nothing?
  • I do more good than harm so why am I being prosecuted?

Finally, the Officials of the Church share a large portion of the blame and responsibility for these acts. They hired these priests, promoted them, protected them and even went so far as to engage lawyers in efforts to cover up these crimes.  Their Truths would include:

  • We are above the law
  • No one was really hurt
  • We can’t afford to accept any responsibility for the crimes committed

Conclusion to Part 2:

I think I am finding (and I assume you might also be finding) that truth is a very ephemeral, elastic and slippery quality.  Nevertheless, despite its elusive attributes, after spending over 2500 years looking at some of the most atrocious and egregious events in history, we should be at the point of finding the Truth.   Alas, I think we have run out of time and space in this blog.   I had thought we could wrap things up and conclude at this point but I think with all the time and energy we have already dedicated to our search, it would be hasty and premature to conclude at this point.  There are a number of observations that warrant attention and I will discuss these in the Part 3, the final part in our search for the Truth.

Time for Questions:

What are your thoughts at this point in our search for the Truth?  What observations can you share in my comments section?  Please add your voice to the search.  Your opinions are valuable and the more brains the better.  We all need to hear from each other or there is no Truth to be shared.

Life is just beginning.

“We must pass through the darkness, to reach the light.”   ― Albert Pike

What the Hell Do We Need Morality For?

morals and ethics

This blog is about the subject of morality.  Once upon a time, they taught morality in school and in church.   The first system of morality that many older Americans were exposed to was probably the “Ten Commandments.”   This was a code of rules given to the Israelites by Moses on Mount Sinai.  I have always thought it ironic that a set of morals from the “Old Testament” was supposed to be the foundation for a Christian America.  Even today, advocates of this code of morality want to hang it in town halls, schools, courts and government centers.  This is a part of the Bible that promoted an “eye for an eye” and stoning adulterers.

Jesus did say “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill” (Matthew 5:17).  Jesus added at least one commandment to all others that was even more valuable than the ten TenCommandmentsMoses gave.   Jesus said, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another” (John: 13:34).  I would be much more in favor of seeing this posted in my neighborhood than the Ten Commandments.

Perhaps even more importantly in terms of a system of morality, Jesus gave a sermon where he proposed what has been called:  The Eight Beatitudes:   (Click here to hear the The Beatitudes Song

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.  —- Gospel of St. Matthew 5:3-10

It is my opinion that the Eight Beatitudes constitute one of the greatest systems of morality to come out of the Bible.  I would rather see these taught (if we are going to teach a system of morality) than the Ten Commandments.  I would also not mind these being posted in schools and other public places whereas I am sick and tired of those who want to post the Ten Commandments.

I noted that once upon a time, we taught morality in schools and churches.   Actually, we not only taught morality but morality was also imbued in our social fabric by many traditional stories and the media.  Children from an early age were exposed to Fairy tales, Uncle Remus stories, Aesop Fables, and Tales of the Arabian Nights.  These stories were full of morals on how to live and behave properly.  Early TV was also full of morality tales.  Shows like Father Knows Best, Leave It to Beaver and Andy Griffith each week clearly conveyed stories of morality and what was right and what was not right in terms of behavior.

sin-guilt-causes-body-pain-sicknessSomeplace along the way, we started losing our sense of morality.  Some have blamed it on becoming a multi-cultural environment.  Some have blamed it on the decline of religion and church going.  Some have blamed education while still others have blamed progress and a business culture that has no room for strict morality.  I am not sure what the actual cause was.  I am more concerned that it did happen.  Studies have shown that our culture has become more amoral than moral and that narcissism now plays an increasing role in our society.  People are less moral and more self-centered than ever before in the history of this country.  A book by Joel Marks (Ethics without Morals: In Defense of Amorality -Routledge Studies in Ethics and Moral Theory, 2012) is one of several that makes an argument for amorality:

“In clear, plainspoken, engaging prose, Joel Marks presents the case for abandoning belief in morality. Anyone who wants to defend the practice of making moral judgments will have to confront the issues Marks raises, and the alternative to morality he proposes.” – Mitchell Silver, University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA 

In the book “The Moral Fool: A Case for Amorality (2009)” the author Hans-George Moeller advances the following case for amorality:

“Justice, equality, and righteousness—these are some of our greatest moral convictions. Yet in times of social conflict, morals can become rigid, making religious war, ethnic cleansing, and political purges possible.  Morality, therefore, can be viewed as a pathology—a rhetorical, psychological, and social tool that is used and abused like a weapon.”

In an article “Why Is Narcissism Increasing Among Young Americans?”  by Peter Gray in Freedom to Learn (2014), Gray notes the following:

“For the past three decades or a little more, researchers have been assessing both narcissism and empathy using questionnaires developed in the late 1970s.  Many research studies have shown that scores on these questionnaires correlate reliably with real-world behavior and with other people’s ratings of the individuals.  For example, those who score high in narcissism have been found to overrate their own abilities, to lash out angrily in response to criticism, and to commit white-collar crimes at higher rates than the general population.[1]  Those who score low in empathy are more likely than the average person to engage in bullying and less likely to volunteer to help people in need.[2.]

