It is hard to envision any path that avoids the accelerating failure that is the US at the moment. This isn't to say that none exist, the country has seen dark days before; the Civil War, WWII, a nearly 50 year Mexican Stand-off with the Soviet Union with each side armed with nukes locked - cocked - and ready to rock, and the end of the Nixon administration. (Which history may one day regard as the beginning of the end of the American empire.) The Civil War was perhaps the darkest since the enemy was within, and it seems like that is where we are once again.

The Civil War ended just 148 years ago this June. Though all wars are complex events the heart of that war was simple, slavery. The Confederacy was determined to continue the practice of treating other human beings as property. The horrors that resulted are well documented and all that a compassionate, thinking, enlightened human being can say now is that it was evil. Yet I wonder if the American experiment in democracy ever fully recovered from having that evil written into its Constitution, only to try and remove it by brute force just 84 years later. Echoes of that conflict reverberate loudly in the attitudes of the Republican / T-party and many people smarter than I have remarked that the Confederacy of old are all "red" states today. Back then the enemy of freedom and humanity was the Confederacy, even if they did claim to have god on their side. The Confederacy was a declared enemy of the United States of America.

The enemy of freedom and humanity today, at least in the West, is the Republican / T-party, even if they do claim to have god on their side. And though it would be a stretch to claim they are the declared enemy of the USA, it isn't Democrats or Independents who are signing the petitions to succeed from the Union. It is the Republican / T-party who are determined to bring the government crashing down even though they lost the last election. That same party openly tried to suppress voter turn out in several states. (Why Obama's DOJ hasn't tossed a bunch of people in jail over that clear violation of both the spirit and the laws of the United States is a mystery.) Some of them actually speak fondly of slavery, suggesting it wasn't a horror after all. They are the party willing to prevent poor people from having access to health care in order to protect the tax cuts of the wealthy and preserve the profits of the insurance companies. Every action they take proves them to be the party of the wealthy over the working class, corporations over unions, and war over peace. What ever it was the Republican Party stood for in the time of President Lincoln, it is long past. And the question is, how does the country survive them?

It isn't clear that we can. The current debacle in Washington over the "fiscal cliff" is just one of an unending failure that is bound to happen when a large portion of the government is determined to see the government fail. Which, lets be clear, is the stated goal of the Republican party. They have no desire to see a capable, working, national government that is responsible to all of its citizens and a beacon of freedom and peace to the world.

(I know it is a bit harsh, labeling the Republican / T-party as enemies. I know a lot of people who vote that way, and they are not my enemies in any way. But I don't know how to avoid the conclusion. It was a Democrat who was gunned down in Arizona after the Republican / T-party types ran an add showing her district as an assault rifle target. It is Republican / T-party wing-nut radio and TV types who depict everyone who is not them as evil and beneath contempt. It isn't liberals who talk of armed revolutions or of turning the USA into an armed camp with the police checking documents at every corner. Who is it talking of succession again? And it is almost exclusively Republicans who support the NRA and its need to hold military assault weapons in order to "protect" themselves from hoards of their fellow citizens.)

The best hope is that the last election was a turning of the tide in Republican / T-party fortune and power and that the elections of 2014 will see the end of them.  The problem is 2014 is still 2 years away and there it is no sure thing that the country can endure even with  them being in the minority. Given the gerrymandering that all but assures a Republican House until the last vestiges of that party fade completely, it seems likely the country will have to survive much more than 2 years of them trying to destroy the system, and that may be too long. It has been 12 since Bush II took office and 4 since the Republicans made it their stated goal to sabotage anything government might do (other than fight wars and buy weapons). Can any country last 16, 18, or 20 years with its government in complete disarray? Germany lasted just 12 years after Hitler was appointed German Chancellor. I am not - NOT - suggesting that the Republican / T-party are equivalent to the Nazis in any way, only pointing out that it doesn't take long for a Democracy to destroy itself.

Yes, the Republican / T-party badly lost the last election. But that hasn't swayed them the least little bit. Serving the elite, ignoring any vestige of reality that doesn't align with their world view, hating an elected President and opposing anything he suggests with the burning passion of the truly pathological, is still their only real political policy. Democracy, it seems, is left wanting in the face of fundamentalism; be it religious, political or economic.

Yet what other option is there? A democracy that uses force to silence its critics forfeits it legitimacy. Running the the disciples of Grover Norquest and Ayn Rand out of power using anything but the ballot box would spell the end of a free society. Massive demonstrations demanding, say, the resignation of the T-party members of the Supreme Court, would be about as far as a democracy can go in removing people from office by force.

Roger Ailes, Charles and Bill Koch, and a few others, are lynch pins of right wing propaganda machine. If they if dismantled their machine and moved to a tropical island somewhere the US, and probably the world, would be a noticeably better place. Scooping them up at the end of a gun and dropping them off against their will however, would be a false victory. A true democracy shrugs off propaganda with a free press and an educated electorate. (Scooping them up in hand cuffs for a perp-walk would be an entirely different thing IF there is any real evidence that they have broken any laws ... like bribery or influence peddling.)

One might hope for a Paul-on-the-Road-to-Damascus kind of conversion for some of the leaders of the Republican / T-party types. Imagine the shock running through the right wing world that would flow from Roger Ailes being convinced that running a propaganda machine for greed and hate has put his very soul at risk, with an eternity in hell as his final reward? What if the Koch brother's had a vision that reveled to them the god they follow isn't the one who rewards the faithful with riches, but the one who drove the money changers out of the temple with a whip; who taught that the money grubbing and the merciless would never find their way to heaven?

But that seems unlikely. The Christian story suggests that Saul of Tarsus was actually a rather bright guy, something I'm not sure can be said of any leading the conservative movement. (This is the party of Young Earth Creationism, climate change denying, voodoo economics touting, sustainable energy hating twits who claim that pretty women don't really mind being raped but, if they should, they will not get pregnant.) Worse, the Republican / T-party are the party of a god, what are they going to be converted to? According to these true believers, progressive, open minded thinkers who believe that feeding the hungry, nursing the sick, visiting those in prison, demanding a fair legal system, clothing the naked, cherishing the children, and paying workers a fair and living wage are socialists, liberals, the very spawn of hell - the ones who need to be converted. Saul had another advantage over the current backers of Republican / T-party politics when it comes to being open to having his heart touched by grace, he wasn't obnoxiously wealthy and bent on raping as much of the planet as possible for more personal gain.

Untouched by the ballot box, immune to outright force, and beyond the reach of reason and compassion, it would seem there are no real options, no way to prevent the Republican / T- party from dragging the USA off the path of human progress. We are teetering on the edge of that path already, falling behind the rest of the first world by nearly any measure one cares to make.

And yet ... if a democracy can fail in a dozen years or so, why not the enemies of democracy? The Republican / T-party types have done a huge amount of damage, but we haven't fallen just yet. People are turning away from homophobia, racism, sexism, and the worship of wealth above all else. What if enough people turn away? Fifty-three percent wasn't enough to bring the Republican / T-party types to heel, but maybe 70% will get it done, or even 55%. Who knows where the tipping point lie? Gerrymandering has undercut the legitimacy of Congress, but even in a gerrymandered district a Republican / T-party candidate will fail if people actually think about who and what is getting their vote. Just a little bit of information beyond a 30 second sound bite on TV may be all that it takes, or one day of listening to Rush or watching Fox News with the slightest bit of skepticism. It doesn't take much light to chase away the darkness.

And if we can find that much light, maybe we can find enough to move even further away from this bought-and-sold system. Citizen's United is a horridly bad law ... but even the worst laws can be changed. Once upon a time the USA decided that Probation was the will of god, then a few years later decided it wasn't. The KKK and the John Birch Society still quote the Bible, but no one pays them much attention. Quoting the 2ed Amendment doesn't mean the NRA need be any less irrelevant. We will close our prisons and overhaul the justice system as soon as we discover they are evil failures. (Pretty soon we will have so many people in jail that no family will be untouched, and everyone will know just how ugly our current system has become.) The war on drugs will end in failure, just like all of our most recent wars. We will be a better people when it does.

The USA doesn't have much of a record when it comes to peace, but other countries have unlearned the art of war, we aren't necessarily too stupid to do so ourselves. Even if we are, we are about out of money to support our war loving habits. This one fixes itself regardless of what any politician thinks or says.

All of our problems are self-inflicted. That is no guarantee that we will fix them, but it does suggest that they can all be fixed. All we need is a little light to work by.

Christmas hope

Though not a believer in any of the Christmastime gods, the holidays are still fun simply because most people get some time off of work and families get together. In my house visiting family means Daughters, Sons-in-law, and grand kids, and that means a chance to visit with the next two generations to pick up human history where my generation sets it down.

My Daughters are giving a serious re-think to all of American Society, along with virtually all of their friends and many of the extended family of roughly the same age. This re-evaluation includes rejecting excess consumerism and crass commercialism, and a stated rejection of the politics of money as practiced in the US today. They are bitterly opposed to the manipulations, greed, and lawlessness of Wall Street and understand quite clearly that exponential growth is an unsustainable economic model. They are experimenting with food co-ops and barter economies, and rigorously avoiding credit card debt. They dismiss the idea that banks, bankers, and Wall Street types making fortunes by loaning out other people's money, and then collecting interest on that money, as of limited benefit to society and seriously questionable morally. (College educated with Masters and PhDs in the bunch, they bitterly denounce the commercialization of education and the astounding school loan bills that come with it.)

