Humility

“When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom.”  Proverbs 11:2

It is an interesting time as those who shape public opinion and the news fall like dominoes -- disgraced by their own transgressions.  It begs the question, will this current sense of outrage continue until we achieve a new equality where all are held accountable for their actions, or will we soon tire of these public beheadings, and the powerful will again possess the weak?

Call me a cynic, but I can’t imagine the celebrities of politics, entertainment, and the news now reaching deep within themselves for introspective and returning to a time when they held themselves to the same standard as the rest of us, or reported the news without a political and moral bias. It seems more likely they are now looking over their shoulders with the fear of what may fall out of their own personal closets. Perhaps, it never was fashionable to accurately report the news, or hold a moderate position, and I was just naive when I thought it was. 

It is almost cliché when we talk about the corrupting nature of power, but the original quote is attributed to John Emerich Edward Dalberg-Acton, (AKA Lord Acton), who wrote in 1887, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.  Great men are almost always bad men.”  

As long as those who report on the politicians enable them to hide their “open secrets,” we value celebrity above honor, and believe entertainers opinions are worth listening to I expect we will soon return to life as normal; or at least something that approximates the previous normal.

Perhaps, and this is just my speculation, if the feminist movement was really about empowering all women and not just furthering the cause of some women, there would be a chance we could achieve a more balanced relationship between the powerful and the powerless.

Due Process

noun.  An established course for judicial proceedings or other governmental activities designed to safeguard the legal rights of the individual.

In these days of instant communication, we now have instant judgment, but at what cost?

We see in the oft times ill-informed statements of individuals a willingness to ruin someone’s life at the first blush of a wrong-doing.  I wonder, would they be so quick to accept the condemnation of society if they themselves were the accused?

The legal system in the United States is a flawed system, it is not always just, it is not always right, and it most certainly is not always equal.  The problem with the system comes not from its design, but from the human beings who are the essential part of it.  We human beings are flawed, and because of those flaws, any system we create and run must account for those flaws.  But, for better or worse, it is our system and it has worked reasonably well for the last 228 years or so and appears to be as good or better than most of the other justice systems of the world.

So here we are in the world of 2017, where the political parties have divided us into two color groups and every news event now carries some sort of political implication.  The shrill public voices on the left and right define everything as good or evil depending not on a stable morality, but on the political gain or loss.

Almost 30 years ago the news outlets started to report public surveys as if they are factual news and we have a generation now who thinks if 60% of the people agree on a poll then it must be true.  If it must be true then we must convict the guilty and send them to wherever the guilty must go.  Of course, we do this without the accused having a right to defend themselves in anything other than edited 15-second soundbites.

To me, it seems like we are willingly surrendering our belief in the design of our legal system and seeking a return to mob-rule or the Roman Circus where all we needed was a good thumb.  

I Wonder, What Has Changed?

-->

I am a “Baby Boomer.”  A child of parents who lived through the depression and the second World War.  When I first became aware of a world outside my family, my school, and my friends, I was introduced to a world where America was reaching for the stars.  A world where anything was possible, and we thought we could accomplish anything we set our mind to do.  After all, we had won the world war, we had an industrial base that was the envy of the world, and we dominated the world’s finances.

John F. Kennedy told my generation, “My fellow Americans ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”

My generation failed to heed his advice.  When we came to authority we created a society that is self-centered and an America where the first question is what’s in it for me?  We have grown our political parties electing individuals who have no idea how to govern, but know only how to vilify those who disagree with them.

In the Kennedy era, the nation was divided by the racial prejudice and discrimination that had openly existed since the end of the civil war, a war fought to save the union.  Martin Luther King, Jr. showed a hostile and unrepentant America what equality could offer.  Today we see million dollar athletes taking a knee because of the racial prejudice and discrimination that still exists.

We now have a younger generation that sees America not for what it could be, but for the ills that still exist.  Yet none of them seem to have a vision for how to make us better than we really are.

I wonder if 10-years olds have the same sense of wonder and destiny that John Kennedy gave me when he became the President?

