I have avoided joining the partisan and polarized fray in reacting to the Clint Eastwood film that has generated so much interest in the film itself, and passion in the reactions to it. My avoidance up to now was based in part on my own responses to the film, and the other reading I've done on the life of Chris Kyle. I guess it has taken me a while sort out what I really think about this matter- and I'm still not sure I'm done with that process. This essay is about the two Chris Kyle's- one from the film, and the other I encountered in the research; and the other part is about my observations of the public reactions. But what follows are my different thoughts about this phenomenon. In sorting through my own thoughts I kept coming back to the phrase you find on the Facebook page where it asks us to describe your "relationship" status and it gives the option: It's Complicated. Well, this one is complicated.
What really spurred my thinking about this essay was a radio talk-show I was listening to on the way home from work this week. I tuned in well after the show started to hear this local commentator discussing the reactions to the comments made about Chris Kyle. Being a "right-wing" commentator this guy was all over some of the unfortunate comments made by Michael Moore and others who made very negative comments about the movie and the man. So the radio host posed the question to his conservative audience: Is Chris Kyle a hero or a coward?( knowing full well what the responses would be.) Hearing that, I'm immediately yelling to myself about what a horrible question that is -and it occurred to me that this is the very reason we don't seem to have civil discussions anymore about our politics or our culture. Christ, does Chris Kyle have be only one or the other? Can't Chris Kyle (or anyone who has done that horrible job) be a little of both? or neither one? or any combination thereof on any given day? To my way of thinking all of the above possibilities would be far more likely than identifying the American Sniper as just a hero -or just a coward. But nearly all forms of public discourse now is phased in "either/or" terms that are polarizing by their nature. When I left the movie- and it was a powerful movie- I didn't feel one way or the other. For me, it's complicated.
Delving into my own thoughts a little more, I came to several touch-points in how I view what has now become such a huge controversy. The first point is: It's a movie! I would remind my friends that this a theatrical release of a feature film. It is not a documentary. Clint Eastwood is not a journalist documenting the unvarnished facts of a man's life. He made a film, which is an art form. As such Eastwood is free to portray his art from his own perspective and tell this story as he wishes. Of course there is a good deal of truth about Chris Kyle in the film- and some fiction too I suspect. But we have to remember what this piece is, and see it for what it is. There is no conceivable way that any filmmaker could capture all the nuance of a complicated life in a two-hour movie, so the storyteller is editing the story by the very nature of the vehicle he uses to express it. What I found so interesting is the reactions to the movie follow the predispositions of the viewers. In other words, reactions are largely based the way you expected to feel, even before you see it. For those who wanted a gung-ho war flick, that's what they saw. For those who expected to see the human damage of war, that's what they saw. I can't decide if that is a strength or a failing of the film- but I'm convinced from the reactions its working that way.
Another touch point for me is the way this movie has become a metaphor for patriotism. I suppose that reactions to war or impending war as it relates to patriotism is common in this country. I grew up and into adulthood during the Vietnam era. Back then the response to those who did not support the war in Vietnam (in its early stages) got the phrase: America- Love it or leave it; which is another way to say that if you can't back the government position on the war you are not a real American so just get out, again eliminating the possibility of a middle ground. Of course the eventual outcome in the Vietnam era was that the protests began to resonate with many Americans and the war lost favor. Remember that the war was being fought by draftees- not volunteers like today. In Nixon's '68 campaign he argued that he would end the war. He didn't of course, and he actually expanded the war. By the time '72 rolled around and reelection was at stake,they had a "sudden breakthrough in negotiations with the North" and the pull back began. He was reelected. It looks like war and the representations of war (like this movie) tends to divide us today as it always has. If you favored the war in Iraq American Sniper represented righteous American patriotism. If you're against it -disliking the movie was somehow cowardly and un-American. President Bush got a lot of Democrats to support the war in Iraq precisely for that reason. Many regretted it in 2008 when they wanted to be the next President. We don't even like it when other countries question our war stance; Freedom Fries, anyone? Perhaps it is in our unique American nature to support war and denigrate those who don't - when it may be that real patriotism could be represented by means other than war and violence. At least we should make room for that possibility. We need to learn that in spite of what the politicians will tell us- not every war we fight is for our freedom- but we buy that line every time. Turns out war is complicated.
The last point is that American Sniper is very different from a number of other war movies in that it hardly even references the war itself. We see a brief scene where Kyle and his wife are watching the 9-11 attack on TV- then it's full out warrior stuff, as if the only reasonable response to 9-11 is war with nothing in between. And all during the numerous war scenes in the movie the purpose or greater mission of the war is never addressed. His purpose is clear. He is there to protect fellow warriors by killing anyone who is perceived as threat to his comrades. Perhaps that is the real legacy of this war- and possibly Kyle himself. We were lied into it- so there is no great purpose. This group of men and women can never be "the greatest generation" as Brokaw called the GIs of WWII- because the cause can never match the deeds. That raises the question of whether we can judge the warriors by the war. We made a terrible mistake in the Vietnam era by disrespecting and disregarding the warriors returning from Vietnam because the war was so unpopular by its end. The pendulum may have swung to the other extreme of the spectrum in the Middle East wars based on our enthusiasm to "support our troops" and not repeat the mistakes of Vietnam. That is, we are being ask to support the war as a sign of gratitude and respect for those who fought it. Neither position is feels very satisfying.
None of the "Hero or Coward" talk seems fair to the movie or the real Chris Kyle. Clearly (real life)Chris Kyle had some serious flaws and he had moments of real valor. His life appeared to be full of conflict and irony in spite of the portrayal of his "straight ahead" approach in the movie. He seemed motivated by his love of country but could not bring himself to be in the country he loved when the lure of action or dedication to fellow warriors called him away from his home and family. Was it sacrifice or compulsion? He mastered the use of firearms beyond the imaginable- but was killed by the errant use of a gun by a damaged Vet back home. He is the quintessential example of Jesus' warning to Simon Peter at Gethsemane that those who live by the sword will perish by the sword- and I don't think Jesus meant that as a good thing. But war is a reality and the damage to those who fight in them is a real thing too. No movie can do justice to that reality. We know that there was far more to Chris Kyle than was told in American Sniper. Eastwood hints at it, but never tells us of some of the more documented bizarre claims Kyle made about killing people in his civilian life. One thing Eastwood does in the movie, is portray every returned Vet as damaged in some way (physically or emotionally)- even Kyle's own brother who appeared before "The Legend" as dazed, shell-shocked and traumatized.
I'm happy to see that this movie and Chris Kyle's life has started this conversation. And, isn't that what art is supposed to do? So, for that reason American Sniper has performed a service. How we see wars and how we view and care for those who fight in them is an important discussion. It should be an on-going discussion. Being a warrior is not the only qualification for participating in that discussion- it should be a discussion for all of us in this democracy. So even though I'm glad to see the discussion happening, I'm disappointed at how quickly it devolves into good guys vs. bad guys; heroes vs. cowards; patriots vs. America-haters and so on. Life is more nuanced and complicated than that. Everything about the movie and the man were more complicated than that. My best wish is that it will encourage smarter and more in-depth discussions- honest discussions- and better outcomes for the country and those who serve it. Even though these matters can seem simple (and politicians want us to think they are simple)- they aren't. They always turn out to be gut-wrenchingly difficult and complex. In other words- It's complicated.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, February 1, 2015
Sunday, December 28, 2014
Dick Cheney was our Babysitter
My wife and I were just thrilled when we learned that I had won an all expenses paid, two-week trip to the Bahamas in this year's sales contest. This was going to be the best vacation of our lives and a great reward for all those long hours I'd put in. The only down side was that it was only for the two of us. That meant that we couldn't take our two kids along for this one. But, hey it would still be great to have a vacation as "just the two of us", a real second honeymoon. Of course that meant that we would have find someone to stay with our kids; our seven-year-old son Biff, and little sister five-year-old Candy.
Finding a good sitter was very important to us and a big responsibility. Since we had some time to plan Biff and Candy's care, I thought I would consult my old stand-by "life coach"- my dad. My old man has been around a long time and has had great, long-standing relationships with a number of important people through the years. So I went to dad and sought his help in finding just the right person to help with the kids while we were away. Dad immediately said that he couldn't really recommend anyone but said that his old friend Dick Cheney was very well connected and he'd be happy to help us find someone. I contacted Dick and he said he would conduct a very thorough search on our behalf. A couple of weeks later Dick called to say that, after a thorough search, he concluded that he himself would be the best person to do the job. Well, we couldn't argue with that! So all the arrangements were made and we took off for the Bahamas while Dick moved into the house to personally care for Biff and Candy.
The two weeks flew by and we had the time of our lives. We called occasionally to check in with Dick and talk to the kids. We didn't think too much of it at the time, but the kids seemed very odd on the phone and Dick would often take the phone away claiming that the kids didn't seem to want to talk. We chalked it up to the strangeness of being away for so long. But upon our return, I can hardly describe the nightmare we discovered.
It took a long time for the whole truth to come out- but the horror of this experience was finally revealed after piecing together reports from many witnesses and a number of official agencies that looked into our family's tragic experience. Here's what we discovered: Dick Cheney had some very strange notions about how to take care of kids. Dick believed that kids represented some kind of threat to household order because he had lived through a pretty horrific event with some kids once in the past. He insisted they think and behave the way he wanted. Naturally, kids behave like kids and that did not sit well with him. He began to see their behavior as non-compliant and he even began to see Biff and Candy as conspirators who wanted to destroy our household. He made up stories about how they were in contact with other kids from other households who were plotting to destroy all of our homes to foster their radical "kid-like" way of life. He called some of his friends to have Biff and Candy watched to see if they would lead him to the kid leaders. After a while Biff and Candy simply grew to rebel against Dick's unbending authority. They did stuff like refusing to eat the food he made them, or not going to bed when he told them to- or not behaving at bath time. He had their room monitors tapped and cherry-picked the conversations to glean their conspiratorial intentions.
Dick just knew that the kids were plotting big trouble and applied his now famous 1% doctrine. Dick's 1% doctrine holds that if there is even a 1% chance of some bad thing happening you have to take action as if it would actually happen. ( If any of you want to know more about Dick's real way of thinking please read the 2006 book The One Percent Doctrine by Pulitzer Prize winning author Ron Suskind) Dick felt like he had to take action to protect the household from further "attacks" by the kids. It turns out he authorized experts to try to extract the information from Biff and Candy. He made them stand in the corner for days until their little muscles cramped and seized and they were barely able to walk. He either wouldn't let them sleep or kept them in dark cold rooms for days, to "break" them. He told them he would have us (his parents) killed and threatened to kill them. He pretended he was about to kill them- then stop short of really doing it. They were terrified. In the end he had them repeatedly held down in the bathtub and put a washcloth over their faces until they gagged and couldn't breath. He had this done over and over again. When they refused to eat- he had their food blended and inserted into their rectums through a tube- or as he called it, "rectal administration of childhood nutrition".
You can image our horror when we came home to our abused and traumatized children. They will never be the same again, and now they hate us because we subjected them to Dick's methods. We wanted something done about this. The truth eventually came out. People investigated and when questioned, Dick didn't even try to deny it. In fact he said he was proud of it. A few people even asked him how he could justify the abuse. He answered that it was NOT "abuse" - it was Enhanced Parenting Techniques (EPT) He said his own lawyer told him it was legally not abusive and the reports of his abusive behavior "were full of crap". He said that even though it was harsh, it was absolutely necessary as he felt that the situation was dire in the household and that these EPTs were absolutely required-AND, he'd do it again!! He said that sometimes parenting isn't so simple- sometimes parental figures have to practice "parenting in the shadows- the dark side, if you will". And even though nobody can trace it now, Dick assured everyone that they got the information and compliance from Biff and Candy, and insisted he prevented other kids from misbehaving -and his EPTs saved families.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Please forgive me for using the analogy of caring for children and this silly story to discuss the very serious issue of our country's behavior towards prisoners in our never-ending war on terror, against no particular country whatsoever. About two weeks ago the Pew Research Institute did a national survey just after the Senate's Committee Study of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was released. I was amazed that 56% of Americans polled favored these techniques! This surprising finding caused me think about how we as a country will promote and claim the most lofty values and the highest forms of integrity- then turn right around and ignore them.