Those who have bought homes have done so with modesty and efficiency high up on the list of "most important" qualities. Several have decided that, at least for now, owning a home is part of an "American Dream" that they don't share. With all jobs now best considered temporary, offered at the whim of an increasingly corrupt corporate / government system and retracted just as quickly, being tied to a mortgage is seen as unwise. (They may be swayed in that opinion after seeing the beating their parents have taken in this current downturn, along with the loss of about 1/3 of the family income due to "downsizing.") They have absolutely no faith in the idea that the money taken from them for Social Security and Medicare will ever be seen again. They also have no faith in the idea that this system will honor anything like a retirement or pension plan, fully expecting a large portion of such monies to be stolen by officialdom somehow.

They see an FDA that approves drugs much of the rest of the world will not touch, only to then see them pulled off the shelves a few years later due to health risks. (After, of course, the drug companies have made a few billion dollars.) It is their children poisoned by toys painted in China with lead paint and unable to digest the food grown and distributed by Agribusiness. They wish the bus and train systems in the US weren't decades behind the rest of the world because they don't care about cars or big oil profits. None of them believes that the car manufacturers are doing the best they can with fuel economy, and they all suspect that the government and the energy companies are in on the scam. They understand fully that the oil can't last forever and that alternate energy systems must be invented, coupled with massive improvements in efficiency. They don't trust people with guns. (Yes, you can read that in several different ways, they all apply.)

They are anti-war. Many have traveled and lived (or were born) abroad. The languages they speak include German, Spanish, and Korean. Several read Latin and Greek. They are big picture kind of people who know first hand that America's claims of superiority are nothing but propaganda. They have experienced the education and health care systems of other countries, seen the difference between countries that care for the environment and those who exploit it for short term profits with little concern for long term viability. I suspect they don't care much about America being #1 in anything if it comes at the expense of the rest of the people on the planet.

They don't watch much TV. They read a lot of books. They write and paint, play musical instruments and make movies. They are nothing like the society they grew up in and which surrounds them to this day. They may well be in the minority, but there sure seems to be a lot of them around.

They are not rebels or interested in revolutions. I am both puzzled and delighted by the fact that they are not even particularly angry at what they see. Part of that, I suspect, is simply that they don't see the things that are wrong as their fault. They didn't do it we, their parents, did. And they are kind of fond of us in spite of our failures.

Not much interested in the ill society we are handing over to them they basically ignore it; going about their lives in their own time and in their own way. They work around us as best they can, doing without cars, finding good food for their families, staying out of debt, living much lighter and quicker on their feet, and staying much better informed then I was at their age. I'm not sure how they vote, but they don't choose based on 30 second sound bites and are deeply skeptical of the motivations of anyone currently seeking public office.

Lest you conclude that they are simply children of an off-the-reservation-dad, I only raised 3 of the bunch. The rest are extended family. Though many have a take-it-or-leave-it attitude when it comes to churches, some are deeply religious and active participants in main-line Christian organizations. They debate abortion and gay marriage. (Really.) We disagree on a lot of things.

And on quiet holiday evenings they give me hope.

Build a new house

I am generally of the opinion that the injuries we have inflicted on ourselves as a society are fatal. Over the course of my lifetime we have embraced an ideology of supply side economics and unsustainable growth (like that of a cancerous tumor that grows until it kills), endless war and war profiteering, and the anti-intellectual stance of religious fundamentalism. Hatred is our national motivation and brutal violence its natural expression. Our elected officials can barely stand to talk with each other, let along govern. Not surprising really, we can barely stand each other.

How we made it this far is kind of a wonder. That we can't go much further seems a given.

But once in a while there is a ray of hope. The unimaginable massacre of a room full of kindergarten kids has actually sparked something in America's view of itself, that perhaps we are not the shinning beacon to the world our delusions would have us believe. Though not actually talking about any real gun control, we are talking about maybe talking about it. For this country that is a huge step. (Not that I think any real laws will actually be passed. I give the assault weapons ban about a 1 in 15 chance, the limit of clip size about 1 in 20, and closing the gun show loop-hole about 1 in 25. Even if one or all of the above become law, the 5 Justices of the Supreme Court owned by the NRA will obviously side with the gun manufacturers and declare it / them "Unconstitutional".)

Still, there is a serious, loud and contentious clash of opinions taking place this Holiday. The mass murder of 6 year old kids didn't push the NRA from its official Weapons Manufacturer's Party Line one iota, showing a total lack of compassion that surprised even me. But at least, this time around, a whole lot of people are standing up in open defiance and condemnation of such a brutal display of inhumanity. There is even a Republican or two daring to disagree with the standard party line on guns. That, in and of itself, is rather astonishing. Up until now the Republicans seemed monolithic in their commitment to a weird kind of self-destruction, with the added insanity of thinking that taking the country with them is "progress."

(Not a big fan of hanging people with labels I hate to tar all NRA members with the same brush. I know several and can imagine they winced at the NRA's statement, but ... they are still holding a card that claims they agree with the Associations goals. If a whole bunch of the 4 million members tore up their cards and sent them back? Now that might just mean something real was happening in this country.)

Another small (very small) ray of sunshine is with the budget debate. Not so much what the political parties are saying - they all sing from the same hymnal. But there are a few voices crying loudly that the whole thing is nuts - lets just go off the cliff. At least the out-of-control Pentagon budget takes a hit the Bush insanity tax rates go away. Our whole "fuck the poor" social mentality does get a boost with the cuts in social program - but two out of three is a damn sight better than none out of a million.

Of course these small rays of sunshine and hope do not suggest that American society, as currently expressed, is going to get better. Our American society is ill to its very core. Much like Islamic ideology, there is nothing of the modern American social ideology that has any redeeming value at all. The good that does lurk in our collective souls is just plain humanity, a humanity that is opposed by virtually everything "American."

It is curious that humans continuously create societies that are so hostile to human beings. Like purposely building a house where the doors are too low to fit through without crouching, the floors too tilted to walk on comfortably, the tables too tall to reach, the lights too few to brighten the dark, and the heater too small to keep away the chill. Why would anyone do such a thing? Why do we listen to a Priest who tells us we are horrible creatures doomed to an eternity in hell when we know that we are not so horrible, and that we have done nothing that deserves an eternity in hell? Why do we listen to an Imam who suggests that killing a daughter who was raped will restore our honor? A President makes up an excuse, and we willing send our sons and daughters off to be shredded in his war. A commercial comes on that insists a new red car will make us happier than the blue car sitting in the driveway, and we run out and buy one.

I know there are a few of the truly crazed that would debate otherwise, but is there any real doubt that we would be better off living in a society were there were far fewer guns? Where it would be unthinkable to argue that everyone should carry a concealed weapon in order to protect ourselves from everyone else so armed? Is there any real debate left that the country, let alone the world, can survive unrestrained consumerism? Is there an honest, sane argument for crushing the middle class while moving an even larger percentage of a nation's wealth into the hands of the very few? All of these seem at least as crazy as insisting that a god demands a man kill his sexually assaulted daughter.

We build horrible houses, then wonder why it is we are miserable living in them. So maybe I'm seeing just a ray of sunshine in the fact that at least a few are starting to suggest that this is a really horrible house that we have built. That maybe it is time to tear it down and build a better one. The old house doesn't survive, but the people living there end up much better off.

Normal

A friend of mine made a joke the other day about me maybe being normal after all. Co-workers, she doesn't know me all that well, but does have a hint of just how far off the reservation I can go. So her saying I might be normal was a kind of a complement, and I took it that way. Normal though, is problematic.

I make no pretence of being a 2ed Amendment kind of person. I don't care about guns one way or the other, but I'm not particularly thrilled about living in a society that worships violence, hate and mayhem, and then arms itself to the teeth. And while any kind of gun control would be welcome, (seeing as we have little or none at the moment) I don't think we are going to see anything meaningful happen because of this most recent killing spree. Killing sprees are normal in our country.& In fact they happen just about every day. There have been no new laws as a result of the last dozen or so most notorious ones, including the attempted assassination of former Arizona congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Expecting sanity to suddenly break out and spread though my fellow Americans now seems mostly an act of wishful thinking.

(I haven't seen much indication of sanity among any of the gun people I know. Twenty dead kids and their response is to go out and buy more guns, or even more nuts, more high capacity clips. I love 'em, but they are bat-shit-fucking-crazy, each and every one. An apt analogy might be this; after the Catholic Church being hoist upon its own petard during the child sex scandal, had Catholics everywhere going out to buy more kiddie porn. It is hard to imagine anyone being that twisted, but somehow gun lovers made the leap effortlessly.)

Most people in this country think guns should be accessible, at least to most people, most of time, for just about any reason. No need to be a hunter, a competitive target shooter, or have a job where a gun is part of the tool kit; just wanting one is enough. No need to explain why you think you need a 100 round, rapid fire, high tech killing machine at your finger tips. No need to have training or hold a licence that has to be renewed every few years. No need to know that guns make your house less safe, not more, and that the gun in the house is most likely to be used to shoot a family member or friend. Normal people think is is normal to want to own a gun.

