US Conservatives Split on Democracy in Egypt

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-02-01/glenn-becks-egypt-freakout-how-the-uprising-splits-us-conservatives/

Very interesting.  I don’t think Michelle Goldberg is correct on Israel–that they are opposed to democracy in the Middle East because Israel has found it easier to deal with dictators and because stability trumps freedom.  Yes, there are many Israelis who take this position.  But in general Israelis are divided between those who believe that democracy will ultimately promote peace in region and those who fear that calls for democracy will lead to Islamic dictatorships and instability.  Of course, Israelis have good reason to more anxious than us.  They have violence and the threat of annihilation at their doorstep.  Nevertheless, Israelis have a diversity of views on this, especially because of their own democratic traditions.

As for myself, I am deeply Jewish and Zionist.  As a Jew and a Zionist, I support the aspirations of all people for freedom, no matter where they are.  How can I not do so?  That includes Egyptians, Iranians, and anyone else. I strongly believe that free, open, democratic societies are not only a human right and a step forward in human consciousness,  but are a gateway to peace and reconciliation in the long run.  No doubt there will be short- and mid-term challenges, but democratic societies are much less likely to engage in war with their neighbors, and that includes the Middle East.

By the way, I know that there are Egyptians who are worried about the image of their society in the world.  I realize you are concerned about chaos, violence, and instability and the negative image that the world will see.  My comments may not carry much weight with you, but as a Jew and a supporter of Israel, I am deeply moved by these demonstrations.  I see nobility, honor, courage, and dignity.  The chaos is not the fault of Egyptians, but the fault of a government that has lost its legitimacy.  I have always been impressed by Egypt, its culture, and its magnificent, rich, long history.  The events of recent days have only served to increase my admiration and respect.  I keep the Egyptian people in my prayers every day.

Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt

I don’t agree with Religion Link’s description (http://www.religionlink.com/topic_110131.php) of the Muslim Brotherhood as “not simply a religion, but a way of life.”  Indeed, the Muslim Brotherhood believes that.  Yet, even though the Muslim Brotherhood is not monolithic, it also believes that Egypt should be an Islamic state, as should other Muslim countries in the Middle East.  It does not historically affirm freedom, openness, an entrepreneurial economy, or secular democratic values such as a free press, freedom of speech, and freedom of assembly.  Unlike Iranian Shi’ites, the Mujhadeen, and Jihadists generally, the Muslim Brotherhood is not wedded to intimidation and violence as the primary means of achieving its goals, but it is willing to use violence when it sees fit.  For example, members assassinated King Abdullah I in Jordan in 1951, tried to assassinate Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1954, were implicated in the assassination of Anwar El Sadat in 1981, assassinated a number of moderate Arab leaders in the 1950’s, and perpetrated other terrorist attacks including the Hebron massacre of Jews in1929.  Since the 1970’s and 80’s, it has renounced violence and has spoken of Islamic democracy, but given its history and its hostility to generally accepted democratic values, it would not be unreasonable to view its democratic advocacy very skeptically.  Further, Hamas (which rules Gaza) is part of the Muslim Brotherhood, and it has consistently used violence against both Israelis and Palestinians as an important tactical component.  In Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood views Israel as the enemy of Arabs and Muslims.  The Muslim Brotherhood has also had a long-standing, well-documented admiration of, and support, for Nazi ideology.  In general, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt now uses moderate tactics, but its goal is still an Islamic state.  And, remember, calling for Islam to be a part of government is not the same as calling for an Islamic State, with Sharia law and all its accoutrements.  There’s certainly the possibility that the Muslim Brotherhood has changed and will continue to evolve into a democratic movement, but there will have to be more evidence to trust that.

Here is a link from Juan Cole, suggesting that a takeover by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt is unlikely.  Many Egyptians who are religious and who oppose the current government also have democratic, secular values.  And there is a long tradition of secular politics in Egypt.  There is also widespread support for Islamic values, but not necessarily for an Islamic state:  http://www.juancole.com/2011/02/why-egypt-2011-is-not-iran-1979.html .  I hope Cole is right.