Over the years, these questionnaires have been administered to many samples of college students, and analyses that bring all of the data together reveal that the average narcissism score has been steadily increasing and the average empathy score has been steadily decreasing ever since the questionnaires were developed [3.]  The changes are highly significant statistically and sufficiently large that approximately 70 percent of students today score higher on narcissism and lower on empathy than did the average student thirty years ago.

What accounts for this historical rise in narcissism and decline in empathy?  There is no way to know for sure, based on the data, but there are lots of grounds for speculation.”

I think we have thrown the proverbial baby out with the bath water.  I agree we need to keep the State separate from the Church.  I also agree that we don’t need the Ten Commandments as the foundation for moral thought in America.  Nevertheless, I do believe that we all need a code of morality to live by.  Whether it be Christian, Buddhist, Confucian, Agnostic, Atheist, Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, Baha’i, or other, we need a set of morals as a template and foundation for our behavior.  We need a baseline that each of us can start from so that we can assess what is good and what is right.  We need to have some system of ideas about what is correct behavior and how we should live in a socially interconnected world.

When I was a kid, (somewhere along the way) I was taught the Seven Deadly Sins.  Sometimes they were called the Seven Deadly Vices or the Seven Cardinal Sins.  I assume that since I attended a Catholic school, it went along with the teaching.  The Seven Deadly Sins included the following:

  • Lust
  • Gluttony
  • Greed
  • Sloth
  • Wrath
  • Envy
  • Pride

7 deadly sins

Some of you might think that this list is old fashioned or out of date.  How could this set of implicit moral values make a difference in our society?  They are so old; do they really have any relevance anymore?

Take a close look around you at the world.  You have only to look for a few minutes to persuade yourself that these “sins” are at the top of the list of major problems.  Greed, envy, gluttony and lust appear pervasive in our culture.  (See my series on Gandhi’s Seven Social Sins) TV shows, movies, magazines, radio, supermarkets, superstars, sports, credit services, escort services, pornography, Las Vegas all portray an American brand of materialism that is nothing short of sick.  Get it now, get it fast, and get more and moreMore is better!  Bigger is better!  Shop till you drop!  He who has the most toys wins!

“If necessity is the mother of invention, then surely greed must be the father. Children of this odd couple are named: Laziness, Envy, Greed, Jr., Gluttony, Lust, Anger and Pride.”  ― John R Dallas  Jr.

Black Friday ( The day after Thanksgiving in the USA) is only a small manifestation of the greed, lust and sloth that has infected our society.  How many Americans have a regular exercise schedule?  How many obese citizens can you count on the street each day?  How many Americans spend more each week then they earn?  How many Americans will go in debt this Holiday Season to spend money that they don’t have on gifts and toys?  Where is the self-restraint that is necessary to push oneself away from the table or shut the TV off and say “Enough.”  It barely seems to exist.  Is it any wonder that so many countries have a very negative stereotype of the “average” American?  We appear to be a group of people who have lost our moral compass.

ARTICLE 29 —  The Universal Declaration of Human Rights

  • You have a responsibility to the place you live and the people around you-we all do. Only by watching out for each other can we each become our individual best.

At this point, you well may be asking “What right does he have to be so damn moralistic?”  Didn’t Jesus say “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone?”  “Are you so perfect that you have a right to look down on other people?”  “Who does he think he is, Jonathan Edwards?”  “I don’t need anyone telling me my faults.”  “I get enough negativity from work without having to get it from you.”

Please allow me to clarify a few misconceptions.  In some religious circles we are all sinners.  Since I am agnostic, I don’t subscribe to a religious view of sin.  My use of the terminology is borrowed from the religious sphere since I think that the concept of sin has a very useful connotation if we can free it from some of the pejorative and negative associations with which it is fettered.  First of all, I do not believe that you will go to hell for committing these Seven Sins.  Second, you will not be a bad or evil person because of them.  Third and accentuating the positive, you may be happier and healthier if you are more aware of these “sins” and can do a better job of examining the role that they play in your life.  My bringing these “sins” out is to help us all become more aware of the morality that we have allowed to become obscured in our daily lives.

There are only two mistakes one can make along the road to truth; not going all the way, and not starting.  —-Buddha

We have had a decline in morality that started over one hundred years ago and it still seems to be declining.  More people are worried about their taxes increasing then the poverty facing many people in this country.  More people are worried about their security then the number of people going to jail every day for victimless crimes.  More people are worried about the price of gasoline then the pollution we send into the atmosphere every day.  Self-centeredness has become a dominant fixture of the American landscape.  “Greed is Good” says Ivan Boesky and everyone applauds.

If you look for truth, you may find comfort in the end; if you look for comfort you will not get either comfort or truth only soft soap and wishful thinking to begin, and in the end, despair.   — C. S. Lewis

Why do I think we should care about morality? 

goodevilWithout morality, we are not even as good as animals.  Animals eat, drink, sleep, procreate and fight when they have to.  They do not do it simply to hurt other animals or to wage war against groups or individuals that they cannot tolerate.  Animals care for their young and exhibit many characteristics of moral behavior.  In captivity, animals may display much more aggressive behavior.  For instance, Orcas in the wild have never been observed to kill other Orcas.  This is not the case for Orcas in captivity.  There is no such thing as civilization without a commitment to moral and ethical behavior.  Even animal societies are proof of this.