Most of the people in this country (and the world for that matter) believe in a god or higher being or supreme power of some kind. No two of them believe exactly the same things about these gods, though groups of people hold beliefs close enough to the same that they can stand being around each other ... most of the time. Catholics tolerate other Catholics, unless they disagree about something serious like gay people. Protestants will usually abide Protestants of another denomination, giving most at least a chance of being allowed into heaven. They are often less optimistic about a Catholic's chance at passing through the pearly gate but that is okay. Catholics don't give the Protestants much of a chance at all. That doesn't make the Christians any worse than other groups of believers. Muslims barely tolerate each other let alone Christians, Jews or Hindus. Much of the "Muslim World" is pretty busy killing each other off with Islamic governments being fond of supporting terrorist organizations to wage proxy war on other Islamic governments. Of course they take any chance that comes along to kill Christians, Jews and Hindus.

Not to be completely outdone, the US is waging a pretty efficient drone war against Islamic terrorists. The problem is a lot of none terrorists get killed along the way. Not a big problem though, all of the none terrorists are still Muslims. So the killing goes on. Think I'm full of shit on that? Ask yourself what would happen if one of those drone strikes missed and brought down the local Christian church full of believers on a Sunday morning. Chaos. Now miss the target and knock down a Mosque. Less chaos, much much less chaos.

Religion is normal. Assuming all "other" religions are somehow inferior to one's own is normal. Religious intolerance, war, murder and butchery are also normal. It is only abnormal when the other guy does it, and even then only if he is of another religion. Think I'm full of shit on that? Ask a Catholic about the Pope and Galileo or the Inquisition; a Protestant about the Witch Trials, or either one about the war in Ireland. Chances are better than 50 / 50 they will offer a much softer line of criticism when the religion at fault was the one they follow.

Normal people watch 5 hours of mass media propaganda a day. Normal people are crushed under a mound of credit card dept they ran up buying things they never needed and don't often use. There are normal people who think the moon landings (all six of them) were a hoax, that Obama is a foreign born Muslim, that angles watch over their shoulder, and that creationism is a science. Normal people get a flu shot every year, then vote in school boards that think teaching evolution as the myth will improve a child's education. Normal people haven't read a book this past week, or month, or even year.

In Iowa the perfectly normal dentist Dr. James Knight fired a women who had worked for him for 10 years because she was too attractive and threatened his marriage. Mind you, she had not done a single inappropriate thing and was (given that she had been doing her job for 10 years) perfectly capable of doing her job. She was fired because of the good Doctor's moral and emotional failings. (To say nothing of shear arrogance. Apparently he is of the opinion that, should he be unable to control himself and make a play for his assistant, she would certainly fall to his overture. This guy is an asshole on to many levels to count.) Then - and here is the real kicker - the seven completely normal men who make up the Iowa Supreme Court, each and every one of them, decided that the good Dr. is in the right. American judicial system, say hello to the Taliban, who have an identical view of how pretty women are the real reason men act like pigs.

I am a man, husband, father of three daughters and grandfather of three grand daughters. I am completely offended by Dr. James Knight and these supposed "Justices." If I was god and these eight stood before me after death, awaiting on judgment, (and if I were god that would be happening real soon) each would be spending a long, long time in purgatory. There they would discover that anything important to them, a job, house, favorite chair, good food, could be arbitrarily snatched away at the whim of someone who, by any measure, was their inferior in every way. After a few thousand years of this Dr. Knight and the Justices would get a chance to grovel before Mrs. Nelson, with every senescent being in the universe watching, and ask for her forgiveness. (By the way, notice it is Mrs. Nelson. Dr. James Knight is a complete piss-ant excuse for a human being, let alone a man.)

Our society is staggering along like a drunk in the early morning. It is debatable that we will ever make it home. Maybe the real problem is that most of us are "normal." What ever it is that a normal human being is, I would take it as a complement to be labeled "not normal".

Taking the Second Amendment ...

... off the Reservation.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

That's it, 27 words, one sentence, adopted December 15, 1791, just one day shy of exactly 221 years before the massacre in a Connecticut elementary school. Based at least partly on these words, our society is rapidly abandoning any pretense of being a first world, civilized society. Lead by these words there is virtually no chance that the people of the United States will ever take a rational approach to guns and violence. So, just for my own curiosity, I thought I would take these words off the Reservation, see how they fair.

According to Webster: Militia -

1 a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
   b : a body of citizens organized for military service
2 the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service

Though I have read this Amendment many times as the years have rolled by and the death toll mounted, I was a bit thunderstruck at having missed something blindingly obvious. There is no militia in the United States. There is a military, but that is not the same thing. Whatever the Founding Fathers were thinking about 221 years ago, it clearly has no parallel in the country today. None of the weapons sold today are going to a well regulated militia that adds to the security of our free state. NONE! The first four words of the Second Amendment render it completely immaterial to any gun policy or law up for consideration. This does not mean it would be a good policy to ban every gun in America. But if we did decide to pass a law banning every gun in America the Second Amendment would not have any bearing.

(I think it would be a great policy, but I'm pretty sure I am in a minority of one. Truth to tell, if I could council some god somewhere to get off his ass and lend us a hand, I would suggest he need do only one thing; say the word that no gun anywhere in the world would fire and that no armed missile of any type would fly.)

Though there is no militia in the US (thankfully) this isn't to say there are no militias in the modern world. Al Qaeda is a militia. The Taliban are a militia. Hamas. They have a chain of command. They have propaganda departments, intelligence networks, supply lines, training facilities. Yet somehow they don't come across as establishing the security of free states. Indeed, their very existence is a threat to free states, and free people, all over the planet. There are other militias as well, like the private armies of war loads. These are often intertwined with the drug cartels. None are concerned with the security of anything other than the power and greed of the war lords and drug kings.

No free state could last long if it allowed an organized,armed opposition to the government to exist inside its own boarders. (Think The Muslim Brotherhood and the still born democracy of the Egyptian revolution.) What ever militias might have been in the year 1791, in the year 2012 they are terrorist organizations. It is shear lunacy to think the the Founding Fathers would amend the Constitution so an armed militia that acted apart from, and in opposition to, the democratic government they were working so hard to establish, could exist.

The next nine words, "being necessary to the security of a free state..." also struck me with something glaringly obvious, they are simply not true. Free states exist all over the planet. Some of them have militias, but those that do regulate the snot out of them; weapons registration, recurrent training, a solid chain of command tied directly to the government. But many a secure state has no such militia. Militias a just not necessary for security.

There are a lot of things that are. Among them is the rule of law, an independent and uncorrupted judicial system, and checks and balances built into the governing bodies. Perhaps most important is a respect of the citizens for each other, and an appreciation that there is a shared responsibility in building and maintaining a civilized society. Armed-to-the-teeth citizens shooting up the place are not.

But they are a threat to a free people. Those living in the Wild Wild West figured that out more than 100 years ago, and passed the first gun laws keeping weapons out of their towns. Wyatt Earp would throw David Keene in jail.

And so we come to the only phrase the NRA knows, " the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. It is clear that the right is based on there being a need for a well regulated militia to secure the state. Yet there is no militia, and there is no need. It follows that there is no right. Once again the Amendment is not applicable to any debate on gun control.

The most basic of freedoms is the freedom to remain alive. The dead have no freedoms at all. Yet guns in the US have done little to save lives. I know the NRA claims otherwise. I heard again today the claim that, in some country where guns were outlawed the murder rate went up. There are a lot of people in the US that believe this is so. But it can't possibly be true. If it were places like Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Sudan, and the United States would have the lowest murder rates. After all, we have the most guns. Places like Canada, Japan, and Australia would have the highest murder rates since they have the least guns. Yet this is not the case. It is also not the case that weapons inside the house make those in the house safer. In all probability if the gun is used, it will be used on a family member or a friend, not on an intruder. Putting a gun in your home makes you less safe, not more.

So the NRA "statics" can only be pure propaganda. If you believe that more guns leads to less murder and less guns to more murder, or you think your family is safer because of the 9mm you keep under your pillow, you are being played for a fool by the gun manufactures and the NRA. Or you are stupid. I would be much obliged if you would figure out which. A fool with a gun or a stupid person with a gun, neither are necessary for providing the security of a free state. Just the opposite is true. Both are a threat to a free state, and a free people.

Off the reservation, outside of the propaganda sphere of the NRA, apart from the Supreme Court Justices and away from Representatives bought and paid for by the gun manufacturers, the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States is complete bullshit. It starts with one false assumption, moves on to one out-right lie, and stumbles to a dubious conclusion.

On the reservation of course, it is as worshiped as any verse in the bible. Which is kind of fitting. Religion is the act of believing things even when the evidence suggests the truth lies elsewhere. Worshiping guns is very much the same. And like the gods, many innocents, including a disproportionate number of children, are sacrificed on the alter of the gun manufacturer's greed.

Just as sad worshiping guns, like worshiping gods, often turns out to be fatal. It proved so for Nancy Lanza. Mother of a murderer who killed her first, she is now reported to have been arming up so she could survive an economic collapse. The muzzle flash from the assault rifle that the NRA and gun manufacturers told her would provide protection from the advancing hoards, was the last thing she ever saw. She believed the lie and it cost her her life. The character of Jesus in the bible is reported to have said, "He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword." Perhaps, were the story written for today, he would say, "She who lives by the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle, dies by the Bushmaster .223 assault rifle." Not as poetic as the original, but more apropos to today's world.

