Symposia Seniors is a Senior Citizen group that I helped found at the Symposia Bookstore in Hoboken, New Jersey. We meet at 4:30PM each Saturday afternoon, Lord willing and the creek don't rise ... and it isn't too hot ... and the main members are feeling OK ... which in my case means I haven't been to meeting in three weeks altenating between too hot and not feeling well.
Which is OK, too, because we decided when started back in the dead of last winter, that it wouldn't be until this coming fall before we REALLY got going. We wanted to just place a "marker" in peoples consiciousness so that when they got done with their summer doings this year they might consider getting involved ... and if they don't, that's OK, too, because Leo and I are having a great deal of fun getting our stuff together and planning to publish it ourselves if need.
Leo is writing a memoir novel with a working title of Operation Plowshare of his life in Hoboken which spans almost 80 years ... stretching back into the lives of both his parents who were also lifelong Hoboken residents. So far we've been working through Leo's youthful antics and pranks up to and incuding a hitch in the US Army in Europe during the Cold War ... fascinating stuff.
I've been working the kinks out in our "publishing" operation by printing and binding a booklet series of my postings here on this blog. I have called the series Thoughts Written In Poverty: Philosophy 0 to 101. So far I have complete small "press runs" for Part 1: July, 2004 and Part 2: August, 2004.
Websites for addtional information:
Saturday, August 20, 2005
Friday, August 19, 2005
I am poor
I am poor. I am also Scandinavian. Being poor is not a shameful state of affairs for Swedes.
And my being poor doesn't correlate well with my lifestyle. It is the label attached to a person who has—in my case—a minus net equity. I owe more than I own. And who receives less than a specific amount each month—which varies from state to state depending on the cost-of-living in that state (I believe).
My lifestyle has more to do with simplicity and patience, of stopping to smell the flowers and absorb the ambience of the world around me.
I live in a suburb a little over half-an-hour away from Manhattan on the NJ Transit Midtown Direct commuter line ... which gives me access to one of the great metropolitan centers of the world for less than $5 roundtrip. I am mobile within my world, a world that offers more interesting things that I can do than I can get around to doing.
Plus, I share the use of a computer with high-speed internet access in the household where I live.
I am fortunate to be part of a culture that values the worth and dignity of each individual member based on a belief in the intrinsic value of the individual human life as a transcendental end in itself rather than the exchange value of the assets he or she owns, or social position, or ...
And what do I mean by " intrinsic value of the individual human life as a transcendental end in itself"?
How can an "end in itself" be "transendental"? How can we transcend or go beyond an "end in itself"? Isn't an "end in itself" an end without any beyond?
This is where the concept of "an idea" comes into play. (Which is VERY Platonian, but that should not bother us, just giving credit where credit is due.) It is that "the idea" of "a chair" is something other than a specific chair and applies to all chairs ... and in that sense goes beyond a specific chair—transcends it—even though the specific chair is an end in itself.
Thus if I believe in the intrinsic value (intrinsic: belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing; Merriam-Webster) of the individual human life as a trancendental end in itself, I am saying that each individual person has worth and dignity that requires respect and consideration, and that that "idea" applies to all human beings.
(Note: It is difficult for me to not immediately extend the concept to all forms of life, but that is a subject for another essay.)
Therefore, my placement on the poor to rich spectrum of ownership (or any other positioning relative to others) does not affect the intrinsic value of my individual human life.
Is this just whistling in the dark? Making a silk purse out of a pig's ear?
As one blind man, it is only with the help of others that I can put together the whole image of the elephant. I can only relate as honestly as I can the description of what I am hanging onto, and encourage others to do likewise.
And my being poor doesn't correlate well with my lifestyle. It is the label attached to a person who has—in my case—a minus net equity. I owe more than I own. And who receives less than a specific amount each month—which varies from state to state depending on the cost-of-living in that state (I believe).
My lifestyle has more to do with simplicity and patience, of stopping to smell the flowers and absorb the ambience of the world around me.