That said, in the final analysis, prosperity and peace in the Middle East depend upon Muslim/Arab societies developing democratic traditions and cultures of openness,  That will be good for everyone, including the US and Israel, in the long run.  Of course, the “long run” can take a long time, and there can be a lot of turbulence and suffering in-between.

Nick Popaditch, Violent Rhetoric, and Antisemitism

Antisemitism is on the rise.  That’s not a surprise in hard times, but it gets a little disturbing when an election night loser (Republican Nick Popaditch, known as Gunny Pop on Facebook) takes a mob of his supporters and corners the winner (Democrat Bob Filner) at his victory celebration on November 2 (2010).  Using physical intimidation and lots of nasty language, including shouting “Jew” at Filner and his wife, the bullies get their chance to intimidate someone who is “liberal” (whatever that means) and Jewish.  Wonder if that bears any resemblance to the . . . 1930’s.

In any case, this is just one of many examples of violent rhetoric run amok.  We all need to take a hard line against over-the-top language and posturing, whether on the left or the right.  People have a right to speak wherever and however they want, but we have a right to ask them to stop when they step over the line, not to listen to them when they continue, and to prevent physical intimidation.  Otherwise, we enter a gateway into tyranny and authoritarianism.

http://lastblogonearth.com/2010/11/03/nick-popaditchs-last-stand/ (particularly the second video at the bottom of the page)

http://eastcountymagazine.org/node/4690

http://gawker.com/5733427/angry-man-screaming-jew-at-congressman-is-not-a-great-face-for-tea-party?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+gawker/full+(Gawker)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOeRGjkC42g&feature=player_embedded

Life Roles

Playing a role in life is a choice, but we can always set it aside and play another.

Change in Egypt and US Foreign Policy

This article is superb: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/opinion/31douthat.html

There is a kind of imperialistic arrogance that exists in the U.S. on both the left and the right.  Each side criticizes the other for allegedly allowing some international event or crisis to take place: “If only the U.S. had done things our way, not yours, then all would have turned out well.”

Yet the reality is different.  We have much less control of events than we think.  The U.S. cannot determine what others do, especially when social media and internet technology allow open information flow.  We need to take a more humble approach to foreign policy and stop assuming that we are omnipotent.

Here is the link to my original comment at the New York Times:  http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/opinion/31douthat.html?sort=oldest

Foreclosing on On-Duty Soldiers

This is just another example of how many large corporate institutions have lost their moral compass.   Over the past several years, large banks frequently subject soldiers called to duty to unlawful foreclosures.  This is precisely why some regulation is necessary if we want to preserve a healthy, functional free market.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/business/27foreclose.html?_r=2&hp=&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1296353099-/N1TWrh0XYHJWyudn8MalA

Walmart and Healthy Foods

I don’t buy food at Walmart, but Walmart’s recent decision to cut sodium and use whole grains will have a major impact on the broader US food market.  And that’s a good thing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/20/business/20walmart.html?_r=1&hp

Doing the Right Thing

This is a moving story, a pitcher who gave up 12 million dollars, because he wanted to do the right thing and keep his self-respect.  Inspiring.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/27/sports/baseball/27meche.html?hp

Theory and Practice: China Has an Economic Plan — The US Does Not

Robert Reich notes the fundamental difference between the economies of the US and China:  China has a plan, and we don’t.  This hands-off approach has characterized both Democratic and Republican presidential administrations.  In general, the US relies on faith in the free market place, while China assumes that the government must make careful plans to advance its interests.  Consequently, the Chinese invest heavily in green industries, even when there is no immediate profit and cost is high, because this technology is the future.  Whoever controls it will have an enormous advantage in global competition.  The US engages in talk, but not much action.

The US has an almost magical faith in the free market.  It’s almost as if the US believes that simply reciting an ideological creed will guarantee economic success.

The US still has one advantage:  the deep creativity and inventiveness that marks our culture.  Americans do not rely on the past and on tradition, but look for new and original ways of doing things.  This has always carried the US through before, and I hope it will continue to do so.  But can the US rely on this, while others make plans?