One would hope the NRA is proud of Ms. Lanza. In addition to the assault rifle she had a Sig Sauer, and a Glock. Maybe they will put her picture up on some billboards, or name some piece of pro-gun legislation they pass though one of the state legislature's they own after her. It hasn't been reported, but I would bet a good cup of coffee she was a member in good standing. If she wasn't maybe the NRA will grant her special, posthumous, life-time membership? It seems the least they could do. (I know that sounds a bit silly, buy hey! This is an organization that claims god wants all of his churches packed with people who are packing; "take your assault rifle to Sunday School" kind of people. Giving a life time membership to a dead person would not count as crazy with this bunch.)

There is some truly twisted irony, and maybe just a hint of justice, in that the person who was the source of the high-tech killing machine used to butcher 20 six and seven year old children, was also the weapon's first victim. Her worship of guns not only got a bunch of people dead, it helped to fuel the illness that is killing a once civil society. Guns are the threat, not the salvation. The Second Amendment will not save the country. Instead those 27 words are hastening its demise.

p.s. The truth is I don't know that much about such weapons, so I looked up the respective manufacturer's web sights; here they are in case you are interested. To paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, "I shall not today attempt further to define ... hard core pornography. But I know it when I see it. I think I just saw some.


http://www.bushmaster.com/index
http://www.sigsauer.com/catalog/pistols
http://us.glock.com/

Is this what its like ...

Is this what it is like to live in a dying culture? And entire class room of Kindergarten kids is butchered by a lunatic reportedly wielding and assault rifle, and the response is a call to arm the teachers? Wouldn't sacrificing the profit margin of the gun manufactures and putting a muzzle on the NRA be a bit more rational (as well as humane)? There are more Americans killed and wounded by gunfire every week than were suffered by the military at the height of the Vietnam war. As a nation we were appalled at those casualties and eventually forced the end of that conflict. Of course passing any real gun laws in this country is a waste of time as long as 5 members of the Supreme Court are in the pockets of the gun lobby. And they clearly are.

(This is just one day after the killing spree, so details such as weapons used and just who was killed where are still sketchy and often incorrect. At this moment it seems the killer got his assault weapon off his Mother. Apparently she fell for the NRA / gun manufacturer propaganda that one must have an arsenal of high tech killing machines in one's home in order to be "safe. Not surprisingly it was a mistake that cost her her life. Most "in-house" weapons that end up being used to kill someone, are used to kill a family member or friend. Tragically, her mistake cost the lives of 26 others as well.)

Even after a so-called "decisive election" our political system is completely dysfunctional. A small faction of Republicans are determined to render the American government inoperable, and they have largely succeeded. This government can't even agree on something they already agree on, holding taxes down on the working class. They can't do something that every single one of them agrees that they should do. That is nothing short of shear lunacy ... madness beyond the pale. Yet this is precisely what their masters, international corporations and the very wealthy want, since a working government is a counter balance to the power of business. And again, those same 5 members of the Supreme Court are complicit in this abortion of governance. (It is impossible to envision that, when history reviews the failure of the American experiment in democracy, the Robert's court is going to escape taking a lot of the blame.)

The "free people" of the US are also the most incarcerated population on the planet.  One doesn't go to jail for looting trillions of dollars from the national budget or starting wars based on lies and cherry picked "intelligence". Once doesn't face jail time for trying to buy elections. There is no penalty for making billions operating a relentless propaganda machine that often operates outside of the laws of several nations. One can lie about anything but, so long as it is claimed as "news" there are no limits to the amorality to which one can go. But get caught with a "controlled substance", particularly if one has enough on them to share with friends? Jail time, lots and lots of jail time. (If one is poor. The wealthy mostly flaunt their drug use and, sometimes, go to rehab centers.)

If I tried to describe a dying culture I couldn't do any better than using our society as the template. From the breakdown of nearly ever social structure to the fraying infrastructure, the rampant and unchecked corruption at all levels, burning through finite resources without care ... it seems pretty likely that yes, this is what it's like to live in a dying culture.

What where they thinking ...

Michigan just passed a so-called "right to work" law. Since I am a big fan of the idea that unions, for all of their problems, are still a good counter weight to the power of well connected corporations, I figure it is just another of the many steps being taken backward by our society. But that is beside the point.

Waiting in a lobby I saw a big news story about the thousands of protesters gathering in the Michigan capitol to protest the law, which I thought was a bit odd. After all, it is a pretty good bet that about half the crowd voted for at least one of the Republicans responsible for writing and passing that bill. What did they think was going to happen?

It isn't like the Republicans are shy about their positions on unions, eviscerating the middle class, protecting the rich, or funding the military / industrial system with endless wars and tax breaks for international corporations. It is what they have consistently stood for since Reagan was elected. They are 100% pro-gun. They are 100% anti-immigration. They openly admit to trying to rig elections by suppressing voter turn out. They hate science (except for the science of war) and are not shy about claiming to know more about physics, geology, weather, and woman's reproductive systems than all of the physicists, geologists, climatologists and doctor's on the planet.

I'll admit that with Democrats it is sometimes hard to tell just what one will get when one votes them into office. (See Obama's first term.) But not so with Republicans.

It isn't only the people in Michigan I wonder about. Fully 48% voted for Romney in the last election. Now some 72% think that taxes should be raised on the wealthy. So nearly 25% of the people who voted Republican in the last election now think the tax policy should be changed? Just what the fuck were they thinking in November?

We voted our country to the corporations many, many years ago. Company pensions went away, replaced by 401K plans ripe to be looted by Wall Street. Unions were busted and working wages have been stagnant ever since. We bitch about the EPA and vote Young Earth Creationists onto our school boards, then worry about the water we drink and bemoan the failure of our school systems. We all still love the military but can't figure out why we have no money.

We have the country we have been voting for for most of my adult life. Why protest about something after an election when the elected are doing exactly what they said they would?

I think I'm for it

I voted against Bush II, twice. (I voted against his father as well). I was, and am, totally opposed to the wars he started and I was deeply disappointed that Obama carried on with those same war policies. The views expressed by my votes did not carry the day however, and via a twisted, convoluted path we come to the edge of a (so called) fiscal cliff. (Given the hyperbole that is now common in all American politics and media, I would bet a big cup of coffee that there is no cliff involved. A speed bump maybe, a curb perhaps, most likely just a continuation of the downward grassy slope the American economic system has been on for several decades now.) A part of that "cliff" is a raise in every one's taxes, big cuts in defence spending, and equally big cuts in domestic programs.

I think we should just go over the cliff. First, this appears to be the best law this particular congress could come up with. Less than two years ago they fought over this thing for weeks. It isn't likely they are going to do a better job now. Second, my guess it is the only way that military spending will, in fact, be cut.

But mostly I think we should go over this cliff because this is a democracy. Regardless of which individual voted which way, those elected to office made military and economic policies that were enacted on behalf of the USA. All of us are responsible for the consequences of those policies, and one of those consequences is that the country is deeply in debt. Budgets have to be cut and taxes have to be raised, cuts and increases that should touch pretty much every citizen.

This isn't to say I think the tax code is fair. I don't think anyone, left or right, Democrat, Republican or off the reservation, is deluded enough to think that taxes in this country are fairly collected and wisely spent. But that is something we are all in together as well. The fact that rich people pay a lower tax rate than middle class working people is clearly a serious breech in good governing. Fixing that should be a part of all of us paying for the decisions made in our name; middle class taxes go up, upper class taxes go up a lot more.

The Republicans are wrong (as usual) in insisting that all "budget balancing" be born by cuts in programs that mostly benefit the middle class and poor; leaving the rich untouched and accumulating even more of the nation's wealth at the top of the economic pile. It is kind of amazing that, given the outcome of this last election, they are clinging to their "protect the rich at all costs" rhetoric. Then again, the T-party / Conservative / Religious right party walked away from being rational a long time ago. No less a luminary than Mr. Rick Santorum, once serious contender to be the Republican nominee, has said, "We will never have the elite, smart people on our side."  I guess he is smart enough to have figured that out.

The Democrats are wrong in insisting that the middle class be spared any responsibility for decisions made, laying the burden mostly at the feet of the rich. Lets be honest, for the most part white, middle class working guys are the foundation of the Republican party and mostly backed Mr. Bush's wars. What kind of warped rational suggests they shouldn't provide a big chunk of the money needed to pay for them?  And, much as I don't care about protecting the unearned assets of the rich, simple math reviles that all of the money the rich have isn't enough to pay down the dept being accumulated at the current spending levels.

And, as usual, both are wrong in their desire to protect the military budget.

So, let us all drive off the cliff together. It actually looks like the best alternative to what the Republicans would do if they had their way unchallenged, or what the Democrats would do if they had their way unchallenged. In fact, since both seem to hate the current law equally (though they had equal parts coming up with it) it is probably a pretty good law.

In other words, the Democrats AND the Republicans both hate it? I think I'm for it.

Pro human

People think that being anti-gun is being, well, anti-gun. Actually it isn't, at least for me. I actually enjoy watching the occasional video of an expert marksman and, once upon a long time ago, was an enthusiastic archer. (Long ago, as in before compound bows became popular.) Once in a while I think about taking it up again, but flying / motorcycles / sailing ... another hobby is the last thing I need at the moment.

In fact my anti-gun thoughts are limited to just a few items. The first is requiring that people who own guns receive some basic training. Let the NRA set up the training and certification process, much like the Experimental Aircraft Association has be asked to set up the training and review process for those who want to do low level acrobatics in airshows. The Federal Aviation Administration has oversight, but the EAA has the experts and the whole thing actually works pretty well. (I worked in the airshow industry and had a low level waiver for acro ... and though not really a fan of the EAA the process was pretty well administered.) Anyone who has been in the military would be assumed to have the training as well.