“I am Envy, begotten of a chimney-sweeper and an oyster-wife. I cannot read, and therefore wish all books were burnt; I am lean with seeing others eat – O that there would come a famine through all the world, that all might die, and I live alone; then thou should’st see how fat I would be! But must thou sit and I stand? Come down, with a vengeance!”  ― Christopher MarloweDoctor Faustus

Without morality, we have no compass to define what is good behavior and what is bad behavior.  We are reduced to the level of opportunists willing to take advantage of anyone and anything that suits our ends.  Listen to the current debate on the use of torture and the recent CIA report and you will find numerous “experts” advocating that the “ends justify the means.”  One man on NPR noted that he thought we should ask the victims of the Twin Trade Towers what they thought about the use of torture to capture Osama Bin Laden.   John McCain (May he Rest in Peace) once said it best when he opined in Congress (12-9-14) that “”Our enemies act without conscience. We must not.”  Nevertheless, he was opposed by his own party in his opposition to torture and in fact to even releasing the CIA Tortmoralityure Report. 

Many Republicans argued against releasing the report, especially as the threat of the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria grew and U.S. intelligence officials had warned that its release could cause backlash from nations and groups hostile towards the nation.   American embassies in the Middle East had been put on heightened security alert for its release.

McCain replied that “This report strengthens self-government and, ultimately, I believe, America’s security and stature in the world.”  (CNN 12-9-14)

Finally, without morality, there is no way to transmit values from one generation to another.  A lack of morality has led to the increase in amorality that is now symptomatic of our society.  Amorality is a set of beliefs which deny the value of morality or at best are indifferent to morality.  A rock is amoral.  It is neither good (moral) or bad (immoral) but may be used for either purpose.  Anything or anyone without a conscience is amoral.  It is a fine line and one that is very easy to trespass between amoral and immoral.  Many people today may think their behaviors are amoral when actually they could better be described as immoral.  Harken back to the Seven Deadly Sins and ask yourself, how many of these vices are amoral?  Are greed, gluttony, lust and wrath amoral?   Can anyone with a good conscience say it is okay to partake in these vices?

“Seven deadly sins,
seven ways to win,
seven holy paths to hell,
and your trip begins

Seven downward slopes
seven bloodied hopes
seven are your burning fires,
seven your desires…”
― Iron Maiden

Time for Questions:

What is your moral code? What are the three most important morals in your life?  Do you think everyone should have an explicit moral code?  Why or why not?  Do you know many amoral people?  What do you think about amorality?  When is it justified?  What do you think the world would be like if everyone was amoral?  Would it be a better world or worse? Why?

Life is just beginning.

“Remember tonight… for it is the beginning of always”  ― Dante Alighieri

Social Legacy Systems: How They Block Change and Prevent Progress: Part 2- The Legal Correctional System

Responsible_Prison_Reform-e1373996928213No set of institutions in America are more in need of reform than our legal correctional systems. No systems in America cost the taxpayer more money with less return or value to the taxpayer than our prisons and correctional related systems. No institutions in American cause more misery and heartache than our courts, legal system and correctional institutions. Together, our courts, legal systems and correctional systems cost the American taxpayer well over $100 billion dollars a year. The Economics of the American Prison System”  (Listen to Wake Up Dead Man) as you read my blog today. 

And what do we get for this “investment?”

  • Within three years of being released, 67% of ex-prisoners re-offend.
  • Within three years of being released 52% are re-incarcerated
  • The rate of recidivism is so high in the United States that most inmates who enter the system are likely to reenter within a year of their release.
  • In 2008, one of every 48 working-age men (2.1 percent of all working-age men) was in prison or jail.
  • In 2008, the U.S. correctional system held over 2.3 million inmates, about two-thirds in prison and about one-third in jail. 450px-Incarceration_rates_worldwide
  • Non-violent offenders make up over 60 percent of the prison and jail population. Non-violent drug offenders now account for about one-fourth of all offenders behind bars, up from less than 10 percent in 1980.
  • The total number of violent crimes was only about three percent higher in 2008 than it was in 1980, while the total number of property crimes was about 20 percent lower. Over the same period, the U.S. population increased about 33 percent and the prison and jail population increased by more than 350 percent.
  • Crime can explain only a small portion of the rise in incarceration between 1980 and the early 1990s, and none of the increase in incarceration since then. If incarceration rates had tracked violent crime rates, for example, the incarceration rate would have peaked at 317 per 100,000 in 1992, and fallen to 227 per 100,000 by 2008 – less than one third of the actual 2008 level and about the same level as in 1980.

These facts are from “The High Budgetary Cost of Incarceration” by Schmidt, Warner and Gupta, 2010

US_criminal_justice_cost_timeline

These facts have not gone unnoticed by state legislatures and politicians.