So let's examine those values by using children as the medium for what we believe. All of us who have raised children or are now raising children have come to a point where we teach our children lessons based on our values. In our endeavors as parents we tell our children that it is sometimes very hard to stick to our beliefs and our values- but people with real character stick to what's right even when it's hard. We tell them that doing what's right- even when it's hardest will make them better people and give them the strength do what's right later in life. We also tell them to be honest and straight with people; and above all be to honest with themselves. We teach them that honesty matters - and to use words that really say what we mean. We teach them these lessons not because they are lessons only for children, but because these lessons are the ones that create character in them as adults.
As it turned out none of those lessons were followed by our leaders in government. In the aftermath of the worst terror attack in our history and the loss of three thousand American lives two forces came together: one, was real fear because we had never been attacked on our soil like this before and we didn't know how to react; and two, old Neo-cons in the Bush Administration who knew the value of exploiting that fear to achieve old political ends for domination in the oil rich Middle East. The record is very clear that the Bush/Cheney White House was planning a military venture in Iran well before 9/11 and would have found another reason to go if 9/11 had not happened. This is made clear by the fact that Iran had nothing to do with 9/11- but we invaded them anyway, all the while using the fear from 9/11 to justify it. We had never before used that level of military might against a country that had not attacked us or an ally first. Once we crossed that line, I suppose the rest of this horrible behavior came easier.
As all the truth is now coming out we can remember the speeches and the Sunday morning shows where the Dick Cheney gang convinced us of things that weren't true, and imprisoned and mistreated people they knew were innocent just to cast the widest net, and tell us they were making us safer. But at what cost? I know the terrorists that attacked us weren't children like I portrayed above and I know that terrorist acts are horrific in real life and we must do everything within the law to prevent them. But I would argue that our values mean something too. I would argue that those are the very things we should seek to preserve, instead of the things we give up so readily when we feel threatened.
Do we teach our children that the ends justify the means? No, we never tell our kids that to get what they want, they should do or say anything to make it happen. But in this case that is exactly what our leaders did. If you have a doubt, go back an listen the statements Cheney has made in the last month about torture and his role in it. It is as close to evil as anything I've heard from an American politician. And it is all because he took the position that the ends (his ends) justify the means. United States law and policy prohibit us from torturing. We have signed international treaties agreeing not to torture. The law is clear on this. But to justify these illegal actions the Bush/Cheney administration simply got their attorneys to define torture as something different. But this was torture by anyone else's definition!! Would we teach our children that if they just use other words for misbehavior, it is not misbehavior? If a child stole money from mom's wallet and then said it wasn't stealing, it was "appropriating funds based on a reasonable expectation of future payment"- would we pat him on the head and say "OK- I see now it wasn't stealing at all-because you used another word"; or we would say, "no, that is stealing- taking money from another person without permission IS STEALING."
As a nation we need to admit that our leaders did things that were illegal and immoral. They did them full-well with the knowledge they were doing wrong but weaseled their way to legitimacy and public approval with lawyers and lies. We have prosecuted others for doing the same thing to our troops in WWII, we led the way to prosecuting Germans for war crimes at Nuremberg and we did that to help prevent those barbarous acts from ever happening again. It is shameful that now we (the self-professed) leader of nations who defend human rights has sunken to such a low level. As terrible a criminal as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad is, what did we gain from the waterboarding him 185 times in a month- that we did not gain from the 180th time- or the 100th time? What have we done to our standing in the world as a leader in dispensing justice, when we have held so many for years on end with no trial? And, what damage have we done ourselves in the eyes of our children? What message have we sent to our enemies, should one of our children be tortured by them in the future. Can we object? Can we hold future enemies accountable, and hold our lofty ideals up as the measuring stick? Can we really say, "we're better than that"?
The debates will rage on over this topic. Several countries have already leveled international charges against the Bush/Cheney administration, and last week the New York Times said criminal investigations should begin against President Bush and Vice President Cheney. But it's highly unlikely that will happen. Apparently we've bought the Dick Cheney argument that "we had to do it-and that makes it OK"- because over half of us agree with their methods. I know this isn't the first time a President has violated our values: Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, and FDR interred Japanese Americans. But in the matter of torture it is all the more sinister and wrong- because it is about inflicting suffering for the sake of suffering. I know sticking to our values doesn't make our enemies give up their brutal and inhumane behavior, but even so (and maybe because of that) we must not follow suit. I would like to see the Justice Department investigate this. I would like to see every person involved from the soldier or CIA operative in the field to the Commander-in-Chief be held accountable. The lesson of Nuremberg is that everyone is expected to behave humanely, even if you are just following orders. The chips should fall where they fall. We claimed that this all started because "they" hated our way of life, and we justified these actions to maintain our way of life. I don't think any of that is entirely truly, but if we are going to say that- we should practice our way of life and the values that make it so. Those are the lessons we should pass on to our children.
Thanks for looking in.
Finding a good sitter was very important to us and a big responsibility. Since we had some time to plan Biff and Candy's care, I thought I would consult my old stand-by "life coach"- my dad. My old man has been around a long time and has had great, long-standing relationships with a number of important people through the years. So I went to dad and sought his help in finding just the right person to help with the kids while we were away. Dad immediately said that he couldn't really recommend anyone but said that his old friend Dick Cheney was very well connected and he'd be happy to help us find someone. I contacted Dick and he said he would conduct a very thorough search on our behalf. A couple of weeks later Dick called to say that, after a thorough search, he concluded that he himself would be the best person to do the job. Well, we couldn't argue with that! So all the arrangements were made and we took off for the Bahamas while Dick moved into the house to personally care for Biff and Candy.
The two weeks flew by and we had the time of our lives. We called occasionally to check in with Dick and talk to the kids. We didn't think too much of it at the time, but the kids seemed very odd on the phone and Dick would often take the phone away claiming that the kids didn't seem to want to talk. We chalked it up to the strangeness of being away for so long. But upon our return, I can hardly describe the nightmare we discovered.
It took a long time for the whole truth to come out- but the horror of this experience was finally revealed after piecing together reports from many witnesses and a number of official agencies that looked into our family's tragic experience. Here's what we discovered: Dick Cheney had some very strange notions about how to take care of kids. Dick believed that kids represented some kind of threat to household order because he had lived through a pretty horrific event with some kids once in the past. He insisted they think and behave the way he wanted. Naturally, kids behave like kids and that did not sit well with him. He began to see their behavior as non-compliant and he even began to see Biff and Candy as conspirators who wanted to destroy our household. He made up stories about how they were in contact with other kids from other households who were plotting to destroy all of our homes to foster their radical "kid-like" way of life. He called some of his friends to have Biff and Candy watched to see if they would lead him to the kid leaders. After a while Biff and Candy simply grew to rebel against Dick's unbending authority. They did stuff like refusing to eat the food he made them, or not going to bed when he told them to- or not behaving at bath time. He had their room monitors tapped and cherry-picked the conversations to glean their conspiratorial intentions.
Dick just knew that the kids were plotting big trouble and applied his now famous 1% doctrine. Dick's 1% doctrine holds that if there is even a 1% chance of some bad thing happening you have to take action as if it would actually happen. ( If any of you want to know more about Dick's real way of thinking please read the 2006 book The One Percent Doctrine by Pulitzer Prize winning author Ron Suskind) Dick felt like he had to take action to protect the household from further "attacks" by the kids. It turns out he authorized experts to try to extract the information from Biff and Candy. He made them stand in the corner for days until their little muscles cramped and seized and they were barely able to walk. He either wouldn't let them sleep or kept them in dark cold rooms for days, to "break" them. He told them he would have us (his parents) killed and threatened to kill them. He pretended he was about to kill them- then stop short of really doing it. They were terrified. In the end he had them repeatedly held down in the bathtub and put a washcloth over their faces until they gagged and couldn't breath. He had this done over and over again. When they refused to eat- he had their food blended and inserted into their rectums through a tube- or as he called it, "rectal administration of childhood nutrition".
You can image our horror when we came home to our abused and traumatized children. They will never be the same again, and now they hate us because we subjected them to Dick's methods. We wanted something done about this. The truth eventually came out. People investigated and when questioned, Dick didn't even try to deny it. In fact he said he was proud of it. A few people even asked him how he could justify the abuse. He answered that it was NOT "abuse" - it was Enhanced Parenting Techniques (EPT) He said his own lawyer told him it was legally not abusive and the reports of his abusive behavior "were full of crap". He said that even though it was harsh, it was absolutely necessary as he felt that the situation was dire in the household and that these EPTs were absolutely required-AND, he'd do it again!! He said that sometimes parenting isn't so simple- sometimes parental figures have to practice "parenting in the shadows- the dark side, if you will". And even though nobody can trace it now, Dick assured everyone that they got the information and compliance from Biff and Candy, and insisted he prevented other kids from misbehaving -and his EPTs saved families.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Please forgive me for using the analogy of caring for children and this silly story to discuss the very serious issue of our country's behavior towards prisoners in our never-ending war on terror, against no particular country whatsoever. About two weeks ago the Pew Research Institute did a national survey just after the Senate's Committee Study of the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program was released. I was amazed that 56% of Americans polled favored these techniques! This surprising finding caused me think about how we as a country will promote and claim the most lofty values and the highest forms of integrity- then turn right around and ignore them.
So let's examine those values by using children as the medium for what we believe. All of us who have raised children or are now raising children have come to a point where we teach our children lessons based on our values. In our endeavors as parents we tell our children that it is sometimes very hard to stick to our beliefs and our values- but people with real character stick to what's right even when it's hard. We tell them that doing what's right- even when it's hardest will make them better people and give them the strength do what's right later in life. We also tell them to be honest and straight with people; and above all be to honest with themselves. We teach them that honesty matters - and to use words that really say what we mean. We teach them these lessons not because they are lessons only for children, but because these lessons are the ones that create character in them as adults.
As it turned out none of those lessons were followed by our leaders in government. In the aftermath of the worst terror attack in our history and the loss of three thousand American lives two forces came together: one, was real fear because we had never been attacked on our soil like this before and we didn't know how to react; and two, old Neo-cons in the Bush Administration who knew the value of exploiting that fear to achieve old political ends for domination in the oil rich Middle East. The record is very clear that the Bush/Cheney White House was planning a military venture in Iran well before 9/11 and would have found another reason to go if 9/11 had not happened. This is made clear by the fact that Iran had nothing to do with 9/11- but we invaded them anyway, all the while using the fear from 9/11 to justify it. We had never before used that level of military might against a country that had not attacked us or an ally first. Once we crossed that line, I suppose the rest of this horrible behavior came easier.
As all the truth is now coming out we can remember the speeches and the Sunday morning shows where the Dick Cheney gang convinced us of things that weren't true, and imprisoned and mistreated people they knew were innocent just to cast the widest net, and tell us they were making us safer. But at what cost? I know the terrorists that attacked us weren't children like I portrayed above and I know that terrorist acts are horrific in real life and we must do everything within the law to prevent them. But I would argue that our values mean something too. I would argue that those are the very things we should seek to preserve, instead of the things we give up so readily when we feel threatened.