The other thoughts focus on the actual equipment. Possessing a fully automatic weapon should be a serious felony, conviction should carry a mandatory 5 year prison sentence. Any semi-automatic weapon should be limited to a carrying capacity of 6 shots. (Yes, a completely arbitrary number admittedly based on the old 6-shooter of by-gone days.) So that is it. Require some basic training for gun owners. Let the NRA hold onto the training records, not the government (to keep the "black helicopter" set from wetting their pants). Limit the mass murdering capacity of the weapons allowed out in public. That doesn't seem that is too much to ask from a first world democracy.

My being anti-gun is more about being anti-violence, about opposing the idea that someone has the "right" to threaten other people with death. The celebration of violence, one might even say the worshiping of it in our society, is the true problem. Our love of high capacity killing machines is just one tenet in the religion of force.

Other tenets of that religion taint our democracy in many ways. We have a "winner take all" mentality which allows a political party to proclaim a "mandate" with a 50.6 to 47.8 percent victory. (Not sure how, but the 47.8 % side is claiming a "mandate" as well.) A bare majority will impose its will on a slight minority in all things and in all ways. Which seems a exercise in force to me. (And one of the real potential problems with democracy that vexed the founders of our experiment - and hasn't been resolved yet.)

Without the American love of war, force, and violence it would be impossible to envision our expanding an out-of-control and bloated military budget even more, even at the expense of caring for our parents and children and maintaining our own infrastructure. Yet both political parties are working desperately to protect the military from the cuts that driving "off the cliff" would required. It would be impossible to envision our approving a drone war, blowing up houses and cars from afar without really knowing (or caring) who is inside and what they are doing. Indeed, just the idea of airborne automated killing machines should chill the soul of any thinking, caring human being. The USA has the most nukes, the only aircraft carriers that matter, overwhelming numbers of "Boomers", and control the world trade in weapons. (The next time the Middle East goes to war it is likely both sides will be flying US made F-18s.)

One of our national past times is football; large men literally (as we are discovering) beating each other's brains out. Another is NASCAR; a racing series deliberately manipulated to ensure several massive, high speed wrecks per season. And then there are video games ...

It doesn't seem much of a stretch to see our love of violence as a love of hate. The love of hate is at the very core of our decline as a culture. It has poisoned our politics, gutted our budget, and eroded our morality past the point of no return.

Anti-gun, anti-military adventurism, anti-military spending excess, anti-drone war, anti-war in general, anti-nuke; it is all wrapped up together. Toss in a lack of enthusiasm for the NFL and NASCAR, and the unlimited violence of video games aimed at young people. Wrap it all together and what you get is a position is that is pro-human, pro-freedom, pro-responsibility. It is a position that suspects that the concentration of power in any form always ends up doing evil. Guns, the military, violence, it is all the worship of power, of the concentration of power that can overwhelm the liberties of another.

No person should coerce another in any way, for any reason.

No one should profit off the effort of another.

Falling Generals

The latest scandal occupying the talking heads of the land involves a General (or two), a mistress (or two?) secret documents and hacked email accounts. Somehow it seems like I am the only one who; 1) isn't really surprised that one of the most powerful men in the world had a mistress, and 2) wonders why this is seen as such a huge moral failing.

If I recall recent history General Petraeus was up to his ribbons in the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars started on false pretenses and flawed (or fabricated) "intelligence". Wars that were launched without any clear objective or exit strategy. Wars that have resulted in uncounted hundreds of thousands of casualties, cost uncountable trillions of dollars, and that will end badly with the US claiming victory for establishing failed states dedicated to serving Allah, oppressing women, and exporting religious extremism and violence around the world. Any true rendering of history will surly count the good General, along with many others in both the Bush and Obama administrations, as murderously incompetent at best; war criminals at worst.

Having a mistress would seem to be a comparatively minor offence.

It would be nice to think that the shine falling off the stars of a few high profile General Officers would tarnish the D.O.D. in general. There is no more bloated, wasteful, black-hole of mis-information den of corruption entity anywhere on the planet than the US weapons manufacturing and deployment enterprises. A few of the utterly failed programs that come to mind are the B-1 and B-2 bombers, the F-22 and F-35 fighters, the V-22 Osprey (an accident looking for a job to fail at) and the C-130J. Equally questionable are more Aircraft Carrier battle groups and submarines.

Whoever it is that is driving the US economy "off the cliff" you can be sure he is wearing a military uniform.

Someday, of course, this is all going to come crashing down in a giant landslide of abuse, fraud, stolen money, illegal contracts, bribery ... maybe falling generals are the first pebbles sliding down the hill? When it does happen both of the current political parties will be swept away as well.

Gun control...

Don't worry my right winger friends, even though your "side" lost rather badly last election, no one is going to take your guns away. If you have been sleeping with them under you pillow, ready to defend your right to the death, (that whole "take it out of my cold, dead fingers" thing) from the hoards of liberals that are about to break down your door, teach evolution to your kids, make sure you health care provider doens't drop you for no reason, and confiscate your tools of mass murder, relax. At the very least you can unload your guns and lock them up in your gun cabinet safe from the kids. (You do have a locking gun cabinet, right?)

The Democrats folded on gun control a long time ago. Even when one of their own was shot in the head along with 15 others (six dead) by a mentally ill man wielding a 9mm Glock semi-auto pistol with a 33 shot magazine, there was no serious talk of gun control. But it bears repeating, by a mentally ill man wielding a 9mm Glock semi-automatic pistol with a 33 shot magazine. A man who had be rejecting by the Army, had dropped out of collage rather than face a mentally health review, and all but posted what he was about to do on Facebook.

Though most of my fellow citizens seem to disagree (why I am way, way off the reservation) it seems to me that:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..."

is the exact opposite of,

"A citizenry at constant threat from mad men who have access to unregulated, high capacity weapons of mass murder".

Free to be murdered is a definition of freedom for crazy people.

There is zero chance of it happening, but if the people of the United States, by what ever means, reinterpreted the 2ed Amendment of the Constitution as meaning, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..." and started passing laws that kept high capacity killing machines out of the hands of crazy people, we would not be abandoning the Constitution.

We would be returning to it.

The NRA, and the people who support it, are the ones undermining the security of a free state.
But then, a free and secure state is the last thing the Powers-That-Be want. A free and secure state does not need nor want those who rule by fear and hate.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've been wrestling with another thought about guns...particularly the high performance killing machines of assault rifles and semi-auto handguns with high capacity magazines; machines built explicitly to kill as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. It is an offensive thought, or at least it occurs to me couched in offensive imagery, but that's the way it is ... so here goes.

Imagine a person who has kiddie porn on his computer. This person has actually never touched a child in an inappropriate matter, let alone raped or abused anyone. Imagine even further that the images he possesses are not even pictures of real children, but caricatures or cartoons. Just the idea gives most people a case of the shudders, and according to

18 U.S.C. § 1466A (2008) § 1466A / OBSCENE VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF THE SEXUAL ABUSE OF CHILDREN

such a person is, in fact, a criminal. (I'm not sure I quite understand (b)(2)(B) - something about artistic or literary value - but (b)(2)(B)(c) is pretty clear.)

Again, this is a person who has never actually hurt anyone, but he is absolutely a criminal and (I think most people would agree) an ugly excuse for a human being. He is an ugly excuse for a human being because he imagines such a thing, but he is a criminal because he has in his possession an item that enhances his imaginings.  Is it much of a reach to think that having the item is a step toward acting out on his imaginings? From the thought to actually doing the thing (in this case accumulating illegal images) is the step from being ugly to being a criminal.

I am sure you have guessed where I am going with this, so I'll give you a moment to get there before me ...



What is the moral difference between someone caressing his AK47 and shredding pictures of human targets with a hail of high velocity bullets, and another gazing at kiddie cartoon porn while stroking his pecker? Are not the fantasies of both equally offensive? And if not, shouldn't they be? Tell me both are not caressing evil.

I admit that the target pictures are usually caricatures of cartoon bad guys pointing big, bad guns at the shooter. But those are no less fantasies than the porn guy thinking that the children in his mind are being treated gently, and with love. When the porn guy acts on his delusions the children are not being loved. And when the gun guy acts on his the targets are not bad guys with guns but a theater full of movie fans or people at a political rally. (And the dead and wounded usually include children.)

Maybe the NRA is more porn empire than it is terrorist organization. That would certainly explain its popularity.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand that assault weapons grew out of a military need to kill as many enemy solders as possible, as quickly as possible. That has no bearing on gun control. Besides, war may be an evil that human kind seems unable to outgrow (which would make it likely that our species is going to have a very limited run in the cosmos), but it is evil nonetheless. Flooding a society with the tools of that evil isn't doing us much good.

My version of gun control has nothing to do with hand guns holding 9 bullets (though that seems rather excessive as well).  It has nothing to do with hunters having shotguns or scooped rifles to pop deer and rabbits.  (Even though both have been used in domestic terrorism.)  Most of the gun folks I know seem to live in constant fear of "home invasion", it being their primary defense for having such weapons.  (A few of the real bonkers are pretty sure the civil war will start in a week or so - and want to be ready to take a side. It is a pretty good question as to them being on the same side as democracy, freedom, civil liberty, and a first world society, but that is a different issue.) Yet living in constant fear of a home invasions seems about as logical as thinking you are going to will the multi-million dollar lottery some day. You might, but the odds are vanishingly small.