“In 2013, 35 states passed at least 85 bills to change some aspect of how their criminal justice systems address sentencing and corrections. In reviewing this legislative activity, the Vera Institute of Justice found that policy changes have focused mainly on the following five areas: reducing prison populations and costs; expanding or strengthening community-based corrections; implementing risk and needs assessments; supporting offender reentry into the community; and making better informed criminal justice policy through data-driven research and analysis. By providing concise summaries of representative legislation in each area, this report aims to be a practical guide for policymakers in other states and the federal government looking to enact similar changes in criminal justice policy.” Vera Institute of Justice     US_incarceration_timeline-clean.svg

I have written about this problem before. See my blogs (The Law Enforcement Legal-Judicial Correctional Complex and Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds or “How did our drug laws get so crazy?” It is not a new problem and in the years since I published my first article on it, it has only gotten worse. I published my first article on this issue back in 1995. In it, I applied the concepts of process and quality improvement to the criminal justice System. My article was published in a journal of pro’s and con’s on the justice system. Subsequently, I was asked to speak at a correctional conference in Minnesota and to explain the concepts that I had outlined in my paper.

The conference was attended by hard Right and hard Left people: Correctional Officers, Wardens, Prison Reform Advocates, and Relatives of both victims and prisoners. The Right wanted stronger sentencing guidelines and tougher police policies. The Left wanted more humane treatment for prisoners and more focus on rehabilitation. Each group had read my paper and each group thought I was “on their side.” The fact of the matter was, each side was wrong. I was not on either side. Tougher sentencing (which seems to have won out) has only resulted in prison reasonshigher levels of incarceration, less feeling of safety in society, higher costs and no appreciable decrease in drug usage or correctional costs. The Left may have lost in terms of policy but their solutions would not have fixed the system either. You do not get a better system by fixing defects after they are created. Process improvement focuses on going upstream and preventing defects, not warehousing and reworking them. It became clear as I tried to explain concepts of process control, six sigma system capability, rework, redesign and systems analysis, that I was speaking Greek to the participants, both Left and Right. Neither side had a clue as to what I was talking about. I suspect each side was disappointed that they had not found a new advocate.

“A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” ― Max Planck,

People in the old paradigm cannot see the new paradigm. Both sides might as well have been deaf and mute while I was speaking since the concepts I introduced were so foreign to them. I noted that the Correctional System needs reform. This was an understatement. The Correctional and Legal systems in America need nothing less than a major paradigm shift. Or to put it another way, we need a revolution in thinking about crime, incarceration and justice. Einstein noted that: “We cannot solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.” We need new thinking and new ideas. We need creative inspired leaders who are willing to break with conventions and boldly go “Where no one has gone before.” This kind of courage is sadly lacking in our political leaders today.

If I had to give my talk over again today, I would not talk about process control or process improvement. I would simply talk about the need for a paradigm shift. I would try with all my might to get the fish to see the water, to get the birds to smell the air and to get the people there to see the failure of the present paradigm. I do not need to recite the facts again. They have been repeated ad nausea. The problem is getting people to open their eyes. More prisons do not mean more safety. Longer sentences do not mean less crime. Tougher policing does not mean less violence on the streets. Witness the wave of protests rocking America today following the Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Akai Gurley, Tamir Rice and John Crawford III shootings by police. Every one of these names represents a killing by a police officer of an unarmed Black man or Black child. To date, not one killing has resulted in the indictment of a single police officer. The apparent message this sends is that: “Black men are guilty until proven innocent and that that they are so dangerous that they need to be shot first and asked questions of later.”

Bill James in his book “Popular Crime” provides the following observation:

“What we are doing, in a sense, is making ourselves constantly more aware of the threats and dangers around us, and then erecting security walls as if these threats were closing in on us, when in reality, we are pushing them further and further away.” P-96

James consistently provides evidence that we are safer and crime is lower than it has ever been in the history of this country. A point I made in my blog Are We Living in More Dangerous Times?  , see Part 1 and Part 2 with numerous statistics from the FBI and other agencies. Nevertheless, as the media treats us to a steady crescendo of violence and terror on the news, radio and TV, it is hard for anyone to feel like they are really safer or that they are less likely to be murdered in their sleep. Gun sales, concealed carry weapons and ammunitions sales have increased dramatically in the US in the past ten years. Smith and Wesson’s stock price has gone from 1.65 per share in 2004 to over $9 per share in 2014.

“The “Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States” report from the Crime Prevention Research Center released Wednesday (July 10, 2014) analyzed parallels between a 22 percent drop in the overall violent crime rate in the same time period in which the percentage of the adult population with concealed carry permits soared by 130 percent.

The report finds that 11.1 million Americans now have permits to carry concealed weapons, which are up from 4.5 million in 2007. This 146 percent increase parallels a nearly one-quarter (22 percent) drop in both murder and violent crime rates during the same time period.” —  Number of Permits Surges as Crime Rate Drops

Citizens, police, homeowners, retired people, elderly, minorities and even children are walking the streets with their weapons in Condition O. That is cocked and ready to fire. Only the slightest provocation is needed to shoot. A dark figure lurking in a hallway, a man running towards us down the street, someone knocking on our front door late at night and the response is “shoot, shoot and shoot.” The reaction is even more rapid when the “allegorical” assailant is a minority or a stranger.

We need a paradigm shift. We are going in the wrong direction. We are safer and more secure than ever before, but we are walling everyone away who pose even the most minimal threat to our security. We are walling ourselves away behind security fences, gated communities, threat detection systems, private police forces, concealed weapons and reduction of liberty and spontaneity. We don’t feel safer and we are more suspicious of outsiders and strangers. We resent immigrants and foreigners and anyone who is different from us. Send them all back. The hell with sanctuary or diversity! America for people that look like me, act like me and think like me.