I live in a suburb a little over half-an-hour away from Manhattan on the NJ Transit Midtown Direct commuter line ... which gives me access to one of the great metropolitan centers of the world for less than $5 roundtrip. I am mobile within my world, a world that offers more interesting things that I can do than I can get around to doing.
Plus, I share the use of a computer with high-speed internet access in the household where I live.
I am fortunate to be part of a culture that values the worth and dignity of each individual member based on a belief in the intrinsic value of the individual human life as a transcendental end in itself rather than the exchange value of the assets he or she owns, or social position, or ...
And what do I mean by " intrinsic value of the individual human life as a transcendental end in itself"?
How can an "end in itself" be "transendental"? How can we transcend or go beyond an "end in itself"? Isn't an "end in itself" an end without any beyond?
This is where the concept of "an idea" comes into play. (Which is VERY Platonian, but that should not bother us, just giving credit where credit is due.) It is that "the idea" of "a chair" is something other than a specific chair and applies to all chairs ... and in that sense goes beyond a specific chair—transcends it—even though the specific chair is an end in itself.
Thus if I believe in the intrinsic value (intrinsic: belonging to the essential nature or constitution of a thing; Merriam-Webster) of the individual human life as a trancendental end in itself, I am saying that each individual person has worth and dignity that requires respect and consideration, and that that "idea" applies to all human beings.
(Note: It is difficult for me to not immediately extend the concept to all forms of life, but that is a subject for another essay.)
Therefore, my placement on the poor to rich spectrum of ownership (or any other positioning relative to others) does not affect the intrinsic value of my individual human life.
Is this just whistling in the dark? Making a silk purse out of a pig's ear?
As one blind man, it is only with the help of others that I can put together the whole image of the elephant. I can only relate as honestly as I can the description of what I am hanging onto, and encourage others to do likewise.
Wednesday, August 17, 2005
Creeping closer to death
I have end-stage kidney disease aka chronic renal failure. I am beginning to feel the fatique and low-level nausea of my kidneys shutting down with my Creatinine level closing in on 5.0.
I have been engaged in the struggle against life-threatening kidney failure since acute kidney failure struck at the end of July, 2002, in Fairbanks, Alaska, and I spent ten days in Fairbanks Memorial Hospital, the first few days hovering at death's door. (I describe the experience in my memoir, "Into the Hospital".)
Yesterday was despressing as I finally made the call to my nephrologist (kidney doctor) and told him the time had come, the symptoms he had described and "ordered" me to call him when they appeared, had appeared. I couldn't put off dialysis any longer.
Today I began the process of the final sort through my treatment options, which will be dictated to some extent by how I can pay for the medical care I am about to receive ... because it will be an expensive regimen for the remainder of my life.
Faced with the hurdles of the next few weeks, I was starting to feel sorry for myself and consider whether it was going to be worth it, worth going through all the rigmarole of applying for the additional medicaid coverage I would need, getting the tube placed in my abdomen, and then go through the training for the peridoneal dialysis I would most likely be undertaking because I can do it at home. Maybe, I should just settle back and drift off into the cotton candy slumber of death from kidney failure.
But the self-pity didn't last too long. The room and closet and office spaces I use are simply too messy to leave for someone else to clean up. I have to try to hang around long enough to at least get that straightened out.
So I got up this morning, showered and headed off to see my PCP (Primary Care Physician) at the clinic.
She cheered me up immediately. I hadn't seen her for a while because I missed an appointment when I was sick that day, and it is harder then heck to get a new appointment. So I just kept putting it off ... until I knew I had to see her today if I was going to get anything straightened out ... and went in as "walk-in" ... which she takes on Monday afternoons and Wednesday mornings.
Knowing it would be a long wait, I brought along a couple of bottles or water and Jon le Carre's novel, ABSOLUTE FRIENDS, ( which by the way, is turning out to be an absolutely fascinating read!)
All went well and she steered me to the Clinic Social Worker who steered me to the County's Division of Aging, where later in the day I met truly helpful local government employee ... who took all the time I needed to explain the programs available to me as a Senior Citizen at my current level of income. (I'm publishing my journal as a series under the title, THOUGHTS WRITTEN IN POVERTY, so that ought to give you some idea of my financial situation.)