An aside: I have had a house burglarize once (while we were sleeping in the next room). My garage has been robbed a couple of times. I have never been the victim of a "home invasion". And though I was hugely pissed at the time, those who stole my friend's stereo system or the stuff from my garage didn't do anything that deserved the death penalty. Had I opened fire with an assault weapon it is likely that anyone in the next room, or next house for that matter, would be in at least as much risk as the bad guys. And before you drag out that old, "hitting what you aim at is gun control" bullshit, military folks practice all the time and often miss, cops practice and miss as well (ask New Yorker about that one). Sharp shooters miss all the time - I've seen Top Shot. Not much chance you are going to be dead-eyed Dick rubbing the sleep out of your eyes in the middle of the night. At least with a shot gun or hand gun that has just a few bullets in it, the only people at risk are the bad guys and your family, not so much your neighbors or the paperboy outside.

Still, no one is coming to take your guns away. Human kind isn't that smart generally, and the US of A is not that advanced a culture. Maybe though, you would consider just getting rid of yours for moral and logical reasons? Loving and owning assault weapons would seem to put you in the wrong camp on both counts ...

... just saying.

Sometimes its good to be wrong...

... not so much about the Presidential election. When it comes to the White House and the House of Representatives the situation on Wednesday (Nov 7) is pretty much identical to what it was on Monday (Nov 5). The Senate is not exactly the same ... 20 women are now sit in the Senate of the United States of America. That is 40%! Women actually said, "Enough!" and delt a major blow to the Republican assertion that they are not equal partners in life and in our society. It will be fun to watch what else they might do. For example, the Senate swings a pretty big stick when it comes to where America sends its foreign aid money. What happens the next time a Muslim nation stands in front of Senate with one hand out for millions of dollars while the other holds a knife used for "honor killings"? Will at least 20 Senators tell them to fuck off until they pull their society's head of a backward religion's ass? (Using more diplomatic and lady-like language, of course.)

The abortion fight will go on, but at least women will now have a major voice on how that battle is defined and joined. It is hard to imagine the next Supreme Court judge is going to be some angry old white guy who promises to walk back a woman's civil rights back into the 1940s.

Maryland, Washington and Maine voted, (Voted!) to allow gay marriage. So much for the conservative insistence that civil rights for gays is being forced on a Christian American by activist, secular, out-of-touch judges. Those three states join Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Washington D.C., and Iowa. (Odd that CA isn't in that list, but my guess is a lot of states will be joining soon.) Hopefully the Religious Right claim that god will punish our society for actually showing compassion and acting humane, will finally die away. It is probably too much to hope that the Religious Right will die away, but, at least in the short term, fewer people will be listening to them. In any case, if someone were to claim that the people of the US finally settled the gay rights issue and landed on the right side of history, it would be hard to dismiss them out of hand.

In Colorado and Washington Americans voted to legalize marijuana use. Could this be the beginning of the end of the "War on Drugs"? That is probably too optimistic a view, but it was a clear slap in the face of the Religious Right / Republican / T-party. Even better, it was a slap in the face of the drug war policies of the Obama White House. On the evidence of the ballot one might conclude that a small majority of the people in the US are actually much more liberal than is Obama. America may not be the "center right" country that some people think.

These are all rays of sunlight, but dawn has not broken yet. There is no simple fix for the fiscal disaster that is the result of US policies. We are still a war economy. We are still at war and war still looms as the likely choice when it comes to Iran. The war on drugs is a failure but continues. The war on poverty is a failure but continues. The culture war will be dampened a bit, for a while. But those who think they talk to god and know what he/she/it/them demands of the rest of us are not going to go away. Our government does not work very well and is still dominated by by money and power while ignoring and abusing those who actually create the wealth in this country. (Those who labor 40 or 50 or 60 hours a week don't get to keep much of the wealth they create, but they are the real "makers" of our society.) It is hard to image a tax code worse than the one we have. Will it get fixed now? As long as money and power write it? Not likely.

Most of us still suffer from the illusion that infinite exponential growth is a valid economic model. Most of us still believe in some version of trickle down economics and the capitalism of Wall Street. Most of us still think that the rest of world doens't mind being under the constant threat of the American military machine.

And we are still a country that hates itself. A bare half of the voting public celebrated the Democratic win. The other half are discouraged, depressed, and some sound like they have suffered a psychotic break of some kind. I actually listed to a couple of hours of right wing radio during a long drive the day after the election. I want to be careful not to paint with too broad a brush, but these folks clearly are bat-shit crazy. (At least the ones on that particular FM station broadcasting into the mountains of WV on Wednesday night last.)

To some degree I have to emphisize with the dispirited right. After all, George Bush the Lesser won, and then won again. I remember thinking that the USA might have finally bit the big one and I would not have been surprised at riots, violence, and a dramatic collapes echoing that of the old Soviet Union. Yet somehow the country muddled through. Badly damaged we were (and still are), sucked into a disasterous war we were (and still are), plauged by an out of control Wall Street and burried in a depression built on fraud and pure theft we were (and still are); but we muddled through. I suspect the damage is cumulative and eventually (hopefully soon) the country will experience a major break with the politics of the past and strike out on a new path. (Hopefully without the riots, violence and dramatic collapes of the old Soviet Union) If (when) that happens the ideas of Republicans and Democrats, the fasinantion with the trany of the bare majority (otherwise known as democracy) and the oppression of wealth (otherwise known as capitalism) will all be descarded. But until that happpes I hope my right wing friends will at least consider that Obama can't be any worse than Bush. They need not despair. And they need not hate the half of us that disagreed and voted for the other guy.

After all, both Bush and Obama work(ed) for the same team.

Eve of Election...

It is the eve of election, finally. More than anything else I will just be glad that it is over ... and I don't watch TV. Those who do must have endured an onslaught of ugly these past few months, an onslaught that darkened their eyes and turned their stomachs. In any case I am going to take a bit of encouragement from one simple fact, no matter who wins in a few hours not much will change.

If Obama wins he will be facing a Congress even more hostile than that of the last two years. Republicans have spewed way to much bile to act any other way. Those who hold their seats in the House, (and my guess is they will still be a majority) got elected for one purpose only, to try and make sure Obama fails. Nothing will get past the House that Obama wants. It is hard to imagine that anything that gets through the House will be signed by Obama. He is in his second term. Vetoing nearly everything a lunatic House comes up with may be the best thing he could do for his place in history. After all, there is no institution on the planet more reviled than the US House of Representatives. No one in the country thinks these people are worth a shit. Obama could be ranked as one of the best Presidents in history by simply stating the obvious, "The House is broken, anything they do is going to be fucked up, so I'll protect the us from them with my veto pen." In doing so he would come closer to telling the truth than he has since the day he took office.

It is true that an Obama second term may have its biggest impact on the Supreme Court, and that is a reason for a little optimism. But just a little. Not even a moderate candidate will get by the Senate, even if the Democrats hold a small majority. The best we can hope for are judges that lean just a little to the right while avoiding the truly bat-shit crazy.

If Romney wins he will be facing a Senate that hates him even more than the current House hates Obama. Four years of Republicans doing all they can to make sure Obama failed? A Democratic Senate will flat butcher anything that Romney tries to do. (Except fight wars and give Wall Street a break - but the Democrats did that under Bush and Obama so that will be business as usual.) It is true that Mitt will try and get the bat-shit crazy on the SCOTUS; but political reality will force him to go with the right leaning as well. (Not that it would be possible to have a Court more corrupt than it already is. It really can't get any worse than betraying the Constitution and selling our elections to the highest bidder.)

At the very worst the Republicans take the White House, the Senate, and the House of Representatives. Though a lot of people are going to get hurt if that happens, the world will not end. No matter what Romney and the bat-shit crazy T-party promise, they can't make magic. They cannot cut taxes, increase military spending, start a war with Iran, and then cut domestic spending anywhere near enough to not explode the deficit. Their god Reagan couldn't pull it off. Bush the First couldn't do it and Bush the Lesser couldn't do it even worse. Clinton did build up a surplus, but a huge cut in defense spending made it possible. (Something neither Obama or Romney would consider even in their wildest dreams.)

Roads and bridges need rebuilt, waterways and power grids... Public education will surly take a beating, but it isn't going away. People will not long tolerate air they can't breathe, water they can't drink, or drugs and consumer products that kill them and their children. It will not matter what Republicans think about the US Department of Education, the EPA, or the FDA. Oil will get scarce and ever more pricey. Republican mutterings will not put more of it in the ground - or make it any easier to extract. Global warming will continue regardless of what those who hate science claim. After all, the world was a globe and orbiting the sun even as the Pope declared that god had told him the earth was the center of the universe. With Mitt in the White House and the Republicans controlling the Hill, the people of the USA might even be forced to concede that the cosmos doesn't care in the least what someone "believes"; and that science is usually right while religion usually wrong.

Republican or Democrat, White House, House or Senate, in any of the possible combinations, will face the same basic math. They will still love war. Any of them will have to answer to those who paid for the propaganda, and not the voters. And none of them give a shit about anything but staying in power and increasing their personal wealth.

In our hearts most of us know this regardless of who we plan to vote for. Everyone I know who will vote for Obama thinks of it as voting for the lesser of two evils. Everyone I know who will vote for Romney thinks the exact same thing.  Virtually all of us, Republican, Democrat, Independent, Off the Reservation, all of us are voting for what we think will be the lesser of two evils. Which means we are all voting for evil. That doesn't say much for the future of this society.