Do we teach our children that the ends justify the means? No, we never tell our kids that to get what they want, they should do or say anything to make it happen. But in this case that is exactly what our leaders did. If you have a doubt, go back an listen the statements Cheney has made in the last month about torture and his role in it. It is as close to evil as anything I've heard from an American politician. And it is all because he took the position that the ends (his ends) justify the means. United States law and policy prohibit us from torturing. We have signed international treaties agreeing not to torture. The law is clear on this. But to justify these illegal actions the Bush/Cheney administration simply got their attorneys to define torture as something different. But this was torture by anyone else's definition!! Would we teach our children that if they just use other words for misbehavior, it is not misbehavior? If a child stole money from mom's wallet and then said it wasn't stealing, it was "appropriating funds based on a reasonable expectation of future payment"- would we pat him on the head and say "OK- I see now it wasn't stealing at all-because you used another word"; or we would say, "no, that is stealing- taking money from another person without permission IS STEALING."
As a nation we need to admit that our leaders did things that were illegal and immoral. They did them full-well with the knowledge they were doing wrong but weaseled their way to legitimacy and public approval with lawyers and lies. We have prosecuted others for doing the same thing to our troops in WWII, we led the way to prosecuting Germans for war crimes at Nuremberg and we did that to help prevent those barbarous acts from ever happening again. It is shameful that now we (the self-professed) leader of nations who defend human rights has sunken to such a low level. As terrible a criminal as Khalid Sheikh Mohammad is, what did we gain from the waterboarding him 185 times in a month- that we did not gain from the 180th time- or the 100th time? What have we done to our standing in the world as a leader in dispensing justice, when we have held so many for years on end with no trial? And, what damage have we done ourselves in the eyes of our children? What message have we sent to our enemies, should one of our children be tortured by them in the future. Can we object? Can we hold future enemies accountable, and hold our lofty ideals up as the measuring stick? Can we really say, "we're better than that"?
The debates will rage on over this topic. Several countries have already leveled international charges against the Bush/Cheney administration, and last week the New York Times said criminal investigations should begin against President Bush and Vice President Cheney. But it's highly unlikely that will happen. Apparently we've bought the Dick Cheney argument that "we had to do it-and that makes it OK"- because over half of us agree with their methods. I know this isn't the first time a President has violated our values: Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, and FDR interred Japanese Americans. But in the matter of torture it is all the more sinister and wrong- because it is about inflicting suffering for the sake of suffering. I know sticking to our values doesn't make our enemies give up their brutal and inhumane behavior, but even so (and maybe because of that) we must not follow suit. I would like to see the Justice Department investigate this. I would like to see every person involved from the soldier or CIA operative in the field to the Commander-in-Chief be held accountable. The lesson of Nuremberg is that everyone is expected to behave humanely, even if you are just following orders. The chips should fall where they fall. We claimed that this all started because "they" hated our way of life, and we justified these actions to maintain our way of life. I don't think any of that is entirely truly, but if we are going to say that- we should practice our way of life and the values that make it so. Those are the lessons we should pass on to our children.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, December 7, 2014
Policing and Race
Over the last few weeks we have been confronted with several horrible, tragic, and perplexing situations where the police and the justice system have intersected with the ugliest part of our national character, racism. The situations in New York, Ferguson and Cleveland are forcing us to face our past, the current state of affairs, and a future that cries out for change.
As with most controversial circumstances these days, we find ourselves torn apart as country, almost forced to pick sides- and do it with extreme prejudice towards those who hold a different position. I've argued in the past that our national discourse has been poisoned and perverted so badly that it is nearly impossible to come together even to have the conversation- let alone to seek solutions to these vexing issues. The killing of these young black men referenced above is no different. These killings have exposed the deep divide and drawn us further apart. The tragedy of these events have two common threads; policing and race. I have been sadly captivated as I watched these events unfold, such that I began to think very hard about these issues and decided to share a few thoughts. I admit my thoughts have been influenced by emotions conjured from the sights and sounds of recent weeks. The emotions are sadness and (at times) anger at the inhumanity so instantly on display. But I will try to express myself free from those emotions because productive conversation and change can only come from discussion based in thoughtfulness, reason, and logic.
I've thought a great deal about policing. The actions of police are the integral part and common thread in all three communities now dealing with these violent, deadly events. In Ferguson, a police office shot and killed an unarmed black young man. Some details of the case conflicted with others and a grand jury did not indict the officer. In Cleveland a patrol car responded to a call, found a twelve year old boy and opened fire in less than 2 seconds believing his toy gun was real. And, In New York last summer police in Staten Island subdued a non-violent, unarmed black man using a choke hold-causing his death. The case went before a Grand Jury and the officer was not indicted. In Ferguson there was no video evidence of the incident and the there was conflicting testimony. In both Cleveland and New York there was clear video evidence. We don't know the final disposition in Cleveland yet, but in both of the other incidents all of us can clearly see what happened- and so far no charges have been brought in any of these deaths.
I could write another entire essay on the particulars of each of these incidents. Even though the events in Ferguson contains a litany of problems with the prosecution and the Grand Jury process; while the New York result is simply logically unexplainable, as was the shooting in Cleveland; that is not the point I want to focus on. These events should cause us to question the relationship Americans (including minority Americans) have with our police. Clearly, I am not a police officer, and hold no particular expertise in policing- but that just might be the reason both you and I should be discussing the nature of policing in this country. One of the founding principals of our democracy is the caution against tyranny that could eliminate our freedoms. That's why we never entrust control of the military to the military. We have civilian control of the military to insure that those with such overwhelming power never control it themselves. On the local, civilian level the same principle applies to our police. We should not allow our police to decide how policing should be done. Because the police have tremendous power, that power should only be exercised by the consent and oversight of another authority- a civil authority that derives its power from the citizens.
There are disturbing trends in policing that may have contributed to the tragic deaths. Even as crime rates overall have decreased dramatically in the last twenty years, we have seen police forces ramp up the level of armaments and become vastly more militarized. Our national (misplaced) over-reaction to the 9-11 terrorist attacks created two factors impacting today's events. One, was our willingness to give up some of our personal freedoms to the government in exchange for what we thought would be more personal safety from those who might harm us. The hastily arrived at Patriot Act gave law enforcement unprecedented access to information as well as more leeway in search and seizure procedures; and in my opinion created an environment within the law enforcement community that they have impunity to exercise authority over us. The second factor was the physical militarization of policing agencies. Again, our over-reaction to 9-11 generated unbelievable spending on military equipment through the DHS. A great deal of that equipment was outright intended for law enforcement agencies for "homeland security" or it was simply given away to municipalities as surplus equipment. Notice too, that uniformed police officers now dress and behave more like soldiers than police officers did only a generation ago. They tend to wear jump suits, dress completely in black and often cover their faces. I have personally witnessed this in my community, and I have seen this trend in media reports from across the country. This trend is not reserved for crowd control situations- but is now the standard in everyday policing. I would contend that when our police look and arm themselves like soldiers, they will increasingly behave like soldiers. That makes them an army (of sorts) with the people or certain segments of the people being the enemy. Our local law enforcement agencies now possess and use military troop carriers and armaments, including a military helicopter. The use of SWAT teams across the country is up near 1000% since police started acquiring military equipment. This use (or overuse) of force can only serve to alienate the very people they seek to serve. The images of the Ferguson Police using military equipment against their own people in the first protests after the Brown killing, were absolutely chilling.
When over-militarism and long standing issues of racism mix it will undoubtedly create a deadly situation. In the first paragraph I said that racism is one of our national characteristics. That is a serious thing to say- but I believe it to be the truth and more importantly the evidence tells us it is the truth. But unless we face our past and effectively come to grips with both individual racism and the more insidious institutional racism that plagues us these occurrences will continue. As we look at all of these situations individually I suppose that people can arrive at a rationalization that justifies the police action. The deniers can always rationalize that every one of these situations could have been avoided "if they would just do what the police say" or they reach back for some prior action that justifies the use of deadly force retroactively and go head-long into villian-izing and blaming the victim. That is the process that keeps us from dealing with the greater problem. We rationalize the individual event so we don't have to look at the overall trend. In this case the overall trend is that young black and Hispanic men are far more likely to be killed by police than white people in the same circumstances. Focusing on the event and ignoring the trend, while blaming the victim robs us of ever getting to the truth. In almost every case of the police killing a young black man we eventually hear the term "thug" applied to the victim. Michael Brown was called a thug- Garner is being blamed for his own death because he did not submit to police (thug-ish behavior)- even Tayvon Martin was called a thug when he fought back for his own life with the amateur cop. Our President has literally been called a "thug and a Gangster" by Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen, and been accused of all manor of lawlessness. That is how low the culture has sunk. "Thug" has become the new N-word and is now just as racially charged as any other racial slur- and it is used to justify some pretty horrific and racially inspired behavior.
The plain truth is that police are just as apt to apply the notions of institutional racism as anyone else, and probably more so due to the power differential. The other plain truth is that our white dominant culture has perpetuated the image of the young black male as inherently dangerous. It is then easy to understand that when confronting that stereotype, police are much more prone to react with lethal force more quickly than they would if the subject were white. Study after study proves persons of color (particularly black males) are stopped more, arrested more, convicted more, and serve more prison time as a function of institutional racism. Every empirical study supports that conclusion. The three cases discussed here are bad enough- but they are only the latest. Shootings like these happen regularly across the country and the justice system routinely fails to hold police accountable. It is also true that police have often been used as the instruments of institutional racism. In the sixties we remember the image of southern police officers turning the dogs and the fire hoses on the marchers during the early civil rights movement. In this era the police use their new-found urban tanks and weaponry. I wonder if anything has changed for the better when we see the Ferguson Police in armoured vehicles with a top-mounted gun turret aimed at protesters.
I'm quite certain some who read this will be moved to great anger at the seeming lack of empathy or appreciation for the police. But that would be missing the point too. I've tried to stay away from discussing the details of individual events in favor of taking a broader view of solutions to this problem. I'm well aware that most police officers do their job bravely and do it well. I'm well aware that not all police officers are outright racists. I'm well aware of the risks they take each day. But there is no denying the overwhelming evidence of institutional racism and its place in our system of justice and policing. So, it is incumbent on all us of raise our voices to define the way we want policing done- that's the way it's done in a free society. I for one would like to see the trend of militarizing the police stop- send the tanks, the assault rifles, and helicopters back. They send the wrong message and create the wrong environment. My version of policing would involve more community policing, more involvement in the neighborhoods, and more relationships between the police and the people they serve. Police must look like, and be like the communities they serve. Police can never be expected to be respected in their communities unless they are part of their communities. And finally, we must admit to ourselves that we have a past steeped in racism and it is still with us. I'm not sure our country can agree to accept that reality and begin honestly discussing it with ourselves and our children- but I'm convinced it must happen. The rising tide of protests are a loud voice telling us we must listen and change the current landscape of both policing and racial inequality.
Thanks for looking in.
As with most controversial circumstances these days, we find ourselves torn apart as country, almost forced to pick sides- and do it with extreme prejudice towards those who hold a different position. I've argued in the past that our national discourse has been poisoned and perverted so badly that it is nearly impossible to come together even to have the conversation- let alone to seek solutions to these vexing issues. The killing of these young black men referenced above is no different. These killings have exposed the deep divide and drawn us further apart. The tragedy of these events have two common threads; policing and race. I have been sadly captivated as I watched these events unfold, such that I began to think very hard about these issues and decided to share a few thoughts. I admit my thoughts have been influenced by emotions conjured from the sights and sounds of recent weeks. The emotions are sadness and (at times) anger at the inhumanity so instantly on display. But I will try to express myself free from those emotions because productive conversation and change can only come from discussion based in thoughtfulness, reason, and logic.