The whole issue relates to an even more fundamental matter.  Will human beings rely on ideology or on practical, integrative approaches to solve problems?  Ideology is  pure theory, ideas separate from concrete reality.  Communism, Marxism, radical free market capitalism, absolute pacifism, religious fundamentalism, and postmodern theory all fall into that category.  They are ideologies rather than evidence-based methods. Significantly ideologues exist on both the left and right. among both the secular and the religious.  Even when something contradicts the theory, followers of the theory simply ignore the data, because fundamentally day-to-day life is messy, confusing, ambiguous, contradictory, and therefore too difficult to interpret.

While the US has recently been primarily concerned with ideas about what should work, the Chinese and others are approaching matters pragmatically, testing for what actually does work.  The US would do well to return to its historical roots in pragmatism and develop more of a balance between theory and practice.

http://robertreich.org/post/2830348699

The Sacrifice of Isaac (Jewish humor from Woody Allen)

This is classic, all over the web.  Take a look at William Novak and Moshe Waldoks (ed. and annotated by), The Big Book of Jewish Humor (New York:  Harper & Row, 1981), p. 220

WOODY ALLEN ON ABRAHAM AND ISAAC

The Sacrifice of Isaac

And Abraham awoke in the middle of the night and said to his only son, Isaac, “I have had a dream where the voice of the Lord sayeth that I must sacrifice my only son, so put your pants on.”

And Isaac trembled and said, “So what did you say? I mean when He brought this whole thing up?”

“What am I going to say?” Abraham said. “I’m standing there at two A.M. I’m in my underwear with the Creator of the Universe. Should I argue?”

“Well, did he say why he wants me sacrificed?” Isaac asked his father.

But Abraham said, “The faithful do not question. Now let’s go because I have a heavy day tomorrow.”

And Sarah who heard Abraham’s plan grew vexed and said, “How doth thou know it was the Lord and not, say, thy friend who loveth practical jokes, for the Lord hateth practical jokes and whosoever shall pull one shall be delivered into the hands of his enemies whether they pay the delivery charge or not.”

And Abraham answered, “Because I know it was the Lord. It was a deep, resonant voice, well modulated, and nobody in the desert can get a rumble in it like that.”

And Sarah said, “And thou art willing to carry out this senseless act?” But Abraham told her, “Frankly yes, for to question the Lord’s word is one of the worst things a person can do, particularly with the economy in the state it’s in.”

And so he took Isaac to a certain place and prepared to sacrifice him but at the last minute the Lord stayed Abraham’s hand and said, “How could thou doest such a thing?”

And Abraham said, “But thou said —”

“Never mind what I said,” the Lord spake. “Doth thou listen to every crazy idea that comes thy way?” And Abraham grew ashamed. “Er – not really … no.”

“I jokingly suggest thou sacrifice Isaac and thou immediately runs out to do it.”

And Abraham fell to his knees, “See, I never know when you’re kidding.”

And the Lord thundered, “No sense of humor. I can’t believe it.”

“But doth this not prove I love thee, that I was willing to donate mine only son on thy whim?”

And the Lord said, “It proves that some men will follow any order no matter how asinine as long as it comes from a resonant, well-modulated voice.”

And with that, the Lord bid Abraham get some rest and check with him tomorrow.

—————————————–

For more on the this story in the Bible:  see AqedahPart1a and AqedahPart2a.

The Pope and the Jews (Jewish humor)

This is a well-known Jewish Joke and can be found on many sites on the web.  It;s a wonderful story that I use in multifaith gatherings to illustrate the importance of understanding how two different people can size up a situation completely differently.  In other words, we may be looking at the same objects, but we don’t necessarily see them in the same way.

————————————————-

THE POPE AND THE JEWS

Several centuries ago, the Pope decided that all the Jews had to leave Rome. Naturally there was a big uproar from the Jewish community. So the Pope made a deal. He would have a religious debate with a member of the Jewish community. If the Jew won, the Jews could stay. If the Pope won, the Jews would leave. The Jews realized that they had no choice. They looked around for a champion who could defend their faith, but no one wanted to volunteer. It was too risky.

So they finally picked an old man named Moishe, who had spent his life sweeping up after people, to represent them. Being old and poor, he had the least to lose, so he agreed. He asked only for one condition to the debate. Not being used to speaking very much as he cleaned up around the settlement, he asked that neither side be allowed to talk. The pope agreed.