Where Does Our Morality Come From (continued 2)

I know I am entering into an area of deep political and emotional and divisive rhetoric with very little real concern with a common morality, but a significant percentage of us have accepted that it is morally justified for one individual to kill another, to end a human being capable of self-sustaining life independent of the mother.  Within the most recent Presidential campaign the whole issue of “woman’s rights” was a significant point of contention between one half of the country and the other half.  The political parties were both willing to make this a core of their political positions, and we have for at least the last 40-years been engaged in an escalating battle of what the government should allow, and now what the government must pay for.  Increasingly it has been the position of the liberal feminist movement, and their political allies, that the right to determine the intentional death of a fetus rests solely with the woman carrying the infant.  Of course they use more sympathetic terms and explain how problematic those lives would be if allowed to continue, but in the end there is one harsh reality.  We, for better or worse, have sanctioned the determination of life as a right of the mother, but only for the period of pregnancy.  If she ends that life one day after birth I think society and the state still consider it murder.  It seems just a bit convoluted to me as we wrestle with the law and moral choices.

The argument for determination of life or death is now moving on.  It is expanding to include the position that an individual with a diagnosed illness who wishes to end their life has that right and the state should approve of individuals who wish to assist in that choice. 

Couple these changes in our society with the development and popularity of violent game playing in computer simulations and alternate reality games and it does not seem to me to be a great leap to ask if we are creating a nation of young men and women driven by alienation, who see ending life as acceptable moral choice, and deciding that their 15 minutes of fame should be in the taking of another’s life.  It seems only a matter of time (and not too much time) before that argument will be made in their defense.

I believe we already see influencers in the media and entertainment industry beginning the virtue signaling that this is acceptable, as long as the targets are those they approve of.  For example, in the past year, we have seen liberal entertainers calling for the assassination of the President, going so far as to hold up a clearly recognizable severed head.  (As an aside, I find the whining of the entertainer who did this to be a fascinating study on denial of personal responsibility and outrage over the consequences of her actions.  Either she is a complete idiot, or she lives in such a sheltered world the reality most of us live in never gets in.)

Along the way should we consider the impact of the social media that has come to dominate the internet?  From our beginnings, the predominant position of this nation was that we must be a nation of law.  Where justice, based on the moral standards of the nation, is applied fairly across the society.  Today does that still remain true, or are we moving ever closer to the concept of mob rule, where those who control the dialogue now control the judgments of the many who become inflamed over the mere accusations of unknown voices?

-- to be continued --

Door to Door Salesmen

When I was young, there were salesmen who would come to the door offering the women of the house all sorts of wares.  The ones that seem most prominent in my memory are the Fuller Brush, and vacuum cleaner salesmen.  Kirby and Electrolux were the two brands I remember my family getting sold by some stranger who offered to vacuum the entire living room to show off their product, but they paled in comparison to one memorable evening at our neighbor’s house on Madison Avenue, in the Holt Development.

I think I must have been about seven or eight, but maybe a little older since the memory remains so vivid.  It was a warm spring night and we (my parents, sisters and I) along with several other families were invited over to the house next door, where a stranger in a bow tie introduced himself and said he was there to cook us dinner.

He then set out cooking dinner for probably a dozen people including the kids.  As he cooked, he explained the wonders of the revolutionary new stainless-steel cookware and how it brought out the amazing tastes of fresh vegetables and meat.  After some time of getting chased out of the kitchen and into the basement we kids were all shuffled up to the living room and sat at small tables to enjoy the fruits of the salesman’s efforts.

I can still recall the moist pot roast, steamed potatoes and carrots, spinach (yuck), and a beef gravy. 

I can’t speak for the other families, but I know my Dad, always a sucker for door to door salesmen, came home with a full set of this revolutionary new cookware.  It was actually a great purchase as he and Mom used it until they passed away.

In these modern times of infomercials, and on-line shopping, I wonder how much we miss out on in our buying when everything is so impersonal?

Where Does Our Concept of Morality Come From? (continued)

Who or what fills in for the parents once a teenager begins to understand the concept of morality and how he or she must act?  Is it peers, teachers, ministers, entertainment celebrities, video games or self-assessment?  How about all of them?