I've thought a great deal about policing. The actions of police are the integral part and common thread in all three communities now dealing with these violent, deadly events. In Ferguson, a police office shot and killed an unarmed black young man. Some details of the case conflicted with others and a grand jury did not indict the officer. In Cleveland a patrol car responded to a call, found a twelve year old boy and opened fire in less than 2 seconds believing his toy gun was real. And, In New York last summer police in Staten Island subdued a non-violent, unarmed black man using a choke hold-causing his death. The case went before a Grand Jury and the officer was not indicted. In Ferguson there was no video evidence of the incident and the there was conflicting testimony. In both Cleveland and New York there was clear video evidence. We don't know the final disposition in Cleveland yet, but in both of the other incidents all of us can clearly see what happened- and so far no charges have been brought in any of these deaths.
I could write another entire essay on the particulars of each of these incidents. Even though the events in Ferguson contains a litany of problems with the prosecution and the Grand Jury process; while the New York result is simply logically unexplainable, as was the shooting in Cleveland; that is not the point I want to focus on. These events should cause us to question the relationship Americans (including minority Americans) have with our police. Clearly, I am not a police officer, and hold no particular expertise in policing- but that just might be the reason both you and I should be discussing the nature of policing in this country. One of the founding principals of our democracy is the caution against tyranny that could eliminate our freedoms. That's why we never entrust control of the military to the military. We have civilian control of the military to insure that those with such overwhelming power never control it themselves. On the local, civilian level the same principle applies to our police. We should not allow our police to decide how policing should be done. Because the police have tremendous power, that power should only be exercised by the consent and oversight of another authority- a civil authority that derives its power from the citizens.
There are disturbing trends in policing that may have contributed to the tragic deaths. Even as crime rates overall have decreased dramatically in the last twenty years, we have seen police forces ramp up the level of armaments and become vastly more militarized. Our national (misplaced) over-reaction to the 9-11 terrorist attacks created two factors impacting today's events. One, was our willingness to give up some of our personal freedoms to the government in exchange for what we thought would be more personal safety from those who might harm us. The hastily arrived at Patriot Act gave law enforcement unprecedented access to information as well as more leeway in search and seizure procedures; and in my opinion created an environment within the law enforcement community that they have impunity to exercise authority over us. The second factor was the physical militarization of policing agencies. Again, our over-reaction to 9-11 generated unbelievable spending on military equipment through the DHS. A great deal of that equipment was outright intended for law enforcement agencies for "homeland security" or it was simply given away to municipalities as surplus equipment. Notice too, that uniformed police officers now dress and behave more like soldiers than police officers did only a generation ago. They tend to wear jump suits, dress completely in black and often cover their faces. I have personally witnessed this in my community, and I have seen this trend in media reports from across the country. This trend is not reserved for crowd control situations- but is now the standard in everyday policing. I would contend that when our police look and arm themselves like soldiers, they will increasingly behave like soldiers. That makes them an army (of sorts) with the people or certain segments of the people being the enemy. Our local law enforcement agencies now possess and use military troop carriers and armaments, including a military helicopter. The use of SWAT teams across the country is up near 1000% since police started acquiring military equipment. This use (or overuse) of force can only serve to alienate the very people they seek to serve. The images of the Ferguson Police using military equipment against their own people in the first protests after the Brown killing, were absolutely chilling.
When over-militarism and long standing issues of racism mix it will undoubtedly create a deadly situation. In the first paragraph I said that racism is one of our national characteristics. That is a serious thing to say- but I believe it to be the truth and more importantly the evidence tells us it is the truth. But unless we face our past and effectively come to grips with both individual racism and the more insidious institutional racism that plagues us these occurrences will continue. As we look at all of these situations individually I suppose that people can arrive at a rationalization that justifies the police action. The deniers can always rationalize that every one of these situations could have been avoided "if they would just do what the police say" or they reach back for some prior action that justifies the use of deadly force retroactively and go head-long into villian-izing and blaming the victim. That is the process that keeps us from dealing with the greater problem. We rationalize the individual event so we don't have to look at the overall trend. In this case the overall trend is that young black and Hispanic men are far more likely to be killed by police than white people in the same circumstances. Focusing on the event and ignoring the trend, while blaming the victim robs us of ever getting to the truth. In almost every case of the police killing a young black man we eventually hear the term "thug" applied to the victim. Michael Brown was called a thug- Garner is being blamed for his own death because he did not submit to police (thug-ish behavior)- even Tayvon Martin was called a thug when he fought back for his own life with the amateur cop. Our President has literally been called a "thug and a Gangster" by Republican Congressmen and Congresswomen, and been accused of all manor of lawlessness. That is how low the culture has sunk. "Thug" has become the new N-word and is now just as racially charged as any other racial slur- and it is used to justify some pretty horrific and racially inspired behavior.
The plain truth is that police are just as apt to apply the notions of institutional racism as anyone else, and probably more so due to the power differential. The other plain truth is that our white dominant culture has perpetuated the image of the young black male as inherently dangerous. It is then easy to understand that when confronting that stereotype, police are much more prone to react with lethal force more quickly than they would if the subject were white. Study after study proves persons of color (particularly black males) are stopped more, arrested more, convicted more, and serve more prison time as a function of institutional racism. Every empirical study supports that conclusion. The three cases discussed here are bad enough- but they are only the latest. Shootings like these happen regularly across the country and the justice system routinely fails to hold police accountable. It is also true that police have often been used as the instruments of institutional racism. In the sixties we remember the image of southern police officers turning the dogs and the fire hoses on the marchers during the early civil rights movement. In this era the police use their new-found urban tanks and weaponry. I wonder if anything has changed for the better when we see the Ferguson Police in armoured vehicles with a top-mounted gun turret aimed at protesters.
I'm quite certain some who read this will be moved to great anger at the seeming lack of empathy or appreciation for the police. But that would be missing the point too. I've tried to stay away from discussing the details of individual events in favor of taking a broader view of solutions to this problem. I'm well aware that most police officers do their job bravely and do it well. I'm well aware that not all police officers are outright racists. I'm well aware of the risks they take each day. But there is no denying the overwhelming evidence of institutional racism and its place in our system of justice and policing. So, it is incumbent on all us of raise our voices to define the way we want policing done- that's the way it's done in a free society. I for one would like to see the trend of militarizing the police stop- send the tanks, the assault rifles, and helicopters back. They send the wrong message and create the wrong environment. My version of policing would involve more community policing, more involvement in the neighborhoods, and more relationships between the police and the people they serve. Police must look like, and be like the communities they serve. Police can never be expected to be respected in their communities unless they are part of their communities. And finally, we must admit to ourselves that we have a past steeped in racism and it is still with us. I'm not sure our country can agree to accept that reality and begin honestly discussing it with ourselves and our children- but I'm convinced it must happen. The rising tide of protests are a loud voice telling us we must listen and change the current landscape of both policing and racial inequality.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, November 16, 2014
Those Who Show Up
Famed author and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin who has given us so many great movie and television stories coined the phrase, "decisions are made by those who show up", in an episode of The West Wing. In a world with so many distractions and so many conflicting sources of information and misinformation the concept of showing up is critically important. Many of us I fear, have come to believe that just having a casual, passing familiarity with the events that touch our lives is enough. We tend to let the post on Facebook or the news alert on our cell phone be our touch-point in the hectic, over stimulating culture we live in. We find ourselves rushing from one place to another to drop off the kids, or attend that meeting, make it to that charity event, arrange to do that overtime, or squeeze in a few moments for ourselves for a workout or read a few pages for pleasure. In the rush to make it to those things we forget how vitally important it is to be there, not just get there. That experience makes Aaron Sorkin's prophetic and pragmatic line all the more important. So often, when important things are at stake- only those who show up decide.
Those words rang jarringly true very last week when this country held an election. Decisions were made by those who showed up. The problem with that election was that only about one in three voters showed up. Naturally the victors crowed that that they had won a great victory. They claimed the result of the election provided a clear message that their side was right. As I go though the rest of this essay I'm going to be discussing some the issues and factors concerning that election. I'm going to be mentioning some FACTS and some OPINIONS. For emphasis I'm going clearly label them as one or the other by using capital letters. I do this because the confusion between FACTS and OPINIONS played a big role in the last election.
Let me start by saying that, in my OPINION, the Republicans did not win. If they won (as they now boast) I'm unable to find anything they won on. In FACT, there was no Republican national vision for the country. In FACT, there was no cohesive group putting forth an agenda for the future. In FACT, there was no Republican candidate with a clear plan for Health Care, the Economy, the VA problems, Wages, Immigration Policy, Trade Policy, Foreign Policy, Military Policy, Tax Policy, Farm Policy, Transportation Policy, or any other major area of government endeavor. If I've missed any of those facts, please enlighten me.What I saw, was in FACT, Republicans just saying that the President was a bad President- even when the FACTS don't support that position. In my OPINION, the real winners were apathy and discontent. If Republicans insist it was a victory, then it is surely a hallow victory devoid any promise for the country. It is true that Republicans will get their seats in the next Congress and control the House and the Senate- but let's not call it a huge mandate for them when two out of three voters decided to sit this one out.
The FACT that only one third of the electorate showed up ought to be a matter of great concern to all of us, regardless of the outcome. The rate of voter turnout in the last mid-term was the lowest in the US since 1942. That is something to worry about- and something to investigate. I'm repeating some OPINIONS I've head elsewhere, but I have to agree that we have two electorates in this country. There is the electorate that comes out for Presidential year elections that is much broader, more diverse and actually more representative of the country; and, we have the mid-term electorate that is older, whiter, and wealthier than the Presidential year electorate. In FACT, the mid-term electorate is not representative of the country as a whole, so it would be proper to be careful about drawing big conclusions from the results. That may explain why the Democrats have won five of the last six popular votes in Presidential contests. It certainly explains why the Republicans have won the last two mid-terms but can't win the Presidency. The mid-terms are notorious for failing to attract the attention of young people, single women, and racial minorities. Of course they are also notorious for costing the Party in charge of the White House seats in the Congress.
The question to think about is why we have two electorates. It would seem obvious to most that the general electorate ought to know that failing to support their choices in the mid-terms spells defeat or failure for the policies they supported in the general election- but it seems they don't. In my OPINION there are three major factors that contribute heavily to this disturbing and exasperating situation. The first factor is the a general lack of information about how government actually works in this country. My generation was the last generation to be taught civics in school- and mind you that was in the '60s. Our failure to insist on teaching children the basic rules that we use to govern this country is a major failing that has resulted in an uninformed electorate. The unprecedented rise in the power of the executive branch (and the media attention it garners) combined with real ignorance of our system of checks and balances in government has left far too many people without a basic understanding of the role of the Congress. Without that understanding, and an appreciation for its significance in our lives far too many people simply don't know why it is important to vote in the mid-terms.
The second factor is a media that has failed to do its duty to rightly inform the public. Today's news media has given in to the same politics as the political parties they cover. They have succumbed to pandering politicians instead of challenging them to provide the public with truth. This change began to take place some years ago when news organizations allowed themselves to be controlled by the advertising departments of their networks. Instead of fearlessly and independently pursuing truth, they ruthlessly pursued revenue. If you watch any of the Sunday morning shows you will undoubtedly see politicians appear and say the most outrageous things, only to have the host say thank you, and move on to the next question. A good example would be the issue of climate change. Naturally, some Republican will come on one of those shows and say the science isn't settled. Well, in FACT it is. There are about 1% of climate scientists who question man-made climate change, but that doesn't come close to the 99% who have the data to say we are heading for a disaster. But the dutiful moderator will just let them say it without questioning the assertion at all. The temptation is great to operate that way. If they don't, if they actually challenge a politician the odds of getting other guests on that program in the future goes down tremendously. The quest for ratings and revenue has created a generation of reporters who are little more that willing mouthpieces for politicians, no matter what they say. The result is an electorate without adequate information and an electorate that has no trust in media to provide real information- which contributes to voter apathy. How often have heard someone say, "I don't trust any of them- they all lie, might as well stay home". Our press is responsible for that.