Build more prisons!  Invoke the three strike rule!  Make it a two strike rule!  Get tough on crime!  Platitudes like these get voters on the side of security and restraint. No new taxes does not apply to building new prisons. The contradiction between liberty and safety is ignored. Fear drives irrational behavior. Everyone develops blinders as the police go about harassing would be criminals or even suspected criminals or anyone who even looks suspicious.  “Thank God, once we lock them away, we can throw away the key and not have to deal with them anymore!  If only we could put all the “suspects” away, we good people could go about our lives feeling safe and free from the possibility of crime and violence.”

“By age 23, almost a third of Americans have been arrested for a crime, according to a new study that researchers say is a measure of growing exposure to the criminal justice system in everyday life.” — http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/19/us/nearly-a-third-of-americans-are-arrested-by-23-study-says.html?_r=0

Time for Questions:

How safe do you feel: On the street, in your home, late at night, at a movie concert? What makes you feel safe? Have you ever been arrested? Do you know anyone in jail? Can you think of a way that prisons could be eliminated? Do you know how many people are in prison for non-violent crimes? What if they were doing public service instead? What can you do to help bring about prison reform? Are you happy with the present system?

Life is just beginning.

“A moment’s beginning ends in a moment” ― Munia Khan

 

The Tenth Greatest Mystery of All Time:  Do Weapons Prevent or Create Violence?

peace textGuns don’t kill people, people do!  Obama wants to take our weapons away so the Communists can take over the country.  A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. We have the right to defend ourselves.  What if someone attacked us and we had no means of self-defense?  Ridiculous, you cannot eliminate weapons.  If we did not have guns and missiles, people would kill each other with sticks and stones.  They always have and they always will.  You can’t eliminate violence by taking people’s weapons away!  Or can we?   (Listen to Give Me Love by George Harrison)

“If everyone demanded peace instead of another television set, then there’d be peace.”  ― John Lennon

There are several paths to take that would help us solve this mystery.  We could look at all the time spent in current and previous wars and compare that to periods of time when the earth was relatively peaceful.  We could look at countries where dollars spent on weapons are high and compare war or violence in those countries to their counterparts where dollars spent on weapons on low.  We could look at the per capita number of weapons in various countries and compare that to crime rates.  Unfortunately, each of these we are warapproaches has been tried and they actually prove very little.  For the most part, it would be a toss-up for each approach.  Those in favor of weapons would argue that without them, there would have been even less peace and those against weapons would argue that the weapons caused the wars, violence and crime in the first place.  They might say “Can you imagine ISIS attacking with flowers and cotton balls?”

“Dad, how do soldiers killing each other solve the world’s problems?”  ― Bill WattersonCalvin and Hobbes: Sunday Pages 1985-1995

Looking at the role of weapons in violence actually misdirects us from a more important question. The more important question is how effective are weapons at resolving violence?  While it can be conceded that weapons do not create violence, are they the most effective means of dealing with violence?  It has often been said that “war is a continuation of politics by other means.”  It might even be more true to say that war represents a failure of politics and a resort to violence to solve problems.  So who is right?  Were Gandhi and King right or were Generals Sheridan and Patton right?  There has been some research which might cast light on this second question.

non violenceResearchers Maria Stephan and Erica Chenoweth show that non-violent movements are twice as effective in achieving their political goals as violent movements. For example, in Timor-Leste, where violent revolution failed, non-violent tactics secured independence and the country now earns a peace score of “high” in the GPI. (Timor-Leste scores 1.95; a score of one is perfectly peaceful.) When people choose non-violent movements they may be improving the structures that support peace in the long run even when governments respond violently in the short run.  http://economicsandpeace.org/

Let’s take a hypothetical case.  Paul and Mohammed are arguing over whose religion is best.  Paul is a Christian and Mohammed is a killed manMuslim.  The argument gets more and more heated until Paul slanders the prophet Mohammed and calls him a pedophile.  Mohammed fires back that Jesus Christ was a fake and not the son of God.  Paul is armed with a concealed carry permit and carries a Glock 36 in a concealment crew neck shirt.  Mohammed is carrying a small 6 inch Jambiya in the waistband of his trousers with a special quick draw holster concealed under his shirt.

“Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding.”  ― Albert Einstein

Paul throws the first punch at Mohammed who is knocked to the floor.  Mohammed starts to get up and reaches for his Jambiya.  Paul upon seeing the blade being pulled out of Mohammed’s waistband, draws his Glock.  Mohammed (still feeling the effects of Paul’s punch) lurches forward.  Paul aims and fires three times hitting Mohammed in center mass and right arm.   Mohammed dies almost instantly from a hit to the heart.

anger-cycle-3When the police arrive, Paul is very sorry. He did not mean for this to escalate as it did.  The police charge Paul with manslaughter.  Paul goes to court and is found not guilty.  Paul is then charged in a civil lawsuit with a wrongful death claim and found guilty.  The financial costs of Paul’s argument are well over 100 thousand dollars.  The mental and emotional strain to Paul and his family are incalculable as are the losses to Mohammed’s wife and children.