Let’s start with peers since studies[1] have shown that peer pressure is probably the single biggest influencer on choice for most humans.  We hear anecdotal stories all the time where an individual is characterized as a “good boy/girl” by family as they are being taken off to jail for some felony.  The need to “fit-in” is one of the great human survival tools, and is probably a key element of why we have been so successful as a species, but it is also one of the great dangers for mankind.  Peer pressure and the need to fit-in goes a long way to understanding how populations tend to accept leadership that ultimately proves itself to be destructive and self-serving.  How else do we explain things like the rise of Communist dictators who kill tens of millions of their own people, or a National-Socialist regime that sets out to eliminate the Jewish population, as it moved to dominate Europe?

Today, we see in America two social phenomena that on the surface seem contradictory, but I believe are both symptoms of the same issue.  In the first case, we see the tremendous growth of gangs, beginning in the inner cities, flourishing in the prison system, and now moving to the suburban and rural parts of the nation. The gang recruitment is on-going and unfortunately reaching for younger and younger recruits to indoctrinate into their society.  There are black gangs, Hispanic gangs, oriental gangs and white gangs.  They all seek and offer the same thing, peer acceptance.  They, just like their underdeveloped country counter-parts, grow to dominate a particular region, and become self-sustaining through illegal activities, just like the infamous Costa-Nostra “families” J. Edger spend so much time investigating in the late 1940’s through the 1960’s.

The second case is “the loner” or social outcast who so often erupts, seemingly from nowhere, to wreak violence and havoc on some unsuspecting individual or group.  We see this in the increasingly frequent mass murders that make our evening news.  What leads these individuals to isolation, is it rejection from family, friends, or peers, or is there some other force at work?  Again, I suspect, although I’ve done little in-depth research that isolation grows from negative experiences with the social structure including peers.  Or from possible addictions to any of a number of devices or drugs. 

It is easy to say this is a manifestation of mental illness, but if we think about the increasing frequency of these events the question must be asked, is it mental illness that is growing uncontrollably, or a shifting standard of personal morality? Have we as a society made murder an acceptable personal choice?

-- To be continued --

---

[1] For example,  Peer Pressure? It's hardwired into your brain, study finds

Where Does Our Concept of Morality Come From?

I seem to be on singular path right now.  A conversation with an avowed atheist got me thinking about what is moral and what is immoral, in these days of rationalization.  As I said in my previous post, according to most modern theories, where God is removed from the equation, “Morality is the product of the evolutionary development of man, and society.  Morality is always relative and never absolute.”

If we assume this is true, where and how do we learn what the moral standards for our society are?  What is the basis for our own moral judgements, and how does society change its views?  I don’t know how many people spend much time thinking about this, but I have.  From those times; I’ve formed a number of opinions.  Some are researched, others just based on the empirical observations of life around me.

Back in the olden days of my youth I think the family was the principle basis for passing along the moral education of society.  Today we call that familiar process “White Privilege” because our society has done a wonderful job of destroying the Black Family.  Even then, not all families were deeply religious, those that were may have done a better job of instilling faith into the children, but my experience is a good church (I don’t assume all churches are good), built upon the work of the parents, it could not substitute for it, only supplement the foundational basis for moral judgement.

But what happens when the parents have a sense of morality that differs from society’s?  What I’ve observed is, for the large percentage those differences are accepted by the children and incorporated into their own moral standards.  The groups become sub-cultures within the larger context of the nation.  For example, the gypsies are infamous in Europe for a society that crosses national boundaries.  It has its own moral code, that is often at odds with the various civil cultures and laws.

Consider the growth of the Moron Church from its founding until the push for the statehood of Utah.  Polygamy was a morally acceptable aspect of life.  It wasn’t until the statehood issue that the church had to acquiesce to the more normally accepted concept of marriage.  Funny how now that we are changing that concept of what marriage is, the Mormons are again being criticized for not accepting the right value.

So, I believe the parents and extended family are the most basic teachers of morality for children, but who else plays a role, and what about those crazy teenage years as a young person begins to really explore and define his or her own personality, and personal belief set?  As they move away from their parents who fills in the missing spaces?

-- To be continued --

What is Moral in a World of Amorality?