The third factor is the general lack of confidence in government. Think again of the Presidential year electorate- the one that is more diverse, more representative of the country. You might refer to that group as the middle class and the lower income class. That group may have just given up on believing there is a reason to vote when it's about the system (Congress) and not about the leader (President). Our Congress has not done one thing to seriously deal with wealth inequality or fair wages since 1980 which explains why working Americans have not advanced in personal income in the last 30 years while the wealthiest have become incredibly wealthy. Our Congress has done nothing to solve the immigration problem leaving 12 million people in limbo while falsely blaming them for causing every problem we have in this country. The Congress has done nothing to create wage equality for women. This Congress has done nothing to generate new industries that hold a promise for young people. Instead we have seen a Supreme Court tell us that the almighty corporations with all their wealth, power, and influence are people with human rights; Republican led state legislators erode the right to vote, make draconian heath related decisions for women; and purposely refuse the engage in the ACA for political reasons resulting in more people not getting health care. If you are a young person, a racial minority, a single woman, a poor person, or anyone in the middle class- you had nothing to vote for in this last mid-term election.
I believe there was a great deal to vote for, but the money and the media conspired to convince the Democrats not to make that case- to their own detriment. In the process they left Americans with nothing to believe in either. I believe that in spite of the Republican claims, they have nothing to be proud of in gaining this victory. This mid-term election is symptom of a number of maladies plaguing the country. Unfortunately I only see more trouble ahead as a result of this election. In my OPINION the Republicans will undoubtedly get the wrong message and believe this victory means they are right and they have a mandate- instead of trying to learn something from the two thirds who didn't even show up.
The rest of us will learn some things. We will learn that gridlock is absolutely guaranteed for the next two years. The Republican "spirit of cooperation" only lasted one day following the election- then it was back to threatening the President. The Republicans will ask the President to respect the results of the mid-term and agree to their agenda, though I recall no such sentiment from the Republicans when Mr. Obama won his elections. I heard nothing from Republicans about respecting the vote of the people in 2008 or 2012- in FACT they took those elections as a call to arms against this President. The rest of us will also learn the importance of having one party in power in Congress when it comes to Committee chairmanships and how the Congressional agenda is managed. Because of this election the new Chairman of the Senate Environment Committee is a person who believes it is God's world and man shouldn't do anything about the global climate crisis, as just one example. We will learn about how Federal Judgeship's will be stalled. And we will learn that Congress will spend its time and our money doing nothing but investigating the White House while continuing to fail to provide needed legislation on any number of fronts. We may also learn that these Republicans will forget valuable lessons from the past and my even try to impeach President Obama, not because of "high crimes or misdemeanors"- but because our politics have sunken to that level. A civics lesson here or there might have been helpful for this electorate.
Finally we will learn that no matter what your political stripe, decisions are made by those who show up- so show up! All of us have a responsibility to cast an informed vote and to encourage others to vote- even shame them into it if necessary. It is critical that all of us who have the hard won right to vote, exercise that right because there are consequences if we don't. We have a responsibility to expect our schools to teach young people about our system of government so we have informed voters- not those who are taught by the corporate or social media. We have a responsibility to expect more from the press than just mouthing the talking points provided by the politicians and their corporate masters. In other words we must all be involved and be willing to show up for every election, big or small- because that allows all of us to decide how things are done.
Thanks for looking in.
Those words rang jarringly true very last week when this country held an election. Decisions were made by those who showed up. The problem with that election was that only about one in three voters showed up. Naturally the victors crowed that that they had won a great victory. They claimed the result of the election provided a clear message that their side was right. As I go though the rest of this essay I'm going to be discussing some the issues and factors concerning that election. I'm going to be mentioning some FACTS and some OPINIONS. For emphasis I'm going clearly label them as one or the other by using capital letters. I do this because the confusion between FACTS and OPINIONS played a big role in the last election.
Let me start by saying that, in my OPINION, the Republicans did not win. If they won (as they now boast) I'm unable to find anything they won on. In FACT, there was no Republican national vision for the country. In FACT, there was no cohesive group putting forth an agenda for the future. In FACT, there was no Republican candidate with a clear plan for Health Care, the Economy, the VA problems, Wages, Immigration Policy, Trade Policy, Foreign Policy, Military Policy, Tax Policy, Farm Policy, Transportation Policy, or any other major area of government endeavor. If I've missed any of those facts, please enlighten me.What I saw, was in FACT, Republicans just saying that the President was a bad President- even when the FACTS don't support that position. In my OPINION, the real winners were apathy and discontent. If Republicans insist it was a victory, then it is surely a hallow victory devoid any promise for the country. It is true that Republicans will get their seats in the next Congress and control the House and the Senate- but let's not call it a huge mandate for them when two out of three voters decided to sit this one out.
The FACT that only one third of the electorate showed up ought to be a matter of great concern to all of us, regardless of the outcome. The rate of voter turnout in the last mid-term was the lowest in the US since 1942. That is something to worry about- and something to investigate. I'm repeating some OPINIONS I've head elsewhere, but I have to agree that we have two electorates in this country. There is the electorate that comes out for Presidential year elections that is much broader, more diverse and actually more representative of the country; and, we have the mid-term electorate that is older, whiter, and wealthier than the Presidential year electorate. In FACT, the mid-term electorate is not representative of the country as a whole, so it would be proper to be careful about drawing big conclusions from the results. That may explain why the Democrats have won five of the last six popular votes in Presidential contests. It certainly explains why the Republicans have won the last two mid-terms but can't win the Presidency. The mid-terms are notorious for failing to attract the attention of young people, single women, and racial minorities. Of course they are also notorious for costing the Party in charge of the White House seats in the Congress.
The question to think about is why we have two electorates. It would seem obvious to most that the general electorate ought to know that failing to support their choices in the mid-terms spells defeat or failure for the policies they supported in the general election- but it seems they don't. In my OPINION there are three major factors that contribute heavily to this disturbing and exasperating situation. The first factor is the a general lack of information about how government actually works in this country. My generation was the last generation to be taught civics in school- and mind you that was in the '60s. Our failure to insist on teaching children the basic rules that we use to govern this country is a major failing that has resulted in an uninformed electorate. The unprecedented rise in the power of the executive branch (and the media attention it garners) combined with real ignorance of our system of checks and balances in government has left far too many people without a basic understanding of the role of the Congress. Without that understanding, and an appreciation for its significance in our lives far too many people simply don't know why it is important to vote in the mid-terms.
The second factor is a media that has failed to do its duty to rightly inform the public. Today's news media has given in to the same politics as the political parties they cover. They have succumbed to pandering politicians instead of challenging them to provide the public with truth. This change began to take place some years ago when news organizations allowed themselves to be controlled by the advertising departments of their networks. Instead of fearlessly and independently pursuing truth, they ruthlessly pursued revenue. If you watch any of the Sunday morning shows you will undoubtedly see politicians appear and say the most outrageous things, only to have the host say thank you, and move on to the next question. A good example would be the issue of climate change. Naturally, some Republican will come on one of those shows and say the science isn't settled. Well, in FACT it is. There are about 1% of climate scientists who question man-made climate change, but that doesn't come close to the 99% who have the data to say we are heading for a disaster. But the dutiful moderator will just let them say it without questioning the assertion at all. The temptation is great to operate that way. If they don't, if they actually challenge a politician the odds of getting other guests on that program in the future goes down tremendously. The quest for ratings and revenue has created a generation of reporters who are little more that willing mouthpieces for politicians, no matter what they say. The result is an electorate without adequate information and an electorate that has no trust in media to provide real information- which contributes to voter apathy. How often have heard someone say, "I don't trust any of them- they all lie, might as well stay home". Our press is responsible for that.
The third factor is the general lack of confidence in government. Think again of the Presidential year electorate- the one that is more diverse, more representative of the country. You might refer to that group as the middle class and the lower income class. That group may have just given up on believing there is a reason to vote when it's about the system (Congress) and not about the leader (President). Our Congress has not done one thing to seriously deal with wealth inequality or fair wages since 1980 which explains why working Americans have not advanced in personal income in the last 30 years while the wealthiest have become incredibly wealthy. Our Congress has done nothing to solve the immigration problem leaving 12 million people in limbo while falsely blaming them for causing every problem we have in this country. The Congress has done nothing to create wage equality for women. This Congress has done nothing to generate new industries that hold a promise for young people. Instead we have seen a Supreme Court tell us that the almighty corporations with all their wealth, power, and influence are people with human rights; Republican led state legislators erode the right to vote, make draconian heath related decisions for women; and purposely refuse the engage in the ACA for political reasons resulting in more people not getting health care. If you are a young person, a racial minority, a single woman, a poor person, or anyone in the middle class- you had nothing to vote for in this last mid-term election.
I believe there was a great deal to vote for, but the money and the media conspired to convince the Democrats not to make that case- to their own detriment. In the process they left Americans with nothing to believe in either. I believe that in spite of the Republican claims, they have nothing to be proud of in gaining this victory. This mid-term election is symptom of a number of maladies plaguing the country. Unfortunately I only see more trouble ahead as a result of this election. In my OPINION the Republicans will undoubtedly get the wrong message and believe this victory means they are right and they have a mandate- instead of trying to learn something from the two thirds who didn't even show up.
The rest of us will learn some things. We will learn that gridlock is absolutely guaranteed for the next two years. The Republican "spirit of cooperation" only lasted one day following the election- then it was back to threatening the President. The Republicans will ask the President to respect the results of the mid-term and agree to their agenda, though I recall no such sentiment from the Republicans when Mr. Obama won his elections. I heard nothing from Republicans about respecting the vote of the people in 2008 or 2012- in FACT they took those elections as a call to arms against this President. The rest of us will also learn the importance of having one party in power in Congress when it comes to Committee chairmanships and how the Congressional agenda is managed. Because of this election the new Chairman of the Senate Environment Committee is a person who believes it is God's world and man shouldn't do anything about the global climate crisis, as just one example. We will learn about how Federal Judgeship's will be stalled. And we will learn that Congress will spend its time and our money doing nothing but investigating the White House while continuing to fail to provide needed legislation on any number of fronts. We may also learn that these Republicans will forget valuable lessons from the past and my even try to impeach President Obama, not because of "high crimes or misdemeanors"- but because our politics have sunken to that level. A civics lesson here or there might have been helpful for this electorate.
Finally we will learn that no matter what your political stripe, decisions are made by those who show up- so show up! All of us have a responsibility to cast an informed vote and to encourage others to vote- even shame them into it if necessary. It is critical that all of us who have the hard won right to vote, exercise that right because there are consequences if we don't. We have a responsibility to expect our schools to teach young people about our system of government so we have informed voters- not those who are taught by the corporate or social media. We have a responsibility to expect more from the press than just mouthing the talking points provided by the politicians and their corporate masters. In other words we must all be involved and be willing to show up for every election, big or small- because that allows all of us to decide how things are done.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, November 2, 2014
"....Fear Itself"
I try to live by the notion that I should approach issues or problems from a position of rational thought. I try to apply reason and observation to the world around me as I search for ways to make sense of things. But, my observations of world events and the our collective response to the issues of the day doesn't square well with a rational approach. The title of this essay is "...Fear Itself", which is of course, is a reference to the famous phrase Franklin D. Roosevelt used in his first inaugural address to the nation as he was about to embark on fixing the greatest financial calamity our country had ever known. He told the country, "the only thing we have to fear- is fear itself". Of course there were many things to fear besides fear itself, but there was a strong message for disheartened Americans in his words. He was telling the country to have hope and not give in to fear. He became an inspiration to his fellow Americans and our greatest President.