The process will continue through at least few more evolving iterations.
I have been engaged in the struggle against life-threatening kidney failure since acute kidney failure struck at the end of July, 2002, in Fairbanks, Alaska, and I spent ten days in Fairbanks Memorial Hospital, the first few days hovering at death's door. (I describe the experience in my memoir, "Into the Hospital".)
Yesterday was despressing as I finally made the call to my nephrologist (kidney doctor) and told him the time had come, the symptoms he had described and "ordered" me to call him when they appeared, had appeared. I couldn't put off dialysis any longer.
Today I began the process of the final sort through my treatment options, which will be dictated to some extent by how I can pay for the medical care I am about to receive ... because it will be an expensive regimen for the remainder of my life.
Faced with the hurdles of the next few weeks, I was starting to feel sorry for myself and consider whether it was going to be worth it, worth going through all the rigmarole of applying for the additional medicaid coverage I would need, getting the tube placed in my abdomen, and then go through the training for the peridoneal dialysis I would most likely be undertaking because I can do it at home. Maybe, I should just settle back and drift off into the cotton candy slumber of death from kidney failure.
But the self-pity didn't last too long. The room and closet and office spaces I use are simply too messy to leave for someone else to clean up. I have to try to hang around long enough to at least get that straightened out.
So I got up this morning, showered and headed off to see my PCP (Primary Care Physician) at the clinic.
She cheered me up immediately. I hadn't seen her for a while because I missed an appointment when I was sick that day, and it is harder then heck to get a new appointment. So I just kept putting it off ... until I knew I had to see her today if I was going to get anything straightened out ... and went in as "walk-in" ... which she takes on Monday afternoons and Wednesday mornings.
Knowing it would be a long wait, I brought along a couple of bottles or water and Jon le Carre's novel, ABSOLUTE FRIENDS, ( which by the way, is turning out to be an absolutely fascinating read!)
All went well and she steered me to the Clinic Social Worker who steered me to the County's Division of Aging, where later in the day I met truly helpful local government employee ... who took all the time I needed to explain the programs available to me as a Senior Citizen at my current level of income. (I'm publishing my journal as a series under the title, THOUGHTS WRITTEN IN POVERTY, so that ought to give you some idea of my financial situation.)
The process will continue through at least few more evolving iterations.
Sunday, August 07, 2005
Some thoughts on old age and dying ...
One of my earliest "mature" stories, begun in my early twenties, started with the protagonist sitting on his front porch in his old age, slowly rocking back and forth, passing the time, thinking about the end of his life, fast approaching. The stream of consciousness setting up the story was about what regrets he might have.
As I thought about that story, it changed my life. Because I became aware early on that the biggest regret for me would come if I didn't pursue my dreams, march to my drummer, take my own path through life. It mattered not a twit whether the route would be crowded or lonely, hard or easy, long or short ... what mattered, I thought, would be that it was mine, of my choosing. I would get the feedback from my decisions.
As a white male of Scandinavian descent, born and raised in the northern tier States of Minnesota and Washington, a natural-born citizen of the United States, gifted with a reasonable intelligence and no physical defects, AND of the working class, I was relatively free to do whatever I wanted to do. I had no legacy of expectations other than to not screw up so badly that it would embarrass family or friends. I was blessed indeed. I was free ... still am, for that matter.
Now that I am that old man rocking away the end of my life, I feel like sharing what I am thinking about ... as openly and honestly as I can. At least some part of that feeling stems from the fact that the important adults in my childhood and youth kept most of their thoughts and how their experiences affected them, hidden from me. I wish I would have known then, or at least in my young adult years, what I now know ... and which I understand as being a fairly common experience.
For starters, up until my early forties, I didn't think much about dying. As a child, I thought a lot about going to Hell, because I was raised a Fundamentalist Christian, a mixture of old time Baptist and Pentecostal religion. I was saved, experienced the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, and the psyche phenomenon of Speaking in Tongues ... the whole bit. As a child, I only knew what I knew.
In my late teens I started seriously questioning the literal teachings of the Bible and spent the next forty some years trying to figure it all out, details of which I allude to from time to time in my stories and public journals.