As we abandon our faith, and replace a belief in a higher power with a rationalization that man is supreme, then there can be no choice but to understand morality is relative.  “Morality is the product of the evolutionary development of man and society. Morality is always relative and never absolute. Within the framework of our society, we chose our own, personal code of moral conduct.”[1]

As I’ve noted in previous posts, segments of our society are today outraged over the conduct of men in their treatment of women.  Unfortunately, they are not outraged at all abusive men for all misconduct, but are selectively outraged by those whose politics differ from their own, or whose political usefulness is waning.  For example, Kate Harding, writing in the Washington post shouts.  “I’m a feminist. I study rape culture. I don’t want Al Franken to resign.”[2]  Or, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) who has accepted support, funding and advice from the Clintons for years has just come out with “Bill Clinton should have resigned over the Lewinsky affair.”[3]  Over the past eight years there has not been one new fact exposed about Bill Clinton’s sexual abuse of power, yet now she is coming out to condemn him?  Hmmm, seems just a bit disingenuous or opportunistic if you ask me.

Then we have Michelle Goldberg, writing in the NYT that she believes Juanita[4] (Brodrick), but this use of sexual transgression was really just a Republican plot that swept up an unsuspecting Hillary who had no idea of his transgressions.  It was used in the 2016 campaign solely to deflect criticism of Trump and cast a bad light on a faithful wife.  She points to an argument made by Brian Beutler that right wing propaganda will exploit the left’s recently discovered injunction to “believe women.”   Seriously I doubt that the left will maintain that commitment for long, as we already see when people like Lena Dunham write on one day women never lie about rape (which is pretty damn ironic coming from someone who had falsely accused a Republican of raping her), and then the next -- except when they accuse my friend.  

There is a story I learned long ago that seems in keeping with the news and perhaps offers some insight into the political decisions we see.  Joseph Stalin[5], was the dictator of the Soviet Union from 1929 until his death in 1953.  A cruel and paranoid master, it is said he was singularly responsible for the deaths of over 60 million citizens of the USSR.  In the power struggle that occurred after his death the politburo appointed three men, but ultimately Nikita Khrushchev was able to consolidate power and assume the supreme role.  When that happened, he was ushered into Stalin’s private office and sat at the huge desk that had marked the seat of power for Joseph Stalin.  Still a bit awe-struck he dismissed his aids and sat pondering his good fortune and what he would do to rule the Soviet Union.  After a few minutes of reflection – he started to open the various drawers of the desk until he came to on small drawer partially hidden by the scars of times past when Joseph Stalin would fly into a rage and beat the desk.

Khrushchev opened the drawer and found three yellowing envelops that must have been in the desk for some time.  The writing was clearly Joseph Stalin’s and there was a simple note paper underneath the envelops.  Khrushchev carefully removed the envelopes and set them aside as he read the note, scratched out in Stalin’s own writing.

Comrade,

If you have found this note, I am dead and the ruling of the Soviet people has become your great prize.  I have few words of advice for you, but there are three things you should know.  The people are there for your service, but the land has been harsh to them, despite my most humane efforts many have died from war and famine so unrest is always possible.  Finally, the west is at our throats like the wolves of Siberia.  I expect you will govern well, but there will come a time when all seems lost. When that happens open the first envelop.  I warn you, do not open it until you have no other choice, for its advice is sensitive.

Nikita quietly slid the envelops back into the drawer and began to govern the Union as best he knew how.  The political in-fighting kept him occupied, as well as the various conflicts for world power.

But as Stalin had forecast, there came a great famine and all seemed lost.  Quietly, Nikita opened the drawer, pulled out the first envelop, and looking around to make sure he was alone, he broke the seal and read the advice.

Comrade,

If you are reading this there is a great calamity that has fallen upon our great Soviet Socialist State.  Here is what you should do.  Call for new elections and create a five-year plan to address whatever has befallen our great land.

Have confidence,

Joseph Stalin

Khrushchev saw immediately the wisdom of this advice and immediately disbanded the politburo, calling for new elections.  While that was going on he announced to the world the creation of a new five-year plan promising all the people of the Soviet Union would be fed and starvation would be a thing of the past.