The day of the great debate came. Moishe and the Pope sat opposite each other for a full minute before the Pope raised his hand and showed three fingers. Moishe looked back at him and raised one finger. The Pope waved his fingers in a circle around his head. Moishe pointed to the ground where he sat. The Pope pulled out a wafer and a glass of wine. Moishe pulled out an apple.  The Pope stood up and said, “I give up. This man is too good. The Jews can stay.”

An hour later, the cardinals were all around the Pope asking him what happened. The Pope said: “First I held up three fingers to represent the Trinity.”  “He responded by holding up one finger to remind me that there was still one God common to both our religions. Then I waved my finger around me to show him, that God was all around us. He responded by pointing to the ground, showing that God was also right here with us.”  “I pulled out the wine and the wafer to show that Jesus absolves us from our sins. He pulled out an apple to remind me of original sin. He had an answer for everything. What could I do?”

Meanwhile, the Jewish community had crowded around Moishe, amazed that this old, almost feeble-minded man had done what all their scholars had insisted was impossible!  “What happened?” they asked. “Well,” said Moishe, “First he said to me that the Jews had three days to get out of here. I told him that not one of us was leaving. Then he told me that this whole city would be cleared of Jews. I let him know that we were staying right here.”  “And then?” asked a woman.
“I don’t know,” said Moishe. “He took out his lunch and I took out mine.”

Marooned (Jewish humor)

Marooned
A ship goes down in the ocean and Benny is the only survivor. He manages to swim to an uninhabited island.
Many year’s later, when a search party finally comes to rescue him, they see that he has constructed two synagogues on his tiny island.
“Why the two synagogues?” the leader asks Benny.
Benny points to the nearest one and replies, “That’s the one I go to every Saturday. The other one, I wouldn’t go inside if you paid me!”

————————————–

Via Lowell Nigoff.

This actually reminds me of a real story of the last two Jews in Kabul (Afghanistan) who did not get along at all with each other.  See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1364310/The-last-two-Jews-in-Kabul-fight-like-cat-and-dog.html.

Four Men in the Desert (Jewish humor)

Four Men in the Desert

Four men are wandering in the desert.  The German man says:  “I am tired and thirsty.  I must have a beer.”  The Frenchman says: “I am tired and thirsty.  I must have a glass of wine.”  The Mexican says: “I am tired and thirsty.  I must have a shot of tequila.”  The Jewish man says: “I am tired and thirsty.  I must have diabetes.”

—————————–

(From Hanna S. who found it on the web site of the Jewish Diabetes Association, via Lowell Nigoff)

The New Pope (Jewish humor)

The New Pope

Every time a new Pope is elected, there are many rituals in accordance with tradition but there is one tradition very few people know about.

Shortly after the new Pope is enthroned, the Chief Rabbi of Rome seeks an audience. He is shown into the Pope’s presence, whereupon he presents the Pope with a silver tray bearing a velvet cushion. On top of the cushion is an ancient, shriveled envelope. The Pope symbolically stretches out his arm in a gesture of rejection.

The Chief Rabbi then retires, taking the envelope with him and does not return until the next Pope is elected.

The new Pope was intrigued by this ritual, and that its origins were unknown to him. He instructed the best scholars of the Vatican to research it, but they came up with nothing. When the time came and the Chief Rabbi was shown into his presence, they faithfully enacted the ritual rejection but, as the Chief Rabbi turned to leave, His Holiness called him back.

“My brother,” the Pope whispers, “I must confess that we Catholics are ignorant of the meaning of this ritual enacted for many centuries between us and you, the representative of the Jewish people. I have to ask you, what is it all about?”

The Chief Rabbi shrugs and replies: “But we have no more idea than you do. The origin of the ceremony is lost in the traditions of ancient history.” The Pope said: “Let’s retire to my chambers and then open the envelope and discover the secret at last.” The Chief Rabbi agrees.

Fortified in their resolve they gingerly pried open the curling parchment envelope and with trembling fingers, the Chief Rabbi reached inside and extracted a folded sheet of similarly ancient paper.