In my early forties, I had the mid-life crisis we hear so much about as common to older men. I realized in a startling epiphany that my life really was going to end some day, leaving me with less time to live than I had already lived. I even remember much of the specific circumstances when and where it happened. It was in the fall, the early 1980's and I was traveling to Evergreen College in Olympia, Washington, from Seattle, via public transportation--a Greyhound and then the local city bus. I had been up most of the night before discussing the state of the cosmos in an all night restaurant, and slept most of the way to Olympia on the Greyhound bus. I got there, boarded the city bus to the college, and as I settled into my seat, I suddenly realized that I was going to die.
I can still remember the shock I felt at that moment. It was true, I was going to die. If ever there was a troubling of deaf heaven with bootless cries, to borrow a line from Shakespeare, that was it.
But I got through the moment, and the day with a renewed committment to follow my own path ... which was never very straight for any length of time, but always interesting.
Fast forward to the end of July, 2002, when I came quite close to dying from acute kidney failure. One of the benefits from dying from kidney failure is that it is usually a simple and painless drifting off into a coma and then dying as all the body's functions shut down. I liken it to settling into a big cotton candy cloud. I don't remember consciously fighting it. I do remember thinking that if this is dying, it ain't so bad. It didn't seem to matter one way or the other, whether I lived or died.
I haven't been afraid of dying since. I get a little annoyed once in awhile when I am right in the midst of a writing project, and I feel my body acting kind of sluggish, and I can get peeved about the interruption if I do in fact have to head off to the Emergency Room to check my blood chemistry when I don't feel right. My basic reaction is that I don't want to be bothered with it at the moment. If I'm not in the midst of something, I am much more mellow, even sanguine, about it.
Another thing, I have prostate cancer and receive a periodic hormonal medical treatment to keep my testosterone in check. As a result, I am basically a chemical enuch. With this new status I discovered that many men don't like to talk about a reduced sex drive in old age. From my point of view, it solves a lot of problems. If I would have known how I would feel about it once it was imposed ... who knows, I might have opted for it sooner. It's hard to explain the additional sense of freedom I have simply because I no longer have an appreciable sex drive. This is a clear example of what I believe older people should share.
I have lived each age-phase of my life past childhood and puberty in pursuit of what I wanted at the time. I regret none of it. It got me here. In this moment, here and now, I am free with more choices than I could ever hope to pursue. I can pick the most satisfying for me, and I do. I love it with a full-throttle zest for living in the moment.
I'll get back to you on the subject.
As I thought about that story, it changed my life. Because I became aware early on that the biggest regret for me would come if I didn't pursue my dreams, march to my drummer, take my own path through life. It mattered not a twit whether the route would be crowded or lonely, hard or easy, long or short ... what mattered, I thought, would be that it was mine, of my choosing. I would get the feedback from my decisions.
As a white male of Scandinavian descent, born and raised in the northern tier States of Minnesota and Washington, a natural-born citizen of the United States, gifted with a reasonable intelligence and no physical defects, AND of the working class, I was relatively free to do whatever I wanted to do. I had no legacy of expectations other than to not screw up so badly that it would embarrass family or friends. I was blessed indeed. I was free ... still am, for that matter.
Now that I am that old man rocking away the end of my life, I feel like sharing what I am thinking about ... as openly and honestly as I can. At least some part of that feeling stems from the fact that the important adults in my childhood and youth kept most of their thoughts and how their experiences affected them, hidden from me. I wish I would have known then, or at least in my young adult years, what I now know ... and which I understand as being a fairly common experience.
For starters, up until my early forties, I didn't think much about dying. As a child, I thought a lot about going to Hell, because I was raised a Fundamentalist Christian, a mixture of old time Baptist and Pentecostal religion. I was saved, experienced the Baptism of the Holy Ghost, and the psyche phenomenon of Speaking in Tongues ... the whole bit. As a child, I only knew what I knew.
In my late teens I started seriously questioning the literal teachings of the Bible and spent the next forty some years trying to figure it all out, details of which I allude to from time to time in my stories and public journals.