A few years passed, and it seemed the plan had worked and the people were, for the most part quiet.  But there was a lingering problem with the Warsaw Pact, NATO was becoming a problem and the divided city of Berlin was a growing concern.  Then there was the problem with the US spy planes, but he had handled that when they shot down the U-2 and tried Francis Gary Powers for spying.  People were becoming increasingly dissatisfied with survival when the saw the prosperity of the West, unrest continued to grow until there were riots in Hungry and Poland.  He went back to the drawer and pulled out the second envelop hoping Papa Stalin would once again have the answer.

Comrade,

If you are reading this, the second letter, your five-year plan has failed or there is some other crisis that has befallen you.  Take heart.  There is an answer.  Blame me, your predecessor, for the ills that have befallen you and our great land.  I was in power for a long time… there are many lives I had to take to preserve the Union.  This will bring sunlight to you and give you time to ensure your power is absolute.

Stay Strong,

Joseph Stalin

Taking the advice Khrushchev implemented a state purge, condemned the evils of Stalin and allowed some minor freedoms to quell the riots.  Unfortunately, this only quieted the discontent for a short while.  Once again Khrushchev opened the drawer, pulled the last letter from it and slit it open to see Stalin’s final advice.  It was brief.

Comrade, Write three letters. JS.

But, I digress.

The question I started with can also be stated as “What is immoral in an amoral world?”

Today we are to be outraged over sexual abuse including rape and pedophilia, but it was only 40 years or so ago we were condemning homosexuality with the same fervor.  Hollywood stars who were homosexual had to hide that fact from their adoring fans, while keeping an “open secret” among their friends.  In the 1980’s how many famous names fell victim to the AIDS epidemic, while the most religious (conservatives) vilified them and called AIDS the “wrath of God.”

Then the LGBT community became true activists.  The entertainment industry began to push increasingly sympathetic depictions, there were parades in the major cities, they had a flag, and they aligned themselves with the Democratic Party where they steadily increased their presence until the party was forced to recognize their rights and advocate for their support. 

Today, I think the majority of Americans have come to accept the LGBT  community's right for equal treatment under the law, but the community will continue to advocate that their rights should be superior to others, and that their lifestyle should be encouraged at the cost of other beliefs.  Whether we like it, agree with it, or not, this is the way power politics works in these days of a bi-polar and schizophrenic government.

Other societies, both historic and modern, have embraced various sexual rights and allowances.  So, as those who study the subject suggest, if morality is never absolute and we can choose our own personal moral code, why should we assume pedophilia and the use of sexual violence won’t be perfectly acceptable one day in the future?  It seems only a question of time until the liberal/progressive movement can come to advocate for these rights.

That is until it is time to write the three letters.

---

[1] http://www.rationality.net/morality.htm

[2] https://epeak.in/2017/11/17/im-a-feminist-i-study-rape-culture-and-i-dont-want-al-franken-to-resign/

[3] http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/17/politics/kirsten-gillibrand-bill-clinton/index.html

[4] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/opinion/juanita-broaddrick-bill-clinton.html?smid=pl-share

[5] http://www.history.com/topics/joseph-stalin

How Much Should You Pay for a Small Chicken.

I was at dinner last night when I had a chance to chat with a friend.  I would say “old” friend, but at this point in our lives we tend to get a little sensitive about that term.  He is an avid outdoorsman who hunts, fishes, hikes through nature, and used to ride his unicycle around the base we worked at.  This is his story, if I err or embellish in its retelling the fault rests solely with me.

I had asked him how his hunting has been going and he related an episode during a recent Elk hunt.  It was bow season, and they were astride horses when a Grouse flushed and flew into a nearby tree.  He told his mates he could take that Grouse with his bow and arrow.  They, of course, doubted his ability so the challenge was laid. 

As he notched his arrow and as he began to draw the bow he slipped just a bit and the arrow flew into the brush near the ground.  He mentioned these were $20-dollar arrows with broad-head tips.

He notched a second arrow, took aim, and let fly.  It sailed true, but clipped a branch and struck the limb the Grouse was sitting on.  The bird took off but came to rest just a few feet away, apparently satisfied that William Tell was done.  We are now at the $40-dollar investment level.