As the Pope peered over his shoulder, he slowly opened the envelope. They both gasped with shock –

It is a bill for the Last Supper from “Moishe Cohen’s Catering and Deli”.

This joke comes from Tzvi M. from Israel and via Lowell Nigoff of Lexington, Kentucky

Translations of Genesis

These are examples of my new translations of two small portions of Genesis: © 2007 Laurence H. Kant:  http://mysticscholar.org/talkspubs/translations-of-genesis/

A New Day

“A New Day”:  © 2010, Dr. Laurence H. Kant, Essay for the Evolutionary Envisioning Circle of the Annual Great Mother Celebration, September, 2010:  © 2010, Laurence H. Kant, All rights reserved:  NewDay1

A Personal View of Kashrut (Kosher)

See Laurence H. Kant, “A Personal View of Kashrut,” Opinion, Shalom, September, 2010, p. 11: Kashrut2

Who Are We, You and I: Meditations on Death and Afterlife

See my talk:  Laurence H. Kant, “Who Are We, You and I: Meditations on Death and Afterlife”: Late Life Concerns: The Final Miles, Newman Center, Lexington, Kentucky, August, 2010: © 2010, Laurence H. Kant, All rights reserved:  Who Are We

Aqedah (Genesis 22): Binding of Abraham and Isaac

See Laurence H. Kant, “Some Restorative Thoughts on an Agonizing Text:  Abraham’s Binding of Isaac and the Horror on  Mt. Moriah  (Gen. 22)”:  “Part 1,”Lexington Theological Quarterly 38 (2003) 77-109; “Part 2, Lexington Theological Quarterly 38 (2003) 161- 94: AqedahPart1a andAqedahPart2a

See also Laurence H. Kant, “Arguing with God and Tiqqun Olam:  A Response to Andre LaCocque on the Aqedah,” Lexington Theological Quarterly 40 (2005) 203-19 (this was a response to an article by André Lacocque, “About the ‘Akedah’ in Genesis 22:  A Response to Laurence H. Kant,”Lexington Theological Quarterly 40 (2005) 191-201): AqedahResponseToLacocque

Antisemitism on Rise in West

See Laurence H. Kant, “Anti-Semitism on Rise in West,” op-ed, Lexington Herald Leader, January 8, 2007:  Antisemitism1

Jewish Inscriptions in Greek and Latin

See Laurence H. Kant, “Jewish Inscription in Greek and Latin,” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, 2.20.2:671-713.  Berlin:  Walter de Gruyter, 1987 at the following two links:  JewishInscriptions1; JewishInscriptions2

Fish and Fishing Symbolism in the Synoptic Gospels

See my talk:  Laurence H. Kant, “Fish and Fishing Symbolism in the Synoptic Gospels,” Synoptic Gospels Section, American Academy of Religion/Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, Chicago, November, 1994: © 1994, Laurence H. Kant, All rights reserved:  FishNTTalk1

Ancient Synagogues in Jewish Inscriptions

See my talk:  Laurence H. Kant, “Early Jewish Synagogues in Epigraphic Evidence,” Archaeology of the New Testament World Group, American Academy of Religion/Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, San Francisco, November, 1992: © 1992, Laurence H. Kant, All rights reserved:  SynagogueTalk1

DaVinci Code and Passion of the Christ: Two Peas in a Pod

See Dianne M. Bazell and Laurence H. Kant, “First-Century Christians in the Twenty-First Century:  Does Evidence Matter?”,  in Restoring the First-century Church in the Twenty-first Century: Essays on the Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement in Honor of Don Haymes, pp. 355-66.  Edited by Hans Rollman and Warren Lewis.  Eugene, OR:  Wipf and Stock, 2005:  Haymes

Avercius (aka Abercius)

Final Draft before publication of Laurence H. Kant “The Earliest Christian Inscription:  Bishop Avercius’ Last Words Document the Emergence of the Church,” in Bible Review 17.1, February, 2001, pp. 10-19, 47:  AverciusBAS1

3b) Here is my most up-to-date edition of the text:  AverciusText

Fish Symbolism

Here is my dissertation:  Laurence H. Kant, “The Interpretation of Religious Symbols in the Graeco-Roman World:  A Case Study of   Early  Christian Fish Symbolism” (3 vols):  Yale University, 1993.  Please note that the pagination in the PDF files, though close, is not exactly the same as in my original dissertation (due to formatting issues).