The strongest defenses to a murder charge are provocation and Self-Defense. If the defendant acted completely in self-defense, this fact may relieve the defendant of all criminal liability. If it does not relieve the defendant of all liability, self-defense at least may reduce the charge from murder to manslaughter. Provocation rarely results in complete absolution, but it may reduce the defendant’s criminal liability.

Now let’s rerun the same scenario with a few minor changes.  Paul is not carrying a gun and Mohammed is not carrying a knife.  The same argument ensues and Paul punches Mohammed.  Mohammed rises shakily from the ground and stumbles to his feet.  Mohammed is too disoriented to counter-attack and has no training in hand to hand combat.  He has no knife to rely on.  Instead, Mohammed asks Paul “Why did you hit me?”  Paul, now on the down stage of the Anger Cycle is feeling remorseful and says “I am really sorry.  I don’t know what got over me.  I did not appreciate your calling Jesus a fake.”  Mohammed says “well, you insulted the Prophet but I did not hit you.”  Both men go their own way vowing never to talk to each other again.  No police have been called and the only physical damage is a sore jaw for Mohammed.

“An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind.”  ― Mahatma Gandhi

Road-RageAt this point, you might be laughing at my scenarios and decrying their likelihood.  However, I have been in many situations where fighting has occurred and the second scenario was the more likely of the two if no weapons were involved.  Put weapons into the mix, add alcohol and I guarantee you will be looking at the first scenario.  Add alcohol san weapons to the second scenario and you will simply have two drunks cursing each other but going home physically sound.

So, what role do weapons have in peace making?  Did the Russians not nuke us because we had a greater nuclear deterrent?  Quite likely this was the case during the Cold War.  However, what if neither side had nuclear weapons, or bombers or aircraft carriers or machine guns or hand grenades or napalm or bio-chemical weapons?  What if diplomacy and persuasion and peaceful non-violent protest were the only weapons to grace each side?  Would the world be more peaceful or simply less violent?  What is the difference you may ask?  A good question.

Peace can be defined:  A state of mutual harmony between people or groups, especially in personal relations.

Non-violence can be defined as:  The policy, practice, or technique of refraining from the use of violence, especially when reacting to or protesting against oppression, injustice, discrimination, or the like.

gun store 047Peace is never likely to exist perpetually.  People, nations, religions, ethnic groups will always have a degree of enmity between them.  Peace will be cyclical as the nature of the world is in most things.  Periods of civility will be interspaced with periods of incivility.  But incivility does not have to turn into violence.  Without weapons of mass destruction, without weapons of mayhem, without weapons of killing, people may be more likely to find non-aggressive means of settling disputes. The disputes will most certainly arise but a focus on peace as opposed to aggression can mean that we minimize violence and decrease the amount of murder and wars that our societies have seen since the first cave-people.  We must substitute non-violence for violence and teach peace and not war.

Time for Questions:

Do you feel peace in your life?  Are you confident in walking the streets at night?  Do you worry about road rage?  Do you carry a concealed weapon?  If so, does it make you safer?  What would it take to make you feel like the world is a safe place?  Do the Army, Navy, Air force and Marines help you to feel safe at night?

Life is just beginning.

“The artist is always beginning.  Any work of art which is not a beginning, an invention, a discovery is of little worth.”  ― Ezra Pound

The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave?

Repeat the words in the title anywhere in the world and they are immediately recognizable as referring to the United States of America.  As Michael Medved loudly proclaims on each of his shows:  “And another great day in this, the greatest country on God’s green earth.”  It is my guess that you have never thought about where the phrase “land of the free and home of the brave” comes from.  Of course, it comes from our national anthem but where did the words originally come from?  Were they from some patriot during the Revolutionary War or from the War of 1812?  Actually they came from a lawyer and amateur poet, Francis Scott Key.  He penned them as part of a poem he wrote in 1814 which was originally titled:  “Defense of Fort McHenry.” 

The poem was set to the tune of a popular British song written by John Stafford Smith for the Anacreontic Society, a men’s social club in London. “The Anacreontic Song” (or “To Anacreon in Heaven“), with various lyrics, was already popular in the United States. Set to Key’s poem and renamed “The Star-Spangled Banner”, it would soon become a well-known American patriotic song.”  — http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner

Today, we naturally assume that the words refer to our penchant for American independence and heroism.  Our unique ability to save the world from itself and to right injustices wherever they are found.  Our vaunted American exceptionalism that gives us the moral right and categorical imperative to influence and insert ourselves in events and places the world over.  No one dares to question (or at least few in this country) the right of America to influence politics throughout the world.  No one questions the assumption that we are only in it for the greater good of humanity.  How could anyone from the “land of the free and the home of the brave” do otherwise?  Where our boots tread, soon follows democracy and prosperity, right?

But what if the “land of the free and the home of the brave” was not the reality anymore?  What if it was more accurate to say that today America has become the “land of the guarded and the home of the fearful.”  Since 911, Americans have seemed to retreat behind a cloak of ongoing surveillance and security measures that could become the greatest detriment to freedom, this country has ever faced.  As Benjamin Franklin so wisely noted; “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety”. 