In my early forties, I had the mid-life crisis we hear so much about as common to older men. I realized in a startling epiphany that my life really was going to end some day, leaving me with less time to live than I had already lived. I even remember much of the specific circumstances when and where it happened. It was in the fall, the early 1980's and I was traveling to Evergreen College in Olympia, Washington, from Seattle, via public transportation--a Greyhound and then the local city bus. I had been up most of the night before discussing the state of the cosmos in an all night restaurant, and slept most of the way to Olympia on the Greyhound bus. I got there, boarded the city bus to the college, and as I settled into my seat, I suddenly realized that I was going to die.
I can still remember the shock I felt at that moment. It was true, I was going to die. If ever there was a troubling of deaf heaven with bootless cries, to borrow a line from Shakespeare, that was it.
But I got through the moment, and the day with a renewed committment to follow my own path ... which was never very straight for any length of time, but always interesting.
Fast forward to the end of July, 2002, when I came quite close to dying from acute kidney failure. One of the benefits from dying from kidney failure is that it is usually a simple and painless drifting off into a coma and then dying as all the body's functions shut down. I liken it to settling into a big cotton candy cloud. I don't remember consciously fighting it. I do remember thinking that if this is dying, it ain't so bad. It didn't seem to matter one way or the other, whether I lived or died.
I haven't been afraid of dying since. I get a little annoyed once in awhile when I am right in the midst of a writing project, and I feel my body acting kind of sluggish, and I can get peeved about the interruption if I do in fact have to head off to the Emergency Room to check my blood chemistry when I don't feel right. My basic reaction is that I don't want to be bothered with it at the moment. If I'm not in the midst of something, I am much more mellow, even sanguine, about it.
Another thing, I have prostate cancer and receive a periodic hormonal medical treatment to keep my testosterone in check. As a result, I am basically a chemical enuch. With this new status I discovered that many men don't like to talk about a reduced sex drive in old age. From my point of view, it solves a lot of problems. If I would have known how I would feel about it once it was imposed ... who knows, I might have opted for it sooner. It's hard to explain the additional sense of freedom I have simply because I no longer have an appreciable sex drive. This is a clear example of what I believe older people should share.
I have lived each age-phase of my life past childhood and puberty in pursuit of what I wanted at the time. I regret none of it. It got me here. In this moment, here and now, I am free with more choices than I could ever hope to pursue. I can pick the most satisfying for me, and I do. I love it with a full-throttle zest for living in the moment.
I'll get back to you on the subject.
Saturday, August 06, 2005
Some thoughts on Intelligent Design (ID)
Posted to the Paul Krugman forum on the NY Times Op/Ed website, hglindquist - 7:52 AM ET August 6, 2005, #44707 and hglindquist - 8:03 AM ET August 6, 2005, #44708:
If ID is an attempt by Creationists to present a rational concept, everyone should applaud. With reason as a guide, blind faith is quickly shown to be irrational ...
But to show the advance of reason that ID brings to Christian Fundamentalists I would like to quote Sir Isaac Newton (taken from Karen Armstrong's A HISTORY OF GOD--a recommended read, by the way):
"This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. . . . He is eternal and infinite, omnipotent and omniscient; that is, his duration reaches from eternity to eternity; his presence from infinity to infinity; he governs all things, and knows all things that are or can be done. . . . We know him only by his most wise and excellent contrivances of things, and final causes; we admire him for his perfection; but we reverence and adore him on account of his dominion: for we adore him as his servants; and a god without dominion, providence, and final causes, is nothing else but Fate and Nature. Blind metaphysical necessity, which is certainly the same always and everywhere, could produce no variety of things. All that diversity of natural things which we find suited to different times and places could arise from nothing but the ideas and will of a Being necessarily existing."
Remember what Newton did for the Age of Enlightenment (from Wikipedia):
"There was a wave of change across European thinking, which is exemplified by the natural philosophy of Sir Isaac Newton, a mathematical genius and brilliant physicist. The ideas of Newton, which combined his ability to fuse axiomatic proof with physical observation into a coherent system of verifiable predictions, set the tone for much of what would follow in the century after the publication of his Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica."