I originally intended this as part of a comparative study of ancient symbols, including the menorah for Jews.   Given the length of the project, this was not practical.  However, I regard my dissertation as comparative project whose goal is to understand the nature of religious symbolism.

There are many things that I would now change, including writing style.  Of note is the Avercius (Abercius) inscription text, which has several errors; for a correct edition, see above.  I also wish that I had  included a section on the use of fish and fishing symbolism in the gospels.  If interested, take a look at the text of a talk I gave on this topic in “Essays and Talks” in “Larry Kant.”

I have also somewhat changed my views of Freud and Jung.  I always appreciated them, but my dissertation is more critical of them than I would be now.

Diss1; Diss2; Diss3; Diss4; Diss5; Diss6

The One and the Many

We cannot get to the One except through the Many.

My Film Ratings

For anyone who wants to see my film rates, take a look at the following link:  http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=7737781 I think that you will have to join IMDB (Internet Movie Data Base), but this is a wonderful website, with full details on almost any film ever made anywhere.

Mindfulness Training in the US Military

Because of the massive information overload that affects soldiers in the US military due to a heavy emphasis on sophisticated technology and multi-tasking, there is greater need than ever for awareness and grounding.  This article shows the unstated influence of Buddhist meditation, with its ubiquitous focus on mindfulness–an intriguing development.  (via Dianne Bazell)

http://nyti.ms/eEa6dV

Israel, Iran, and the Stuxnet Worm

This is certainly better than a military attack or a war.  Of course, the same technology can be used for more nefarious purposes, and there’s the rub.  Still I prefer it done this way.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/world/middleeast/16stuxnet.html?_r=2

Then again, here’s another piece arguing that that the US and/or Israel did not design this worm and that its effect is much more minimal than what has been reported:

http://blogs.forbes.com/jeffreycarr/2011/01/17/the-new-york-times-fails-to-deliver-stuxnets-creators/

The BP Oil Spill and Its Large Impact on the Gulf

Despite some assessments of the BP oil spill and the appearance of the Gulf waters, damage to coral, plankton, small creatures like worms, and soil is massive.  The foundation of the deep ocean life chain and ecosystem is in trouble.

http://www.thenation.com/article/157723/search-bps-oil?page=full

Tucson: Others as Alien

An astute observation from Robert Wright:  Whether we’re on the left or the right, when we isolate ourselves from those who disagree with us and put them into the category of “alien,” we dehumanize others and make violent acts easier to commit.  Blessings, Larry

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/before-hatred-comes-fear/

Tucson: Real Violence Rather than Civility is the Issue

This is an excellent piece, emphasizing the existence of real violence over the past two years.  Frank Rich argues that you don’t have to look to rhetoric, but to actual acts.  Though violent rhetoric and threats of violence are likely to encourage and foment actual violence, Rich has a point when he argues that we should pay particular attention to violent incidents.  Even when they cause minimal damage, they are precursors to larger scale bloodshed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/opinion/16rich.html

On rhetoric, see my piece:  http://mysticscholar.org/2011/01/10/violent-rhetoric-and-tucson-again/

Lunch in Erice

There are those moments–moments when you enter a gateway, and you feel the presence of God.  I remember Erice in Sicily:  eating a meal at a local restaurant, lingering, savoring the garlic, the olive oil and the pasta–and most of all the wine–cold, white, shimmering, crisp–Ambrosia, the best wine I ever tasted, the same for Dianne and for our friend Tony. Was it the wine, the town, the restaurant, or the moment with my wife and our friend? I don’t know, but it felt like heaven:  like a dream in which my senses put me deep underwater, gliding effortlessly, with no particular goal, just living fully.