So tomorrow's election will be much, much ado about very damned little. At the moment the USA is on the wrong side of history. Not matter who wins the decline continues until the people of the USA shake off the self-hatred that as been bread into our politics by the scorched earth tactics of the disciples of Lee Atwater. (Look him up ...)

Glass half full ...

I have a friend who looks a the world very much like I do, but I find him hard to take for more than a few minutes at a time. The reason is simple, he is relentlessly, endlessly, negative about everything. Talking with him just makes a person tired. Indeed, I often find myself taking an optimistic view of something just to fend him off a little.

I think it is a tactic I should use on myself. It is far too easy to be pessimistic.

Human kind really is backing itself into a corner and it appears that evil is on the rise everywhere. Religious fundamentalism has hijacked the hopes of more than one country in the last decade, and is going a long way to derailing the US of A. War is the norm, civil rights are in retreat, and most of us work harder and harder every year and have less and less to show for it. It seems that even Mother Earth is a bit tired of us as the environment shifts dramatically, leading to ever more calamitous events reeking havoc on our modern societies. I am tired of the relentlessly bad news even as I know there is more in store.

Human trends work on scales that are usually much longer than individual life spans, making it hard to find optimism if one's personal life happens to get tangled up with a bad stretch of history. Imagine those who lived in Europe starting early in the 1900s ... WWI, WWII, the cold war ... 1919 to 1989 ... 70 years of trying to find good news. Imagine living in China pretty much during any time since 1911 on to today ... war lords, civil war, the war with Japan, the Cultural revolution ... ugly. But all are temporary upheavals even in the short span of human civilizations (as compared to that of the cosmos). Things have been much better in the US of A since 1900 or so, as long as one was white, male, and Protestant.

Happily the Protestant thing is a dying requirement. Though the Republican Presidential ticket is, in my eyes, one scheming Capitalist hypocrite and his faithful, bat-shit crazy T-party side kick, it is interesting that neither one is Protestant. In fact, in what I can take as a glass-half-full kind of thing, the only Protestant in the mix is Obama, and American Protestantism has renounced him with a level of hatred that is near astonishing, backing the Mormon and the Catholic instead. Should the Mitt and Paul show move into the White House, the Protestants are not likely to find much of a sympathetic ear to demands particular to their religion. (It is hard to imagine the Mormon and the Catholic being very sympathetic to young earth creationism, and hopefully, to the idea that all science is evil.) Should Obama stay for another 4 years, the Protestants will be even further removed from political power. This is all glass-is-half-full stuff.

The "male" thing might be fading a bit as well. Though women are not doing themselves any favor by sticking to religion or the Republican party, not all women are voting against their own best interests. It looks likely that the most outspoken of the anti-women jack asses running for the Senate are going to get their heads handed to them come election day. And it may well be that a Mitt and Co. loss could be attributed to the women they have managed to alienate. In any case women as a whole are not likely to allow themselves to be dragged back into the 1930s. They are too well educated and too entrenched in positions of power. The conservative / religious re-oppression of women is going to be a short lived phenomena. (Something the Muslims will be facing before another generation goes by as well.)

And then there is the "white" thing. Sad fact for the white racists and elitists among us ... we will not be the majority much longer. The Republican party's efforts to disenfranchise non-white voters is all the proof anyone needs that they see the future coming, and realize it doesn't belong to them. Plus, well, the fact of the matter is the guy in the White House for the last 4 years has not been White. Even if he loses next week the color barrier in the West Wing is broken.

So, glass-half-full? All the longer term trends seem to favor a better future. Climate change and global warming is going to kick our ass, no question. But that may well lead to a whole new view of the need for conservation and alternative energy. It will be a change in perspective that falls directly on the middle class of the first world, who have the resources to change lifestyles, live in smaller and more energy efficient homes, support public transportation, drive more fuel efficient (and eventually electric) vehicles. (When a major US business magazine has on it's cover, "It's Global Warming, Stupid; one can hear the sound of heads being pulled out of asses all over the nation.)

The continuing collapse of robber baron capitalism coupled with unrestrained consumerism is also promising. People will find a way to eat, to put a roof over their head, to stay warm. Whole new economic ideas will be invented, tried, and modified. China and South America are on the leading edge of blending old ideas into new economic systems. In Europe and the USA underground and off-the-grid economics are popping up and taking hold as people, unable to remove their Capitalist Masters at the voting booth, simply find ways to work around them. Unpresidented global communications and social networks moving at the speed of light will open up avenues never before imagined in human history. Societies hoplessly wedded to the whims of the Capitalists and cosumerism are already on the wrong side of history and will simply not endure much longer.

The world is struggling right now, but when you think about all the changes that are in the works, how could it be any other way? Old power structures will not give way easily, new ways of thinking always cause chaos at first. Things are looking grim, but they are also looking up.

I like this glass-half-full view.

Truth and joy

I used to think that truth and joy were close allies. Not two sides of the same coin, but close companions in a life well lived. But now I'm not so sure.

Some people may find truth and joy to be allies, but only those who find joy when they understand a truth. In such cases joy is dependant on truth, where understanding leads to a deep satisfaction, and that satisfaction, coupled with a sense of understanding one's place in the cosmos, leads to joy. But I have come to suspect that most, as in the vast majority, of my fellow travelers don't see it that way. For them truth and joy are two entirely separate, and sometimes mutually exclusive, commodities. When they conflict truth is always sacrificed for joy.

If the poles are to be respected most Americans be live in some form of creationism. While not all are young earth creationists, most think that a god created human beings, just as we are now, within the last ten thousand years or so. Even many who admit to evolution see it as just a tool used by god to create humanity as the center of interest in his cosmos. For them joy comes from being special in the eyes of an all powerful, all knowing, all loving being. They are chosen, destined for a blessed eternal life, for whom all things happen for the good, even if they can't see the good on this side of death. Any truth that contradicts this sense of being, this source of joy, is rejected. Any observation, any finding, any understanding that would tend to undermine their world view, and thus their source of joy, is simply dismissed. The need for joy is paramount; only truth that supports the claim for joy is acceptable.

Religion is not the only ideology guilty of subjecting truth to joy. In America the rich get rich mostly on the backs of the working class and the poor. This is nothing new. All through history the rich have gotten rich by claiming for themselves the wealth created by others. In America that particular form of greed is known as "trickle down" or "supply side" economics. But greed is pervasive in our society. From the cradle to the grave we are taught to be consumers, that money is the measure of success, and that to be rich is to be blessed. We all want to be rich. And we are taught that capitalism in general, and specifically supply side economics, gives us all an equal opportunity to be rich. Thus, if we are not rich it is 1) probably our own fault, and 2) possibly a reflection of our relationship with god.

None of this is the least bit true, but most of us find joy in the delusion that we can be fabulously rich one of these days. All we need is that one lucky break, that one good idea, that one best selling novel. And when we don't get to be fabulously rich we blame it on "the government" which takes too much of our money in taxes, or burdens society with too many regulations, or somehow or the other "gets in the way" of free enterprise. We find joy in the idea of riches. Any suggestion that the truth might be that not everyone can be rich, or that (for the most part) the rich are born to money, or even that being rich might not be a goal worthy of a thinking, caring, human being, is greeted with howls of protest. We find joy in the idea of greed. The truth that greed can and is destroying what was once a good and noble experiment in democracy, must be ignored.

Those who are rich must ignore the truth that most of them were born to money and power. In the USA today Mitt actually thinks he earned the name and access to power that allowed him to be rich and vie for the office of President. Those in the Bush empire suffered the same delusion. Those who flood the Democrats and Republicans with money actually think they have earned the right to dictate policies to the rest of the nation. After all, they have been blessed by god. Therefor what they see as good reflects what god sees as good. They find joy in money and power. Any hint that they are not actually anything special is a truth they must, and do, ignore.

Here is the rub, at least to me. Truth is an external thing. It exists regardless of what we feel. The cosmos is roughly 14 billion years old. Human kind was not created, we have evolved from a species of tribal ape, and all of our ideology gives evidence to that history. More, we are a natural expression in a universe that is, itself, continuously evolving. Of the three "Superpowers" likely in the modern age, the USA, the USSR, and China, two were (are) socialist economies. Capitalism is just another human attempt to organize a society. Gay people were born that way but, even if being gay is a choice, it doesn't matter. Gay people hurt no one, do not call down the wrath of a god, and experience love just like straight people. The earth is a globe, it revolves around the sun, it is a few billion years old itself, and its history is wrapped up in the history of the solar system, galaxy, and cosmos. These things are true regardless of what humanity believes.

Joy is an internal, and somewhat selfish, thing. It is mostly self centered, focused on the "me". If I find joy in a thing I will bend heaven, earth, physics, and history, to justify the thing that brings me joy. Unless I am very, very careful, I will not allow the truth to intrude on my joy. If I find joy in a god belief no amount of truth will dissuade me that the god does not exist as I believe he does. So self centered is this god belief that other people's god beliefs are dismissed.

Worse, if I find joy in a god belief, and that belief leads me to conclude that gay people are evil or that strapping a bomb to my chest and murdering as many infidels as I can will lead me to paradise, no amount of truth, nothing approaching rational thought that conflicts with those ideas, will be tolerated. My need for joy has inoculated me from the truth. I am, so far as truth is concerned, unreachable. Separated from external truths, I have become an agent of evil in the world.