One more thought, this time from Jean-Paul Sartre,(in translation, of course, from THE PHILOSOPHY OF JEAN-PAUL SARTRE, edited and introduced by Robert Denoon Cumming):
"Existentialism isn't so atheistic that it wears itself out showing that God doesn't exist. Rather, it declares that even if God did exist, that would change nothing. There you've got our point of view. Not that we believe that God exists, but we think that the problem of His existence is not the issue."
I accept that.
Now if I chose to take Kierkegaard's leap of faith to believe in God then I would have to deal with the rational consistency demanded by that belief, would I not? Many people I know, respect, and love have made this choice. They cover a wide range of ID advocates to Literal Creationists. Most of them are not stupid or uneducated.
I choose to believe that God does not exist and to deal with the rational consistency demanded by that belief.
Getting Literal Creationists to establish a standard of rational consistency via the concept of ID is a huge step forward, in my humble Existentialist opinion.
Maybe we will have a new Age of Enlightenment?!
If ID is an attempt by Creationists to present a rational concept, everyone should applaud. With reason as a guide, blind faith is quickly shown to be irrational ...
But to show the advance of reason that ID brings to Christian Fundamentalists I would like to quote Sir Isaac Newton (taken from Karen Armstrong's A HISTORY OF GOD--a recommended read, by the way):
"This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being. . . . He is eternal and infinite, omnipotent and omniscient; that is, his duration reaches from eternity to eternity; his presence from infinity to infinity; he governs all things, and knows all things that are or can be done. . . . We know him only by his most wise and excellent contrivances of things, and final causes; we admire him for his perfection; but we reverence and adore him on account of his dominion: for we adore him as his servants; and a god without dominion, providence, and final causes, is nothing else but Fate and Nature. Blind metaphysical necessity, which is certainly the same always and everywhere, could produce no variety of things. All that diversity of natural things which we find suited to different times and places could arise from nothing but the ideas and will of a Being necessarily existing."
Remember what Newton did for the Age of Enlightenment (from Wikipedia):
"There was a wave of change across European thinking, which is exemplified by the natural philosophy of Sir Isaac Newton, a mathematical genius and brilliant physicist. The ideas of Newton, which combined his ability to fuse axiomatic proof with physical observation into a coherent system of verifiable predictions, set the tone for much of what would follow in the century after the publication of his Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica."
One more thought, this time from Jean-Paul Sartre,(in translation, of course, from THE PHILOSOPHY OF JEAN-PAUL SARTRE, edited and introduced by Robert Denoon Cumming):
"Existentialism isn't so atheistic that it wears itself out showing that God doesn't exist. Rather, it declares that even if God did exist, that would change nothing. There you've got our point of view. Not that we believe that God exists, but we think that the problem of His existence is not the issue."
I accept that.
Now if I chose to take Kierkegaard's leap of faith to believe in God then I would have to deal with the rational consistency demanded by that belief, would I not? Many people I know, respect, and love have made this choice. They cover a wide range of ID advocates to Literal Creationists. Most of them are not stupid or uneducated.
I choose to believe that God does not exist and to deal with the rational consistency demanded by that belief.
Getting Literal Creationists to establish a standard of rational consistency via the concept of ID is a huge step forward, in my humble Existentialist opinion.
Maybe we will have a new Age of Enlightenment?!
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
On reading the fora of the NY Times Op/Ed Columnists
Posted under hglindquist to the Bob Herbert forum in the NYTimes website, Wednesday, August 3, :
hglindquist - 10:04 AM ET August 3, 2005 (#29261)
The fora of the NY Times are a fascinating read! So many people appear to have closed their minds to reason ... all along the spectrum of political thought from the right to the left.
Some individuals expend a seemingly inordinate amount of time and energy to respond in kind to the sophomoric rhetoric (drivel?) of an opposing view. Where does all this angst come from?
Are we turning our back on the ideals of our great nation?
This spoken by a Republican President:
"It is rather for us the living, we here be dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."