I wish we lived in a time when we could find inspiration in words like those again. Instead we live in a time when fear is purposefully being foisted upon us for political gain. Fear is always close to it's natural partner- blame. I don't believe I have ever seen a time in the course my life when the politics of fear and blame have been so blatantly in play as they are today. Examine any issue and you will find politicians who are all too ready to turn away from rational thought or scientific facts and revert to the tactics of fear and blame, not as a last resort, but as the weapon of first choice to win our political favor. We are very near another mid-term election to return a Congress that has grievously failed us for the last six years. And in spite of their continuous failure they refuse to face their own failure, and stubbornly cling to the politics of fear and blame.
It would be polite and much less challenging to the rational mind to shrug our shoulders and say, "both parties are at fault". It is somehow soothing to cast all the players as the hapless, talentless, buffoons caught in the "system" in Washington D.C. It would be easier to just say, it's the "culture" of Washington that's to blame. But that would not be intellectually honest. I believe that an honest appraisal of why government isn't working today rests almost entirely with the Republican Party. They have made it their stock and trade to use fear and blame to render the government unworkable, ineffective, and in many ways-useless. It should come as no surprise though. They vowed to do just that when President Obama took office and they have been true to their word.
Let's examine a few of the bigger issues of the day and apply a bit of rational thought to the problems in contrast to the Republican messaging. Start with ISIL, the latest in a line of Muslim boogieman we are told to fear. We find ourselves seemingly caught in a never-ending war stance in the Middle East. ISIL is a natural outgrowth of our actions there. The much smarter of the Presidents Bush knew when it was time to get out. After reclaiming Kuwait and crippling Saddam he got out. He did not dismantled an entire country leaving a huge void in a country where we were not wanted and that we could not hold. The younger President Bush was not nearly so wise. He used the ultimate fear and blame scenario. Following the horrific and shocking events of 9-11 he capitalized on the fear and uncertainty of those events to fulfill an agenda that was unconnected to the events of 9-11. He started the wrong war in the wrong country and destabilized the entire region. It only makes sense that a group like ISIL would emerge. Rather than look at the actual reasons for the mess, the Republican party has somehow decided that President Obama is entirely at fault for withdrawing our troops in Iraq and not going to war in Syria. Remember that we elected this President on the promise he would not prolong war in that part of the world. Let's not forget that we did not want the US in any more wars there. That was the case right up to the time two American journalists were beheaded. When those images hit the Internet and the news shows, the fear and blame game went into high gear. Suddenly these beheadings became the battle cry for more war and an excuse to stop examining policy decisions. My rational side tells me that we are just reacting with emotion and fear. My rational side says that we didn't get so indignant when Assad killed a hundred thousand people in Syria. My rational side says we don't really care that our friends the Saudi royal family conducts weekly public beheadings; so maybe we should question why these horrible things are enough to send us back into war now. Our rational selves won't go there because we have succumbed to the Republican fear and blame machine that will use any issue to make President Obama look bad and be blamed, no matter how inconsistent or disconnected those reactions are to reality.
When an intruder made it over the fence and into the White House the fear and blame crowd in the Republican Party immediately held Congressional hearings. Congress was indignant that this President could be so lax as to manage the Secret Service so poorly. It was fairly transparent that that their indignation wasn't over concern for the Obama family, as much as it was another opportunity to be critical of the President. My rational mind knows the Secret Service should not be toyed with for political reasons- so my rational mind asks why we didn't blame President Reagan for his mismanagement of the Secret Service when they allowed him to be shot. But the politics of fear and blame knows no bounds when it comes to this President. The Republicans will even politicize the Secret Service to spread fear and blame, though it has never been done before.
The crisis de jour is the Ebola scare. No other (non-crisis) crisis more symbolizes the politics of fear and blame more than this one. Yes, the world has a real problem Ebola that needs to be addressed rationally using our best scientific reasoning and experience at disease control- and in spite of all the panic we are actually doing so. But listen to the politics being thrown around by the Republican party in Congress and on the campaign trail. We saw the Ebola crisis building in Africa for several months. There was no political will in the country or the Congress to anything about it. We have known about doctors and other health care workers contracting the illness for some time. But when one person from Liberia came here, became ill and died the fear and blame apparatus went into high gear- not because the science of this illness told us this was cause for panic, but because the know-nothing Republican politicians saw another opportunity to use this issue to spread fear and blame a month before a mid-term election.
Our medical technology is the most capable one in the world. And let's face facts- in a country of nearly 320 million people; one death (a visitor from west Africa) and two other domestic infections (where the two sick people are now completely well) should not be a reason to go into full-blown panic. But the fear mongers saw their chance and they took it. They ignored the science and spun incredibly wild scenarios wherein the entire country would be infected in weeks. And it only followed that this would all be the fault of a President who played golf while personally failing to be at every airport testing every traveler for Ebola. They forgot that President Reagan had over twenty thousand deaths occur before he would even acknowledged the AIDS epidemic. They forget that over 13 thousand Americans die from gun violence every year but our Congress will do nothing about it- and in fact have blocked us from having a Surgeon General because the nominee dared to say 13 thousand deaths is a health issue. According to the Republican party two sick (heroic) nurses is an emergency- but 13 thousand dead every year is not. The lengths that these fear mongers will go to literally lay everything at the feet of this President and ignore their own hypocrisy challenges all reasonable thought.
I know most of us have heard the fear mongers suggesting the most far-fetched theories about Ebola. Last week I heard Republican Congressional candidates suggesting that ISIL terrorists would purposely become infected with Ebola, slip over our borders and mass infect America. They got a twofer- ISIL irrational panic AND Ebola irrational panic in one convenient package. Every medical expert in the world has told us that you cannot contract this terrible disease unless you are in direct contact with a person's bodily fluids when they are actively displaying serious symptoms; yet just the other day in an effort to spread the fear Republican Peter King of New York said, "we don't know how it is transmitted." Yes we do! But, we have allowed the fear-spreading politicians and a willing corporate press to continue spreading lies. The motives are obvious and they fly in the face of well settled issues in the medical community.
There are things we need to fear. Unfortunately the real threats to our security, and our national needs are being completely neglected by a Republican led House of Representatives and Senate Republicans that will apply the filibuster for everything. The Republican party has decided to do nothing and they have set the record (quite literally) for doing nothing. Immigration reform: nothing. Climate Change: nothing. Income inequality: nothing. A Republican health care policy: nothing. Long-term Unemployment relief: nothing. A Jobs Bill; nothing. Women's wage inequality: nothing. Women's health care: nothing. Even while many of our allied countries met in Parliament to debated a response to ISIL, our Congress went on vacation with no debate, no nothing. (By the way, while they get face time on the news complaining about the all the crisis in the world, they are still on a two-and-a-half month long vacation) The Republican party has made an art form of sitting on the sidelines and obstructing progress while at the same time offering nothing to the American people but complaints about a President they had no intention of working with from day one. If any of us behaved that way in our workplaces we would be fired in a heartbeat.
Next week this country will go to the polls to elect the House of Representatives and one third of the Senate. Most polls suggest the Republicans will hold the House and probably win control of the Senate. My rational mind asks why? What has this Party done except get in the way of progress, attempt to limit access to health care, hinder people of color and in poverty from voting, actively stunt the economy, ignore science and medical experts, shut down the government, neglect their jobs, and generally create dysfunction in government? Republicans in Congress have a 72% unfavorable rating. Congress as a whole has a 9% approval rating. With those well-deserved numbers my rational mind cannot understand why Republicans can expect to win next week- but it looks like they will. The only thing that makes sense to me is that they want us to vote out of fear- and most who will turn out will ablige them. The very thing FDR asked us to reject is the actual game plan for the Republicans. My only hope is that people come out in large numbers and speak up for the kind of government they really want. My hope is that they will use real judgment and rational thinking in making important decisions and not be swayed by the fear mongers and the know-nothings who prey on fear. We can be better and smarted than to give in to fear itself.
Thanks for looking in.
I wish we lived in a time when we could find inspiration in words like those again. Instead we live in a time when fear is purposefully being foisted upon us for political gain. Fear is always close to it's natural partner- blame. I don't believe I have ever seen a time in the course my life when the politics of fear and blame have been so blatantly in play as they are today. Examine any issue and you will find politicians who are all too ready to turn away from rational thought or scientific facts and revert to the tactics of fear and blame, not as a last resort, but as the weapon of first choice to win our political favor. We are very near another mid-term election to return a Congress that has grievously failed us for the last six years. And in spite of their continuous failure they refuse to face their own failure, and stubbornly cling to the politics of fear and blame.
It would be polite and much less challenging to the rational mind to shrug our shoulders and say, "both parties are at fault". It is somehow soothing to cast all the players as the hapless, talentless, buffoons caught in the "system" in Washington D.C. It would be easier to just say, it's the "culture" of Washington that's to blame. But that would not be intellectually honest. I believe that an honest appraisal of why government isn't working today rests almost entirely with the Republican Party. They have made it their stock and trade to use fear and blame to render the government unworkable, ineffective, and in many ways-useless. It should come as no surprise though. They vowed to do just that when President Obama took office and they have been true to their word.
Let's examine a few of the bigger issues of the day and apply a bit of rational thought to the problems in contrast to the Republican messaging. Start with ISIL, the latest in a line of Muslim boogieman we are told to fear. We find ourselves seemingly caught in a never-ending war stance in the Middle East. ISIL is a natural outgrowth of our actions there. The much smarter of the Presidents Bush knew when it was time to get out. After reclaiming Kuwait and crippling Saddam he got out. He did not dismantled an entire country leaving a huge void in a country where we were not wanted and that we could not hold. The younger President Bush was not nearly so wise. He used the ultimate fear and blame scenario. Following the horrific and shocking events of 9-11 he capitalized on the fear and uncertainty of those events to fulfill an agenda that was unconnected to the events of 9-11. He started the wrong war in the wrong country and destabilized the entire region. It only makes sense that a group like ISIL would emerge. Rather than look at the actual reasons for the mess, the Republican party has somehow decided that President Obama is entirely at fault for withdrawing our troops in Iraq and not going to war in Syria. Remember that we elected this President on the promise he would not prolong war in that part of the world. Let's not forget that we did not want the US in any more wars there. That was the case right up to the time two American journalists were beheaded. When those images hit the Internet and the news shows, the fear and blame game went into high gear. Suddenly these beheadings became the battle cry for more war and an excuse to stop examining policy decisions. My rational side tells me that we are just reacting with emotion and fear. My rational side says that we didn't get so indignant when Assad killed a hundred thousand people in Syria. My rational side says we don't really care that our friends the Saudi royal family conducts weekly public beheadings; so maybe we should question why these horrible things are enough to send us back into war now. Our rational selves won't go there because we have succumbed to the Republican fear and blame machine that will use any issue to make President Obama look bad and be blamed, no matter how inconsistent or disconnected those reactions are to reality.