If I find joy in riches nothing will convince me that my joy is based in greed and likely bad for most everyone else but me. Nothing that a god might say will convince me that riches are evil either. In fact I will find a god that condones my greed.

This all sounds like joy is a bad thing in the world, blinding us all to the truth. Sadly, I think that might be the case, at least for a lot of us at this point in history. For a long time there was so little that we understood that truth and joy were not often in conflict. But now? What other explanation is there for the rise of religious and political fundamentalism? Something is driving us to ignore truth. What could it be besides our clinging to joy?

And...if we cling to joy at the expense of truth, eventually we will extinguish hope as well.
This is not to say that we dismiss truth out of hand. On some inner level we all know that making good decisions is a key to survival. It is hard to make good decisions based on bad information. Indeed, all of us are descendants of those who made at least enough right decisions to live long enough to breed. We don't dismiss truth out of hand. But we often hold our short term, selfish joy dearer than truth.

Anytime we reject truth in order to protect a source of joy, we are engaging in a really base act of total selfishness. We are claiming that what we want is more important than how the universe really is. No wonder it is so destructive, for ourselves, and for those around us. Somehow we have to stop looking in at our own joy as the most important thing, and find joy in looking out to find truth. Until (and unless) we do, it is hard to see how the near term future will unfold without a lot of death, greif, sorrow and war.

Looking out ...

is better than looking in.

I haven't had a mystical experience in a while. That may sound like an odd thing for an atheist to say, but it is true. Mystical experiences are a pretty regular occurrence for me, but I haven't had one in a while. Some of my most profound experiences have happened while during night watches on a small sailboat far out in the ocean. Others while sitting in the cockpit coasting through the upper flight levels, again at night, everything quiet and going as planned. I have been stopped deep in the AZ desert, called to the side of the road to sit quietly and simply be part of a landscape that showed no evidence of humanity other than the road, myself, and the bike, as far as the horizon in every direction.

Usually these moments come without herald, settle my heart and mind in a way that lingers for days, and pass without comment. Such moments never come when I look in, musing about myself or examining my "inner life." Rather I have to be looking out as far as my eyes can see and then add to that the knowledge that I am seeing only a fraction of what is. Only a sliver - a few narrow bands - of the electromagnetic spectrum that flows from cosmic background radiation to Gama radiation and beyond, pass through my eyes. I also see only a fraction of the "stuff", dark matter and energy making up most of what is. Then there is the reality of an infinite expanse of all this unseen stuff beyond the range of sight.

In those moments everything I can experience in sight and thought is still just an infinitesimally small bit of all that there is, and I am an infinitesimally small bit of that bit. Yet the thought doesn't make the experience. In fact the knowledge of being so minute a bit is something I try to keep close by, a foundational understanding if you will, to all of my musings. It is important not to think too much of ourselves, and keeping the knowledge of our physical place in the cosmos close at hand is a good way to keep our egos in check.

Though an integral part, it isn't the knowledge that makes the experience. When it happens it is a fleeting understanding that all that I know and can't know is a part of me, and I a part of it. "Understanding" isn't really the right word. Usually "understanding" is something we think we can hold. But this "understanding" isn't like that. It has an emotional component that comes as it will and departs in its own time. Though it is undoubtedly part of my brain's function, it is nothing I have any control over and it has no "I" of its own. It brushes by completely unaware of me and, so far as I can tell, with no thought of itself. In fact, since this occasionally happens when someone is sitting right next to me and they are completely untouched, it is clearly some interaction within the confines of my own self.

It is a mystery, which is no surprise. Most of what is is mystery to us.

It is easy to dismiss such moments as random combinations of energies flowing through the circuits of my brain, maybe sparked by my physical location and some unknown emotional state. The philosophies of materialism and reductionism certainly claim so. But I am neither a materialist or a reductionist, and I admit that part of the reason I dismiss such claims are these experienced moments of mystery.

Yet I am an atheist. I have never found a "god" in those moments either.  I know mysticism is part of nearly every religion, but my perception is that such experiences flow from our humanity and consciousness, not a god or religion. 

But, like I said, I have not had such a moment in a while. And I think its because I am spending too much time looking in again. How do I deal with living in a society as twisted as ours? Where do I fit in a species that is tribal, backward, violent, clings to myths and fairy tales, abandons reason and rejects learning?

Four hundred and forty eight years after Galileo was born, 153 years after Darwin published "On the Origin of Species", 126 years after the first doctorate was awarded in psychology, 87 years after Hubble discovered that the Milky Way is just one of billions of galaxies ... sitting on my Son in Law's book table is a tome on Catholic Rituals for Exorcism. And because I know most people at least give credence to the idea of evil spirits, somehow that just takes all the wind out of the idea that humanity has a future.

A sham election unfolds in the United States. Candidates already vetted by power are offered as alternatives, yet each varies by only a fraction from the American party line. Thrown in the mix are a few truly bat-shit crazy religious fanatics; some who will win, others who will lose. But all will offer a distraction that keeps us from taking a clear-eyed look at our sorry State of affairs. Living in a failing society makes it easy to look in, look close, look at how to best ride out the storm.

But all of these things do narrow one's vision. Ridiculous religious fantasies abound, but are they really gaining? Or are we seeing the tantrums of a failing, false view of the cosmos? Worshiping the war god of Abraham the Jews and Muslims continue to spasm their way into backwardness and irrelevancy. Worshiping supply side economics and the same war god of Abraham, the USA continues to shuffle out of the way of China. European / American colonialism has run up against a full earth. There is no one left to colonize, no land left to appropriate. This same full, and fully connected, earth, has stripped Christianity of the mantel of the "one true religion." Oh, some of the Christians still claim it, but no one else believes it, or is listening much to them anymore. With a few scattered exceptions much of the first world is moving toward rejecting America's social engineering, crony capitalism, and war mongering. Those who are not are following us into the void.

It may well be that barley enough Americans believe their own propaganda enough to put the T-Party / Republicans in power. But that will only hasten the change. And it might be kind of fun to watch. The history of human kind and always been full of stumbling and the rise and fall of bad ideas. Experiments in social structures continuously evolve just as does everything in the cosmos.

There is no telling when, or if, the mystery will brush by again.  I hope it does ... hope and joy experienced as emotion will make any day brighter.  But they can also be conclusions born of observation.

Looking out is better than looking in.

Living with the Bad Guys

During the earlier part of my life it seemed to me America was home to a lot of good guys. There was the civil rights movement, the women's movement, the ant-war movement, and the beginning of the environmental movement. The first big oil shock had come and with it a growing understanding that the oil supply was not infinate, that conservation and devising alternate means of providing energy were simply challenges that would have to meet. The need to eliminate poverty and provide a quality education for every child was a given in the national debate. There were conflicting ideas on how to go about reaching those goals, but no one suggested that the poor deserved to be poor and their children deserved to be uneducated. Very often much of religion, including my particular tribe of Christianity, was on the right side of these efforts.

Those were tumultuous days and the bad guys were putting up a fight. The governments of Johnson, Nixon and Tip O'Neil were as least as corrupt as any modern counterpart. The war in Vietnam went on endlessly, without hope of "winning" and with no exit stragity while uncounted millions were sacrificed to the bottom line of the war profiteers and the military. Southern politicians went to war against civil rights and in many places cities burned and tanks took to the streets. Leaders of religion waviered on civil rights for women and, knowing who buttered their bread, quietly began to abandon the poor so their patrons could get tax breaks. American Christians flocked to the prosperity doctrin teachers and kneel before their alters of money to this very day. Industry leaders started to suggest that protecting the environment could only be done at the cost of middle class jobs and moved jobs oversees to prove it.

In fact, the bad guys put up such a good fight that they eventually won and I now live in a country in full retreat on every front of human progress.

And I'm not sure what to do with that. I can't even vote in good conscious, seeing it as giving some legitimacy to a comply debased system, like voting in Cuba or the old Soviet Union. I can pick between deeply evil people, just evil people, or occasionaly well intentioned but utterly incompetent people. (People who, by the way, have no chance of making a difference.) I take a lot of heat for my opinion of voting but tell me, who do I vote for? Who is the anit-war candidate? Who is the anti-Wall Street or pro-union candidate? Where on the ballot will I find a politician who is openly pro-science, who will dare critisize the excesses of religion, who will keep the creationists out of the schools, and who would consider even a 10% budget cut for the D.O.D., let alone the 40 or 50% cut that we should be discussing? Vote? Sure, except there is not a single progressive anywhere to be found.

I could take to the streets and join the protesters, but there are no protesters any more. Occupy Wall Street has faded for lack of interest and focus, and it turns out the T-party types are the bad guys.

Unless I want to give up eating I can't really boycott big corporations. We do have a local hardware store around the corner that I use when I can. But often Wall-Mart or Home Depot is the only place to find I need. I ride a motorcycle, but it is a big one that only gets about 40 mpg. And to be truthful, I don't ride to be "green" but because I like to go fast and be out in the wind. (I'm also not brave enough to take a 100 mpg scooter out on the highways around here.) Corporations who abuse the planet, their suppliers, their workers and their customers in order to boost their stock price to its maximum are about the only game left.  The entire US of A is now like one big company mining town from the late 1800s, only it is Multi-national corporations who own the place.

It is starting to feel like being a rational, moral, compassionate human being is to be in the minority on our little planet.