But he was not done… Taking the third arrow, he took careful aim, considered John Wayne’s advice to Marian McCargo, who played Ann Langdon, in the 1969 movie Undefeated, “windage and elevation Mrs. Langdon, windage and elevation” and let loose a third shot.  This one sailed past the Grouse as well, but the bird fell to the ground.  He told his comrades he had shot the head clean off the bird, they laughed, until he dismounted and retrieved the bird, sans its head.

So, this is how a Grouse dinner comes to sixty (plus) dollars on an Elk Hunt.

This Reminds Me of a Story

US Airways, Woman Kicked Off Flight When Her Emotional Support Pig Became Rowdy, "The Sun"

The story in the Sun takes me back to a time in the mid-1980’s, when I worked with a small group of officers and NCOs who coordinated with other organizations on high-priority national missions.  One of the men in the office served as a real mentor for most of us.  He was a Chief Master Sargent, but everyone called him “Duke.”  He has passed away now, but there is a briefing room named to honor him in the Headquarters of Air Force Special Operations Command.

Duke used to tell the story of when he was a younger enlisted man assigned to a unit that was developing a personnel recovery system known as “The Surface to Air Recovery System (or STARS) for short, although most of us referred to by its inventor’s name when we talked about it.  For most of us, it was just the “Fulton Recovery System.”  You can see an early prototype of the device in the fourth James Bond movie “Thunderball,” and the actual system as installed on a specialized C-130 in the John Wayne movie “The Green Berets”

The system was designed to pick up one or two people or about 500 pounds of equipment.

During its development, there came a time they wanted to put some live weight on the end of the line but were not yet ready to risk human life.  To test the weight bearing capability they chose a 500-pound sow as the test subject.  The plan called for the pig to be tranquilized so it would be docile when it arrived at the aircraft.  Duke said the testing was done out of Pope AFB, NC which was surrounded by the many drop zones and gun ranges of Fort Bragg (home of the 82^nd Airborne Division).

Duke had us in stitches as he talked about that test.  When the pig arrived at the aircraft they could tell it was no longer fully tranquilized and was one mad-pig.  As they got it onboard the aircraft and tried to guide it into its cage the pig broke loose and went squealing and shitting all over the cargo compartment until it, unfortunately, ran off the ramp and for a short while became a flying pig.

Details of the accident remain sketchy, but I can only assume it led to the expression “I’ll believe that when pigs fly.”

Character Counts, But Only for Some

We are now firmly entrenched in the age of sexual outrage, with story after story, and condemnation after condemnation coming from the very same people who for years not only turned a blind eye to the allegations of abuse and assault coming from victims of politicians of their party, but actively engaged in the vilification of those victims.

With the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton in 1998 we clearly saw the battle ground laid out with one side arguing that character mattered and the other side saying it didn’t.

Now here we are, almost twenty years later and that same battle rages on, only the names and party affiliations have changed.  Lost in today’s world -- is the acceptance of Clinton’s abuses by the party at large when the allegations first began appearing during his 1991 primary run.  This despite the battle over alleged abuse these same politicians and activists had fought over the Clarence Thomas appointment to the Supreme Court.

Clearly, when the issue was with their “guy” the victims didn’t matter at all.  

Unfortunately for all concerned, the arguments made in Clinton’s defense have been accepted by society; all the pontificating and sanctimonious ravings of the political and media elite about the sins of this or that celebrity, politician, or celebrity-politician are viewed through the jaded eyes of people who’ve seen this all before, and realize it is only about power.  Getting power, or keeping power.  There is no morality behind the claims of the moral high ground and faux-moral outrage.

Judgment in a Judgmental World.

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” ( Matthew 7, verses 1-2 (New International Version))

I suspect society has, and will always be judgmental.  Probably going back to the earliest family group where the woman said, “you’re not wearing that to the Mammoth hunt, are you?”  If it weren’t so - we wouldn’t have so many instances of mob mentality in our history.

For example, Jesus rebuked the Pharisees who sought to trap him on the law with the stoning of a woman for adultery.  “When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, ‘Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.’”  (John 8, verse 7  NIV)

Then, of course, we have the French during their first revolution.  Where the mobs took over and the Guillotine became the social event of the day as the nobility was carted in for their amusement.