So I have decided to do some first-hand research and go visit a few “average” Americans.  I took a little road trip across Wisconsin to find some true patriots and to see what they think about our country.  Are we really scared and fearful?  Are we willing to give up our freedom for security?  Have we become more xenophobic?  To answer these questions, I stopped at diners, coffee shops, rest areas, truck stops, libraries and Denny’s Restaurants to visit with real Americans.  Not the 1 percent who make their money from stocks and bonds, but the hardworking “Joes and Janes” who make their money the old fashioned way, by the sweat of their brows.  I will briefly post a few excerpts here from some of my interviews.

Roxanne:  The Full-Time-Part-Time Worker:

I met 36 year old Roxanne in a booth in Mc Donald’s where we talked over a Big Mac, fries and a shake.  Roxanne is a divorced mother of two school aged children whom she is raising with the help of some grandparents.   She works both a part-time day job at Benny’s Cleaners and a part-time night job at Wal-Marts.

John:  Let’s cut to the chase Roxanne. What do you think about America today?

Roxanne:  Well, John, its dam hard to make a living, I can tell you that. Without my grandparents helping me, I don’t know how I would get by.

John:  Do you think we have too much security and not enough freedom?

Roxanne:  I don’t know, seems like there is never a cop around when you need one.  I had a fight with my boyfriend the other day and called the cops, but it took them over 30 minutes to get to my place.

John:  What do you think about the Russians, Iraqis, Mexican Cartels and Obama?

Roxanne:  I think they should all go back to the countries they came from and leave us alone.

John:  Did you vote in the last elections?

Roxanne:  Who was running?

John:  Thanks Roxanne – got to go now.

Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.”  — Mark Twain

 Pete:  The Carpenter

I met Pete while stopping to fill up my gas at a Pilot Station.  I noticed the painted sign on his pick-up truck which read “Carpenters keep it up longer: Call Pete for a good job.”  I offered to buy him a coffee if he would answer a few questions.  Pete was 54 years old, married with four kids. One daughter was still living home with him.  She had been married and was now divorced.  Pete’s wife worked part-time as a church secretary.

John:  So Pete, what do your kids do?

Pete:  Well, one boy works with me when I need extra help. One daughter is married and lives out of state.  One daughter lives with us and the other son works nearby at a local manufacturing plant as a night supervisor.

John:  Do you think this country has provided enough opportunity for them?

Pete:  Yeah, I guess so

John:  What do you think about the economy Pete?

Pete:   Sucks.

John:  I guess a lot of people would agree with you there.  What are your biggest worries for the future?

Pete:  Paying my mortgage and taxes.

John:  Are you worried about freedom and security.

Pete:  Nope, got a concealed carry permit and a good stockpile of ammunition.

John: What do you think we should do about immigration?

Pete:  Send them all home.

John:  Well, thanks for your time Pete.

True patriotism hates injustice in its own land more than anywhere else.” — Clarence Darrow

 Bob:  The Tea Party Member

Bob is a 47 year old accountant. He is married with wife and no kids.  I met Bob at a local café that I had stopped at on my journeys.  He was wearing a t-shirt that read: TEA: Taxed Enough Already.   I sat down at the counter next to Bob and struck up a conversation.

John:  So you belong to the Tea Party?

Bob:  Yeah, joined about five years ago.  I am fed up with big government, taxes and the present no ethics politicians running this country.

John:  So how is the Tea Party going to change things?

Bob:  Well, for a start we are going to only elect politicians that support our views and are not going to compromise away what we stand for.

John:  So what do you stand for?  I know you hate taxes but is that all?

Bob:  Well, here look at this card.  It says it all.

John:  The card Bob gave me read as follows:

Our Core Principles

Tea Party Patriots stands for every American, and is home to millions who have come together to pursue the American Dream and to keep that Dream alive for their children and grandchildren.

What unites the Tea Party movement is the same set of core principles that brought America together at its founding, that kindled the American Dream in the hearts of those who struggled to build our nation, and made the United States of America the greatest, most successful country in world history.

At its root the American Dream is about freedom. Freedom to work hard and the freedom to keep the fruits of your labor to use as you see fit without harming others and without hindering their freedom. Very simply, three guiding principles give rise to the freedom necessary to pursue and live the American Dream:

John:  That sounds very good Bob, but I don’t see a lot of progressive thinking coming from the Tea Party.  Seems like you guys are more against things then for things?

Bob:  That’s because we want to go back to the way this country used to be run before the bureaucrats, illegal aliens, liberals and socialists took over this country.

John:  What about health care and education and social services for the needy?

Bob:  This country is full of free loaders who sponge off the hard working Americans who work for a living.

John:  So you don’t believe that there are truly needy people out there in this country?  What about new immigrants?

Bob:  No one gave me anything or my grandparents.  They came over to this country with just the shirts on their backs.  People used to believe in hard work and honesty.

John:  What about education?  It is barely affordable anymore.

Bob:  That’s because we give all of these free scholarships to students from other countries and the high salaries that those lazy professors make.  Do you realize most of them work less than ten hours a week?

John:  Well, thanks for the opinions Bob.  Time to go!  You have a great day.