From our Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ... "
Yes, there is some latitude in interpretation of our ideals, but I believe that we have start with what we believe these principles mean and explain with reason how we then come to our interpretation of them as applied to current events.
In this there will always be the tension between what is and what we believe ought to be.
I would suggest that if we turn away from the pursuit of freedom and a "government of the people, by the people, for the people", we will be retreating. And what is retreat?
hglindquist - 10:04 AM ET August 3, 2005 (#29261)
The fora of the NY Times are a fascinating read! So many people appear to have closed their minds to reason ... all along the spectrum of political thought from the right to the left.
Some individuals expend a seemingly inordinate amount of time and energy to respond in kind to the sophomoric rhetoric (drivel?) of an opposing view. Where does all this angst come from?
Are we turning our back on the ideals of our great nation?
This spoken by a Republican President:
"It is rather for us the living, we here be dedicated to the great task remaining before us--that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion--that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this nation shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth."
From our Declaration of Independence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, ... "
Yes, there is some latitude in interpretation of our ideals, but I believe that we have start with what we believe these principles mean and explain with reason how we then come to our interpretation of them as applied to current events.
In this there will always be the tension between what is and what we believe ought to be.
I would suggest that if we turn away from the pursuit of freedom and a "government of the people, by the people, for the people", we will be retreating. And what is retreat?
Tuesday, August 02, 2005
Reaping the harvest of Manifest Destiny
Once again the Christian West is embarked on a program of bringing our view of "knowing what is best for them" to another culture. We used to call this Manifest Destiny.
One problem in bringing our (the Christian West's) view of enlightenment to the Middle East is that we have a historical legacy in how we have treated aboriginal populations. Remember Kipling? Didn't he write something like, "We have got the gatling gun, and they have not"?
The next problem, stemming from that one, is that the Muslims have the gatling gun, and they are willing to use it in defense of their culture.
What did Nathan Hale say? "I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country."
The blowback (unintended consequenses) of our policies in the Middle East, which are so obviously constituted to protect our access to its oil, is that we have allowed the doctrine of jihad as a violent response to imperialism to take root. Muslims are not Native Americans with bows and arrows, nor Australine aborigines with boomarangs, nor Africans with spears. Muslims have an arsenal of lethal weapons at their disposal and the will to use them, in a culture that affirms the validity of martyrdom in opposing the encroachment of other cultures.
This conflict will not now cease until either we renounce our designs on the Middle East or the doctrine of jihad is renounced by Muslims everywhere. Which do you think will happen first?
Bush does not have a clue as to the conflagration that has been fanned and fueled by the Neocon's War in Iraq, because he is a true believer in the Christian God of the Bible.
Or maybe he does. Maybe he believes that he is God's instrument in bringing us to the prophesied Battle of Armaggedon.
Either way, there is no putting the genie back in the bottle ... or stopping the grain from ripening.
One problem in bringing our (the Christian West's) view of enlightenment to the Middle East is that we have a historical legacy in how we have treated aboriginal populations. Remember Kipling? Didn't he write something like, "We have got the gatling gun, and they have not"?
The next problem, stemming from that one, is that the Muslims have the gatling gun, and they are willing to use it in defense of their culture.
What did Nathan Hale say? "I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country."
The blowback (unintended consequenses) of our policies in the Middle East, which are so obviously constituted to protect our access to its oil, is that we have allowed the doctrine of jihad as a violent response to imperialism to take root. Muslims are not Native Americans with bows and arrows, nor Australine aborigines with boomarangs, nor Africans with spears. Muslims have an arsenal of lethal weapons at their disposal and the will to use them, in a culture that affirms the validity of martyrdom in opposing the encroachment of other cultures.
This conflict will not now cease until either we renounce our designs on the Middle East or the doctrine of jihad is renounced by Muslims everywhere. Which do you think will happen first?
Bush does not have a clue as to the conflagration that has been fanned and fueled by the Neocon's War in Iraq, because he is a true believer in the Christian God of the Bible.
Or maybe he does. Maybe he believes that he is God's instrument in bringing us to the prophesied Battle of Armaggedon.
Either way, there is no putting the genie back in the bottle ... or stopping the grain from ripening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)