The question is – What happens to individual judgment when the vocal judgment of an angry society takes over?  

In this day of instant mass communication, it is so easy to play to the emotions of the mob, eliciting outrage or anger from those who have neither the inclination, nor the time to consider consequences, and who believe they will remain anonymous behind the mob as they cast their stones or yell for the beheading of the rich, famous or infamous.

From time to time I see questions from some of those same people who are mystified by the loss of “common sense.”  I guess it would judgmental of me to suggest it is one of the first victims of today’s mob mentality.

As the Tide Rolls In

This weekend has been an interesting one for the State of Alabama.  It began early with the Washington Post “exposé” of Roy Moore, the Republican candidate for the Senate seat vacated by Jeff Sessions when he became the US Attorney General.  Then on Veterans Day, the two football powers in the state both won.  The first, Auburn University, handed the University of Georgia “Bulldogs” a shellacking that will probably eliminate them from consideration for the College Football Playoffs.

Later, Alabama managed to close strong in their game at Mississippi State University and avoid the stress of overtime. 

Along the way, Notre Dame suffered a beating at the hands of Miami University that has sealed their fate, while Clemson handled Florida State University.

Unless something dramatic happens in the next couple of weeks it looks like Clemson and Alabama will be back in the final four, the only question is who will be the other two teams?  I can already hear the cries for expanding the playoffs to eight teams versus the four they settled on three years ago.

With its win over Georgia, Auburn is making the upcoming Iron Bowl game more interesting than early season predictions suggested it would be, but I am not sure they have the depth to hang with Alabama for all four quarters.

Ode to the Veteran

Youth, impetuous and fearless, standing on their own

Eyes, cast to a strange world, seeking independence for the first time

Minds, filled with more questions than answers, unsure of what lies ahead

Hearts, beating to be set free, wanting to make a difference in the world

These men and women come from many walks of life

Choosing different paths to a common goal

Bound by a belief in this nation

Driven by a need to be greater than the one

They come with different dreams

Putting service before themselves

Willing to guard the rights of all

Unwilling to let this country fail

Quietly they serve, and quietly they return

Too often with scars

Both hidden and not

They try to put their lives back together

They form the backbone of this country

The strength of character we are

The moral courage we show

The compassion to which we aspire

It is a veteran of war who knows its horror

It is a veteran of peace who knows our honor

It is a veteran of service who knows our sacrifice

It is a veteran who demands justice for the oppressed

As Teddy Roosevelt once said

“The credit belongs to the man who is in the arena”

Our veterans today stand on the shoulders of those before

Our veterans of tomorrow will do the same.

The Destruction of Olympus

     Watching the fall of the famous names of the entertainment and political industries strikes me as similar to watching the destruction of Mount Olympus.  It is as if the Greeks had discovered an unexpected flaw in their gods, and in that instant, they became irrelevant to those who just the day before had built such impressive monuments to them. 
     It began slowly with the vilification of the aging demi-gods.  Once they had been condemned, it moved on to the disgracing of the Titans.  Finally, once the Titans were gone the mob moved to the gods and the leveling of Olympus itself.
     As this pantheon of gods is cast aside who will replace them?  In this age of instant fame and condemnation, the people need their gods to worship and destroy.

Living in a Messy World

-->

“History is written by the winners” is a popular expression.  You have your choice of authors since it has been attributed to Orwell, Churchill, Hitler, Franklin, Bismark, and probably Genghis Khan.  History is always sanitized by those who record it, read it, and teach it.  It is impossible in the written, spoken and or acted word to truly convey the chaos of a place and time in history.  We always lose the tension, the sensory influences, and the real emotions that drove the events of the day.

Today, living with our sanitized history and known outcomes, it is so easy to condemn the overt racism that drove the United States government, led by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, to relocate and imprison over 110,000 Japanese-Americans at the onset of the second world war.  Unfortunately, few alive today can appreciate the emotions of fear and outrage that come when your self-image of the strength of the US, and a bigoted view of the enemy are shattered in a single instance?  Today’s touchy-feely society is all about making right the sins of the past, but they miss the point of those sins.  Man’s inhumanity to man cannot be made right, it cannot be undone, and it must not be excused.  Rather, it must serve as reminders of man’s weakness and inhumanity.  Guide posts and lessons along a path we should learn from as we struggle for a better society.