When an intruder made it over the fence and into the White House the fear and blame crowd in the Republican Party immediately held Congressional hearings. Congress was indignant that this President could be so lax as to manage the Secret Service so poorly. It was fairly transparent that that their indignation wasn't over concern for the Obama family, as much as it was another opportunity to be critical of the President. My rational mind knows the Secret Service should not be toyed with for political reasons- so my rational mind asks why we didn't blame President Reagan for his mismanagement of the Secret Service when they allowed him to be shot. But the politics of fear and blame knows no bounds when it comes to this President. The Republicans will even politicize the Secret Service to spread fear and blame, though it has never been done before.
The crisis de jour is the Ebola scare. No other (non-crisis) crisis more symbolizes the politics of fear and blame more than this one. Yes, the world has a real problem Ebola that needs to be addressed rationally using our best scientific reasoning and experience at disease control- and in spite of all the panic we are actually doing so. But listen to the politics being thrown around by the Republican party in Congress and on the campaign trail. We saw the Ebola crisis building in Africa for several months. There was no political will in the country or the Congress to anything about it. We have known about doctors and other health care workers contracting the illness for some time. But when one person from Liberia came here, became ill and died the fear and blame apparatus went into high gear- not because the science of this illness told us this was cause for panic, but because the know-nothing Republican politicians saw another opportunity to use this issue to spread fear and blame a month before a mid-term election.
Our medical technology is the most capable one in the world. And let's face facts- in a country of nearly 320 million people; one death (a visitor from west Africa) and two other domestic infections (where the two sick people are now completely well) should not be a reason to go into full-blown panic. But the fear mongers saw their chance and they took it. They ignored the science and spun incredibly wild scenarios wherein the entire country would be infected in weeks. And it only followed that this would all be the fault of a President who played golf while personally failing to be at every airport testing every traveler for Ebola. They forgot that President Reagan had over twenty thousand deaths occur before he would even acknowledged the AIDS epidemic. They forget that over 13 thousand Americans die from gun violence every year but our Congress will do nothing about it- and in fact have blocked us from having a Surgeon General because the nominee dared to say 13 thousand deaths is a health issue. According to the Republican party two sick (heroic) nurses is an emergency- but 13 thousand dead every year is not. The lengths that these fear mongers will go to literally lay everything at the feet of this President and ignore their own hypocrisy challenges all reasonable thought.
I know most of us have heard the fear mongers suggesting the most far-fetched theories about Ebola. Last week I heard Republican Congressional candidates suggesting that ISIL terrorists would purposely become infected with Ebola, slip over our borders and mass infect America. They got a twofer- ISIL irrational panic AND Ebola irrational panic in one convenient package. Every medical expert in the world has told us that you cannot contract this terrible disease unless you are in direct contact with a person's bodily fluids when they are actively displaying serious symptoms; yet just the other day in an effort to spread the fear Republican Peter King of New York said, "we don't know how it is transmitted." Yes we do! But, we have allowed the fear-spreading politicians and a willing corporate press to continue spreading lies. The motives are obvious and they fly in the face of well settled issues in the medical community.
There are things we need to fear. Unfortunately the real threats to our security, and our national needs are being completely neglected by a Republican led House of Representatives and Senate Republicans that will apply the filibuster for everything. The Republican party has decided to do nothing and they have set the record (quite literally) for doing nothing. Immigration reform: nothing. Climate Change: nothing. Income inequality: nothing. A Republican health care policy: nothing. Long-term Unemployment relief: nothing. A Jobs Bill; nothing. Women's wage inequality: nothing. Women's health care: nothing. Even while many of our allied countries met in Parliament to debated a response to ISIL, our Congress went on vacation with no debate, no nothing. (By the way, while they get face time on the news complaining about the all the crisis in the world, they are still on a two-and-a-half month long vacation) The Republican party has made an art form of sitting on the sidelines and obstructing progress while at the same time offering nothing to the American people but complaints about a President they had no intention of working with from day one. If any of us behaved that way in our workplaces we would be fired in a heartbeat.
Next week this country will go to the polls to elect the House of Representatives and one third of the Senate. Most polls suggest the Republicans will hold the House and probably win control of the Senate. My rational mind asks why? What has this Party done except get in the way of progress, attempt to limit access to health care, hinder people of color and in poverty from voting, actively stunt the economy, ignore science and medical experts, shut down the government, neglect their jobs, and generally create dysfunction in government? Republicans in Congress have a 72% unfavorable rating. Congress as a whole has a 9% approval rating. With those well-deserved numbers my rational mind cannot understand why Republicans can expect to win next week- but it looks like they will. The only thing that makes sense to me is that they want us to vote out of fear- and most who will turn out will ablige them. The very thing FDR asked us to reject is the actual game plan for the Republicans. My only hope is that people come out in large numbers and speak up for the kind of government they really want. My hope is that they will use real judgment and rational thinking in making important decisions and not be swayed by the fear mongers and the know-nothings who prey on fear. We can be better and smarted than to give in to fear itself.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, August 31, 2014
"Like"
“Like” it or not, we are now in an age of mass
communication, available to just about everybody who lives in any half-way
modern society. What differentiates this age of mass communication from its
founding fathers in the radio and television electronic age of mass
communication is that now anybody can participate. The Internet gave birth to
new programs and new platforms that permit all of us to have a voice capable of
going around the globe in a matter of seconds. Think how far we’ve come in just
a mere half century, when mass communication consisted of worldwide
distribution of a newspaper-that was actually made of paper and was physically
transported by trains, planes, or trucks to reach the masses. Then came the
electronic age of radio, followed by television. In the beginning even
television was limited to landlocked broadcasts dependent on transmitter relay stations.
Eventually intercontinental cable and fiber-optic cable cut down the time of
mass broadcasts, but it was nothing compared to today’s split-second digital
micro-wave technology that works through a complicated systems of satellite
relays. Really remarkable!! And who knows what will be next in the future of
communication technology.
I often stand back in complete awe at the amount of
information we have available to us via the Internet. Mankind has never
experienced this type of broad access to so much information. Mankind has never
been able to share information so widely or with so much speed. I am not one to
criticize the Internet, or the social media networks that came into existence as
the natural outgrowth of computer technology. Far from it- I believe this is
transformative and will mark a real advance for humanity. It would be
hypocritical of me to denounce these advances, considering I use them with
great pleasure and, in fact am using it now to share this essay. But that is
not to say that I’m completely comfortable with all ways it is used, or comfortable with some of the unintended consequences these technologies have brought us.
I tend to think that we are somewhat like young children
with a fancy new toy we haven’t totally figured out just yet. We seem to be
fumbling around with the parts without determining how it all goes together,
and how it works. We have something new and very exciting, but we haven’t
discovered how to integrate it into our lives in healthy ways. So we just keep
experimenting with our new toy trying to have it make sense and figure out
better ways to use it. Perhaps our fascination with the speed and availability
of communications has caused us to turn away from other intellectual pursuits
and habits we engaged in before these technologies took our attention. I see
these kinds of issues played out in places like Facebook. I don’t want to
pick on Facebook, but it seems Facebook is the best example of mass
communication without the benefit of old-fashioned intellectual integrity.
I got to thinking how
easy it is to see a post put up by a Facebook “friend” or even a
friend-of-a-friend who just hits that “like” button without much thought. When
I first started using Facebook it was almost entirely made up of posts from
family and friends who were sharing some item from their personal lives. They might share
family photos, family news, or just personal tidbits. In that vein, Facebook
became the MySpace for the masses and grew into a huge sensation- relatively
easy to use, and widely popular. Networks of friends and friends-of-friends
expanded our social reach in some good ways. It enabled us to be in touch with
old friends and acquaintances from long ago or far away. I have noticed however
how Facebook is now populated with many more commercial, political, or “issue”
posts. And I suppose that’s OK too. These “issue” posts have actually been able
to mobilize worthy social movements that might not have otherwise never gotten
off the ground, let alone ever been recognized. Facebook enables us to see
things that are of interest to us and reflect our own desires for information,
activities, or points-of-view. I have a few that I follow with
regularity too.
Of concern are posts that pop up on my page from friends who
have hit that “like” button, or the “share” button, and whom I suspect have not
thoroughly checked out the source material behind the posts. As easy as
Facebook can be to share information, it can easily be coopted by unscrupulous or
down-right offensive sites which count on the user just seeing the single
message and not understanding the people and the underlying message that
spawned it. I’m particularly sensitive to some conservative political messages,
but I know that the same thing can happen with progressive sites too. For example,
each time I see a post that calls for us to “Impeach Obama” or "take back our Country", I find myself
clicking the original source site to see what they are really espousing.
Sadly, I often find openly racist or offensive messaging on the original site.
I won’t give specific examples in this essay as I don’t want to offend any
Facebook friends who most probably have spread these ideas unintentionally. I
have also seen sites that seem to put out an otherwise innocuous message only
to dig deeper and see violent or misogynistic material. In another example some
of the sites that I prefer occasionally have posts that I won’t “share” or
“like” because I know the source might go too far for some- or it just doesn’t
truly reflect my thinking. For example, I
won’t share or “like” some post on my page that suggests “religion is the root
of all evil”. First of all, “all’ is a big word and I don’t want to misuse it- and even though I have my own thoughts on the
matter, I find it intellectually dishonest and just plain lazy to express my thoughts on such a complex topic in one slogan I
didn’t even write.
I’m always a bit saddened when I see a post from a Facebook
friend that contains offensive, racist, or violent messages. I go back and
forth as to whether I should “Unfriend” the sender or just let it be. I truly
don’t want that kind of message on my page, and I try to believe the sender
probably just didn’t know what they were posting. But I know too that we should
all be responsible about what we post. It is one of the dilemmas of social
relationships this new technology has given us.
One of the unfortunate by-products of this new mass
communication and sites like Facebook is that it actually encourages us
to be lazy. We are seduced into pushing that “like” button because it is easy
to be taken in by a slogan and just say to all of our friends and their
friends, “yea, that sounds good to me- and I’m letting you know it”. Perhaps we
have just come to the place in the Internet world where there is so much
information- so many opinions that we simply won’t take the time or don’t have
the time to dig just a little bit deeper for the true messages and meanings.
In that old-fashioned world of intellectual integrity I
mentioned above, bad ideas or false information exited then too, but they didn’t
spread quite so fast because the mechanics of mass communication gave us an
opportunity to check things out and rethink ideas before they got out there too
far to retrieve. Another very unfortunate by-product of the computer age of
mass communication is the growing belief that every idea or thought is just as
valid as every other idea or thought. After all, one might come to believe that
anything that CAN be put out there has equivalent validity
to anything else simply because it’s out there too. In the days of real journalism, reporters
had to answer to editors who demanded to know the sources and confirm that they
were credible. Those of us who remember the Watergate era know that Woodward
and Bernstein investigated for months before Ben Bradlee would let them go to
print. Now anyone with a laptop or an iPhone is instantly published. Ideas that
are widespread come to be believed based on the scope of their disbursement,
rather than the quality of the information. We are all subject to the
manipulation of ideas such a world makes possible. Recently I heard an excerpt of a
speech the President made wherein he was making statements (seemingly)
offensive and insulting to the middle class. These excerpts were making their
way around the Internet and social media as “proof” of the President’s “disdain”
for the American people. As it turns out the excerpts were taken totally out of
context and the President was actually arguing the opposite point. But such is the way of instant mass
communications- and the purveyors of these hoaxes knew it.