 “Let us take a patriot, where we can meet him; and, that we may not flatter ourselves by false appearances, distinguish those marks which are certain, from those which may deceive; for a man may have the external appearance of a patriot, without the constituent qualities; as false coins have often lustre, though they want weight.”  — Samuel Johnson

Cassie Jean:  The NRA Member

Cassie Jean is a 33 year old single woman who works as an Assistant Manager in a small bakery.  I talked to Cassie Jean while she was on a break over coffee and a cigarette.  I had stopped for donuts and a rest break.  Cassie Jean rides a 2002 Honda Shadow 600 motorcycle.  She is an avid hunter and a card carrying member of the National Rifle Association.

John:  So Cassie, what was the last thing you killed?

Cassie Jean:  Well, got me a good sized buck this past fall and a nice turkey this spring.

John:  How long have you been shooting?

Cassie Jean:  Ever since I was a little girl.

John:  Why do you belong to the NRA?

Cassie Jean:  They protect our rights.  You know the Second Amendment.

John:  Isn’t that about militias?

Cassie Jean:  People have the right to arm themselves.   If we let them take our guns away, we will have no protection.

John:  Protection from what.

Cassie Jean:  The wackos and socialists.

John:  What about our army, National Guard and the police department.  Isn’t their job to protect us?

Cassie Jean:  They work for the liberal socialists that are destroying this country.  The only thing that stands between them and us is our guns.

John:  But what about all the gun violence in this country?

Cassie Jean:  If more people were armed, there would be less violence.

John:  How do you figure?

Cassie Jean:  Well, would you screw with someone who had a gun?

John:  But what if no one had a gun?

Cassie Jean:  Over my dead body.

John:  Well, you sure make good donuts.  Take care and happy hunting.

Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear – kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervor – with the cry of grave national emergency.”  — General Douglas MacArthur

 Dick:  The Mechanic

Dick is a retired Ford mechanic who worked for a small Ford garage in upstate Wisconsin for over 30 years.  A bad back and a desire to enjoy more of life convinced Dick to retire early.  Dick is a strange sort of man as he does not like hunting or sports but enjoys literature and particularly good poetry.  He is a connoisseur of fine wines and good music and never misses an opportunity to travel with his wife Paula to see new places.  Dick belongs to a group of retired men who hang out at a local library where they can get free coffee and an occasional donut.  Despite his lack of a formal education, Dick is knowledgeable and well versed on many subjects.  His views would surprise many.

John:  What’s new Dick?

Dick:  I am going to Russia!

John:  For real?

Dick:  Yep, I like the way Putin is running things.  No BS in that country.

John:  What about freedom of speech and freedom of religion?

Dick:  Religion is a farce, just a bunch of know nothing do-gooders trying to live off the backs of hardworking people.

John:  What about freedom of speech?

Dick:  No one listens to you here anyway unless you are a billionaire.

John:  I don’t think Putin would tolerate unions and I thought you were a union man?

Dick:  Unions used to help people now most of them are just parasites as well.

John:  You sound like a libertarian.

Dick:  I don’t belong to any party.  They are all useless.

John:  When are you leaving for Russia?

Dick:  Soon

John:  How soon?

Dick:  Not soon enough.

John:  Well, I imagine many of your friends would hate to see you leave.

Dick:  Yeah, well I can send them a postcard.

John:  Do you think the libraries in Russia would have a men’s group and free coffee?

Dick:  I don’t know.  I will talk to Putin about it when I get there.

John:  Well, if I don’t see you before you leave Dick, have a good flight.

Conclusions:

I arrived back to my starting point in Frederic Wisconsin after several days on the road.  Truly, I cannot say I had any great insights into the subject of freedom and liberty.  My “random” sample of “average” Americans would not satisfy even a lazy graduate student much less a hard core researcher.  Nevertheless, my total observations have literally been based on hundreds of such conversations over the past ten years.  My interviewees are a composite of dozens of people whom I have met and talked to from the shores of Coon Lake in Wisconsin to the rocky Casa Grande Mountains in Arizona.

Numerous books attest to major changes taking place in our country.  Are we going backwards, forwards or perhaps sideways?  Are things getting better or worse?  Are we still the place that everyone wants to immigrate to?  If not, what has changed?  We are surrounded by apocalyptic visions.  The USA will be overrun by illegal immigrants.  Socialists will take over the country.  Fascism will become the norm.  The end days are near and the Messiah will return to judge the good and the evil.  The poor will rise up and destroy America.   The country will become one vast prison with drug addicts and drug dealers on every corner.  No one will be able to afford health care or education.  Terrorists will infiltrate and bomb our most prized establishments.  The country will give in to Sharia Law.

With such gloomy visions of the future, is it any wonder that many people are fearful and ready to sacrifice their freedom for security.  More and more Americans live behind walls either in a prison or in a gated community.   Neither prison walls nor community walls seem to protect us from our worst enemies which may be ourselves.

Beck – It’s All In Your Mind, music video         (Love this Song, click on here to listen)

Time for Questions:

Have you felt things are getting better or worse in this country?  Do you think we need more or less patriots?  Do you think most people professing patriotism are really patriots?  What do you think makes a good patriot?  What do you think makes a “bad” patriot?  Where do you stand on patriotism?

Life is just beginning.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Next Newer Entries