Judges Berate Foreclosure Lawyers

Many judges are particularly critical of foreclosure lawyers who use sloppy and improper documentations on behalf of lenders:  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/11/business/11lawyers.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

Violent Rhetoric and Tucson Again

Neal Boortz says that people have a right to be angry and use whatever imagery they wish as long as they do not resort to violence. Of course, there is no legal question here. Free speech is guaranteed by the first amendment to the US Constitution. But is it wise to use such imagery? I’m angry about many things in our culture and politics, but I would try not to use imagery that others can misinterpret or take literally. When we talk about targeting a political opponent with gun imagery, or taking second amendment remedies if we lose at the ballot box, or publicly describing our opponents as evil, unamerican, or alien, or musing or joking about assassinating politicians we don’t like, we have crossed the moral line.

Further, metaphors and symbols are not simply colorful ways of speaking, but the core elements of communication and expression which human beings use to articulate ideas and give voice to feeling. They express our most deeply held worldviews and values. When we use them, we are tapping into powerful currents of visceral emotion. By using war and combat imagery, we are not merely offering persuasive rhetoric, but we are appealing at a visceral level to a deep need for aggression that is latent in all us and part of the biological memory of our species. It is not surprising or unexpected that there are those who would take the metaphor literally, because the distance from violent language to violent action is not all that great.

The vast majority of us would not do so, but there are those who are disturbed or unbalanced who could well do so.  Now no one has responsibility for this assassination attempt and mass murder except for Jared Lee Loughner.  But what we say and do influences others, both directly and indirectly.  Whatever Loughner’s particular motivations, it is unlikely that he would have acted in this way without living in a culture of violence, including violent language and symbolism.

Whether or not Loughner listened to particular radio shows, belonged to specific groups, or was conservative or liberal is not the most important factor here. What matters is that the language we use sets a tone that affects the behavior of others, especially the mentally ill and disturbed. Those of us who speak and write in public venues have a great responsibility because others are watching us and following us. Gabby Giffords understood the violent context in which she worked and many (including her) have rightly noted that “words have consequences.” Indeed they do, because they are not “merely” words, but images and symbols that connect to primal, archetypal emotions.

It is not a question of assigning blame to the right or left or to any group, but rather of understanding the context in which our politics take place. There is a sense that it is legitimate to dehumanize others by using violent metaphors about them. Those on all sides of the political spectrum have done this. We don’t need to aggravate the hostile climate further by focusing on individuals who have made poor use of language and imagery, but we simply must ask them to stop doing it.

Let’s find other words and symbolism to express our anger and frustration.

Violent Rhetoric and Tucson

As we see today in Tucson with the attempted assassination of a congresswoman (Gabrielle Giffords), plus the shootings and murders of many bystanders, violent imagery and language can set the context for real-life horror. Whatever your political point of view (center, right, left, independent), let us please pledge ourselves to civility, humanity, and mutual respect.

Pima County (Arizona, Tucson) Sheriff, Clarence Dupnik, says it powerfully:

“When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government, the anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on this country is getting to be outrageous, and unfortunately Arizona has become sort of the capital. We have become the mecca for prejudice and bigotry.”

“The vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business … This has not become the nice United States that most of us grew up in.”

Please keep the victims and families in thought and prayer.

“Why Exercise Makes You Less Anxious”

This article discusses the effect of exercise on brain chemistry (via Nelson French): http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/phys-ed-why-exercise-makes-you-less-anxious/?emc=eta1

Will Ocean Generators Affect Migration of Sea Creatures?

As we develop new green technologies, we will have to think about unforseen consequences:  http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/26/105798/will-generating-ocean-energy-affect.html

Genocide and Human Progress

I recall explaining to a group that the percentage of soldiers killed in war  is much lower than in the past, especially in hunter-gatherer societies.  The number of civilians killed was also much higher, and people viewed genocide as a normal (though dreaded) hazard of life.  In fact, we did not even have a word for “genocide” until the twentieth century. There is no record of any nation intervening to stop a genocide until the US intervened in Bosnia and Kosovo.

The fact that we talk about “genocide,” condemn it, and criticize lack of action about it is in fact a testament to the unfolding evolution of humanity.  This did not happen in past centuries, in pre-modern cultures, or in the Bible. That’s why cultural transformation is difficult.  People refuse to see what right in front of them:  a growing repulsion for the annihilation of groups of human beings. If we want to move forward, we need to talk about what’s good about us.  Otherwise, those listening shut down.

« Previous Entries Next Entries »