In this brave new world of the Internet, Facebook, and
instant mass communication it would good to stop a moment and consider how we
can blend these new technologies with traditional ways of thinking and
educating. In particular, it is vitally important in this new age of technology
to resurrect the art of critical thinking. Our children are incredibly adept at
managing the technology of the day. It’s an old joke, that if you want to learn
how your new computer works, just ask a 9 year-old kid! As we have come to rely
on the technology and “reformed” education to enable our children to pass the
standardized competency tests we have left many of the thinking and reasoning
skills by the side of the road. They just aren’t taught. To give a recent
example that speaks to the lack of reasoning ability, and also speaks to the
creation of false equivalencies, consider the issue of climate change. 99 out
of a hundred climate scientists have collected data to show man’s activities
(with fossil fuels- and greenhouse gases) is creating accelerated and
devastating climate change. Instead of accepting the overwhelming data, the
fossil fuel industries (and Rush Limbaugh) insist it’s a hoax. They say, “don’t
believe the data-don’t believe that putting hundreds of millions of tons of
chemicals and pollutants in the air every year will actually change the air.
Instead believe the one guy out of a hundred (who works for us) who says it
isn’t so.” That is not reasonable- and one out of a hundred is not
equivalency. But our use of mass communication methods suggests it is.
I’m hoping our wisdom will begin to catch up to our
technology. I’m fairly confident it will, as it always has. A case in point- we knew how to
transplant a human heart before we knew how to make wise decisions about when
to do it, and who we should do it for. Information and knowledge will be the
currency of the future. If we begin to look at the sources, dig a bit deeper,
use our reasoning abilities, and teach our children the lost art of critical
thinking; questioning the assumptions of others and challenging our own
assumptions; our communications and our relationships with nature and each
other will surely improve. That’s something we can all “like”.
Thanks for looking in.
Sunday, August 17, 2014
The Summer of Our Discontent
The first lines of Shakespeare’s Richard III read “ Now is
the winter of our discontent, Made glorious summer by this son of York; All the
clouds that low’r’d upon our house, In the deep bosom of the ocean
buried.” For those of us who are living
this "summer of discontent", we might think Shakespeare had his
seasons a bit mixed up.
I have not written anything- not engaged in my little hobby
for several months now. One reason for the hiatus was the need to take a rest
from it. But to be honest, I’ve begun to write this essay several times over the
last couple of weeks, and after a paragraph or two I just needed to stop. I was
trying to capture some of the malaise and negativity of these last months in a
way that I could expound upon them in an interesting, or (even) hopeful
way. I discovered that I was simply overwhelmed at the thought of
trying to make sense of these last few months in current events. I didn't want
to just put down on paper that which seemed so obvious, yet so hopelessly inescapable,
as it seemed it would just part of the noise. But, I have now given in to the
habit of writing once again. With that said, I will try to put my own different
thoughts to this summer of discontent.
To say we are now living through a period of total
dysfunction is an understatement. For many of us the common reference here is
the dysfunction of government. I am, more and more, coming to believe that the
dysfunction in government is nothing more that the reflection of the
dysfunction in us. Each time I see some ridiculous politician jump head-first
into nonsense pool, I stop and ask myself why we don’t react and voice
objections to the hate-filled talk and demand more character from those who represent us.
At present, I am loath to think that anything I hear from my Congressperson
actually represents my thoughts, or useful thoughts of any kind. I am often disappointed to hear nothing from
my two Senators, even though I know they hold positions much more akin to my
own. I see a President who is virtually helpless to manage this form of
government, not because he isn’t competent; but because our form of government
requires that Congress and the Courts do their parts too. So as I look at the
troubles of the day, I’m convinced that the dysfunction comes from a
Congress who does nothing, and from us who does nothing in response.
Two events occurring this summer, in my view represent the worst in our character. The first was the
release of Bowe Bergdahl from his captors in Afghanistan. Normally Americans
would rejoice in the return of an American servicemen from POW status. Normally we would rally behind that person and his family. I was shocked
that his release caused an immediate reaction from the right-wing politicians
and the right-wing talk radio hate machine. These types are usually adamantly in support of our military. But in this age
of hating the President above all else, they used this singular issue to turn
on the President, and on Bergdahl himself. Without the benefit of any facts at all-
the hate machine began to manufacture all kinds of scenarios to explain why
Bowe was a traitor and not worth the prisoners at Guantanamo we traded to get him
back. Number 1: We have no idea yet how he ended up in enemy hands. If it is
true he deserted, that will come out.
But so far the investigation is just getting underway. Let’s remember
that in war many realities get muddled and it is unfair to judge until we can
sort out the facts. If you have any doubts about how loyalty works in war, just remember that
when Senator John McCain was a POW they broke him too. He signed the
statements they gave him-but we gave him and many like him the benefit of the doubt because
we understood what they went through. In Bowe’s case the Obama hatred factor
has changed our perspective on supporting our servicemen. Number 2: The
criticisms of the President over the prisoner exchange are just plain wrong and
once again based on the idea that anything this President does is automatically met with
hostile criticism. The Republicans argued that this exchange would lead to more
hostage taking. Really? Are we to believe that until this particular exchange
enemy fighters hadn’t already figured that out? The Republicans also argued
that the release of the five “detainees” would cause Armageddon. One of the
problems with a “war on terror” is that we get easily terrorized. The last
Administration was expert at scaring us. I ask, should the most powerful,
technically advanced and most well-armed, largest and most heavily funded military
in the history of mankind quake at the thought of five guys who hate us being
out in the world, living in primitive societies? Should we base the military and political policy of the only
global super-power on such small potatoes because we are now scared of anyone
called “terrorist”? -Lindsay Graham and John McCain aside. Be honest, is
there one mother or father in this country, Democrat or Republican, who would not
have wanted President Obama to trade five (or ten- or twenty) terrorist
“detainees” to get their son or daughter back? Our friends the Isrealis
do it regularly- without the childish criticisms we saw in this case. Only in an environment where this President can do no right,
is this even tolerable to discuss. The Bergdahl affair is a shameful example of how hatred has changed our national character.
As we moved through the summer of discontent we saw the
emergence of thousands of children crossing our southern border and seeking
refuge from daily terror in Central America. The immigration problem is
complex and requires our best thoughts to resolve it. But two things occurred to
me as I watched this human tragedy unfold. First, Congress has
a workable bill on comprehensive immigration reform crafted by Republicans in
the Senate. It has the votes to pass the House, but it won’t be voted on
because the Speaker (alone) won’t allow it for purely political reasons. To complain
about the President- then not do their duty is the height of cowardliness. Secondly, I
was heart-sick to see affluent white people stand in the way of busses filled
with frightened children, screaming at them and waving signs with
hate-filled messages. These children became surrogates for hatred
of President Obama however tragically misplaced. But for those who constantly insist this is a Christian
country- this was a most un-Christian way to behave. I felt
embarrassed at the way some our fellow citizens acted toward these
children. More embarrassing yet is that Congress did nothing except complain- then leave for
an extended vacation. They call Obama the Imperial President, but when the
chips were down they took off and said, “you handle it”. Cowards to the end.
This summer of discontent is not only filled with domestic
issues, gone unaddressed by a negligent Congress, it is also a time of deep
international tensions. Aggression in the Ukraine gave the Republicans more
reasons to damn the President, as if there is anything he do short of going to
war alone against Russia. Remember Europe is not with us entirely on this,
and more than half the people of Ukraine want to affiliate with Russia. Would
we once again invade a land to liberate those who don’t want to be liberated
and would only side with our enemies in the end? The Republicans are long on
criticism, but have not provided a single idea on how to handle this any
better. If I missed their idea somewhere along the way please let me know.
On to Iraq. In June Iraq began to be overrun by ISIS, once
again leading to massive discontent with the President. In turn, each
Republican to come before the camera has laid this issue squarely at Mr.
Obama’s feet. Oh, what short memories we have. The UN did not approve of President
Bush’s invasion, as it could find no justification. Many Democrats did not
approve, even though they gave him his way. Many career diplomats and
international experts argued that invading a country that did not invade us was
bad policy and would eventually destabilize the entire region. We now have a
totally destabilized region in the Middle East. Obama is blamed for pulling
out too soon. There’s that poor memory again. The Status of Forces Agreement
timetable was agreed to by the Bush Administration. Even if Mr. Obama could
have changed it, what would he have changed? Given the instability that
comes with hundreds of years of religious tribalism, we would have to remain
in Iraq forever. This country would not stand
for that. The mistake was not the way we got out- the mistake was the way we
got in. But again in this era of “Blame Obama” our recall and our reasoning
have taken the summer off. My fear is that we will be pulled steadily back into
a conflict we cannot resolve, all because there's oil there. I
sometimes wish our motives were more genuinely humanitarian, instead of
humanitarian when it suits us.
This horrible summer, punctuated by downed airplanes,
political turmoil, War in the Gaza Strip, unrest in the Ukraine, Ebola
outbreaks in West Africa, civil war in Syria and Iraq, homeless and uncared-for
Veterans at home, and racially charged violence in our streets between the
police and our citizens have truly made this the summer of our discontent. But
we must reject the easy and popular notion that all of this unrest and trouble
can be blamed on the President, as the Republicans would have us believe. That is simply the thinking of the political
hucksters who want us to practice the art of blaming and the art of redemption
in one quick and easy sound bite. Real solutions require deeper thinking and
real analysis. One election or one President cannot be blamed for the problems
we face today, and cannot be expected to solve them all him or herself.
The problems in our own land with immigration and the
Veteran’s crisis have their roots in events and trends that are generations in
the making. The problems we face at home with police violence and racial unrest
are part of an American legacy that can be traced back to our very beginnings
as a people. Generations of leaders have all grappled with these issues, some
more successfully than others. The best
progress we ever make as a nation happens when those in government or in
leadership work together.
Our international problems are a result of years
of bad diplomacy and decision-making that was often done without the best
intentions or the greatest wisdom. One of the lessons we Americans have a hard
time understanding is that not everyone on the planet wants the same things we
want, or we want for them. It used to be that politics stopped at the water’s
edge. Obama hatred has changed that old tradition too.
I believe the qualities of great leadership can alter the
course of things. I often disagree with
our President these days, and question his leadership. My disagreements would
probably be over very different things than most people would cite. But I don’t lay all
the blame on him. I liken his predicament now to a person in a marriage where
one spouse refuses to work together and actively undoes what their
partner is trying to accomplish- or a business where one partner refuses to
cooperate with any part of running the business and says “no” to very idea or
very solution to a problem. The result is that is no partnership exists and
failure is assured. In our case failure has been assured by the Republican
Party. They vowed from the beginning to give this President nothing and they
kept their vow. I know there are those who would say that both parties are to
blame- a pox on both their houses. This is part of our tendency to create false
equivalency in this age of instant media and the mass distribution of (even) stupid ideas. Yes, both parties disagree- but only one party
has actively obstructed the process. That is not equivalency. That is planned
dysfunction-politically motivated. Republicans left a long list of issues never dealt with- issues that
matter to Americans. Instead they have presided over a House that is the least
productive in history and a Senate that has set the record for filibusters.
They have left immigrants, Veterans, active duty Military, long-term unemployed
people, the poor and the middle-class, job seekers, and everyone who is not in the 1% by the
side of the road. That is the real seed of our discontent.
Shakespeare’s opening line in Richard III mentions a winter
of discontent, but also points to better times with the misshapen King about to
rise. I would like to see the season of our discontent be transformed by a
Congress that is finally willing to come back and do its job. They must stop
complaining about a President trying to act alone, when it was them who deserted
him-and us. They have chosen to focus instead on suing the President for exceeding his power. Ironically the one specific they are suing him for is the very thing in the Affordable Care Act they wanted in the first place. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds. Our system of government calls for three equal branches of
government. One branch should not have the luxury to just quit doing their part
because they have fomented hatred for this President, thinking it will fool us into
believing they are the answer. I look forward to seeing this season of discontent be transformed into a season of change for the better.
Thanks for looking in.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)