But we don’t learn from them, we use them as sledge hammers to beat our opponents senseless as we make the same mistakes for different reasons.  I would say our society is at a crossroad, but then I realize we are always at a crossroad where we must choose good or evil, right or wrong, or better or worse.  The only question is who knows which is which?  Perhaps we will never know, until it is all over and the historians tell us who won.

-->

For example, take the crisis of mental health here in America. 

Progressives in the 19^th Century thought it best for society that we condemn those who suffered from various mental defects to large institutions where they could be looked after and controlled for both their own good and good of society.  Various state governments used their dollars to build these institutions and everyone was happy.  That is everyone who was not condemned to these places where care ranged from adequate, through miserable, to horrific.

Then, through the advancements of medical chemistry and pharmacology we invented drugs that would mitigate the outward effects of the mental disease and seemed to be a good path towards solving the social stigma of long term hospitalization.  Progressive people in the 20^th Century said we should close these horrid institutions and return the population to live among a society where their care and treatment would be compassionate and the drugs would solve all the problems.   Of course, the politicians were happy to eliminate that expense, so the hospitals were closed and the money used elsewhere, but just how many of our society are now on these wonder drugs?  Did we become the society described by Grace Slick in the song White Rabbit?

Now we are in the 21^st Century and the issue of mental wellness seems again at the forefront of our society as it is linked to the murder of so many people in the discussion of gun violence.  On the one hand those who hate guns suggest everything would be better if we just took away all the guns, on the opposing side we have those who suggest only crazy people use guns to kill people, suggesting we should do something about crazy people and then everything would be okay.

Unlike past generations where there seemed to be a more moderate media, centrist politicians, and a compliant society we are now a bi-polar and schizophrenic nation without an ability to act effectively towards one solution.  There are so many voices in our head.  Which one do we listen to?

A Few Thoughts on Terror as a Political Tool

Much has been written about the current war on Terrorism.  Terror is the tactic used today primarily by militant Islamic organizations against both non-Islamic and moderate-Islamic cultures to break down the standards of society they are attempting to destroy.

With yesterday’s (10-31-2017) incident in New York City we see another example of how effective this tool is for bringing their cause to the news cycle.  It also illustrates the delusion of politicians, who believe they can stand before the cameras and claim that a “lone-wolf” incident will not affect the city and that city residents will not let this affect them, while at the same time telling everyone that they are dramatically increasing police presence “out of an abundance of caution.” 

The fact the government institutes new protective measures after the attack means the terrorist has achieved their objective.  Terror is the tool of the weak, used against a much stronger foe.  Its sole purpose is to destroy the status quo of society.  It does this through undermining faith in the existing government’s ability to protect its people, altering the nature of that government, or separating the average citizen from those who protect them. 

If you think of terrorism as a political tool, a good simile would be the movie “The Shawshank Redemption” where the hero, Andy Dufresne, tunnels his way out of prison using only a little rock hammer.  It appears to be an impossible task, but each chip in the wall brings him just a little closer to his goal.  So, it is with terror. 

Take just a moment to consider the changes in western society since the first public attack by Islamic terrorists.  Can you remember when that even was?  I think it was in the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich when Palestinians killed 11 Israeli athletes and a German policeman.  It has continued unabated since then, growing to the point of the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001.

Terror has historically been a criminal activity rather than a military one, but as our court systems seem unable to deal effectively with them we have created a separate secret process.  As the press is now fond of saying “Democracy Dies in Darkness” but they have only taken that approach with the current administration.  They were okay with Darkness when someone they liked was in charge.  Since 9/11 our democracy has been affected by terror to a scale few can understand or appreciate.

That will continue, unabated, until we are honest about the source of the terror and its cost.  It will continue until we, as a culture, decide we have had enough and agree on a unified course of action to kill it.  Anything else is akin to playing “WackaMole.”