This is my personal blog, which is focused on creating peace. Come on in and kick off your shoes! I appreciate feedback and would love your thoughts and comments.
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Time for a Choice
Dear Mr. President
This is a letter I am sending to President Barack Obama.
Dear Mr. President,
I know I speak for not only myself, but for many other Oregonians, when I offer a deep, heartfelt apology for the way you were treated when you visited our state. As as native-born Oregonian, I'm embarrassed and ashamed by one of the most unpatriotic things I have ever witnessed.
Dear Mr. President,
I know I speak for not only myself, but for many other Oregonians, when I offer a deep, heartfelt apology for the way you were treated when you visited our state. As as native-born Oregonian, I'm embarrassed and ashamed by one of the most unpatriotic things I have ever witnessed.
And to the Republic
Yes, I'm going to talk about politics and religion. I'm very disturbed (and have a very hard time keeping my mouth shut) when I see people who describe themselves as Christians ranting about how everyone should be required to recite the pledge of allegiance.
First of all, reciting a pledge is not going to decrease terrorism, or make someone with terrorist leanings change his/her mind. Not reciting it is not going to turn anyone against America, or make them any less of a citizen. And forcing someone to recite something in the hopes they will espouse that belief is simply indoctrination. The idea to me of a crowd of children being taught, through recitation, blind obedience to their government does not comfort me in any way. It chills me to the bone. Most people don't give much thought to the fact that they are pledging allegiance to a particular government. They just think (because they've been told) that it's the "patriotic thing to do." Few people question it, but everyone should.
Either it's just words that don't mean anything, or a nostalgic tradition, in which case it's pointless, OR it's a serious commitment of lifelong allegiance. One's disingenuous and one's dangerous.
It amuses me when the "uneducated" call me "un-American" because I don't recite the pledge. Since "un" means "not," that literally translates to "not American," as in, "Anyone who disagrees with me is not American." Well, last time I checked, I am a legal citizen, born and raised here, and I won't make a fool of myself by acting like a sheep in the name of religion. I do, however, enjoy this seemingly un-American activity I like to call "thinking for myself."
I'm assuming, since Christ was from the Middle East, that He was "un-American" too, in the same way that I am "un-Chinese" or "un-Israeli," to the best of my knowledge. People who use the phrase "un-American" are probably trying to say "anti-American," which is a whole different matter. Their assumption is that anyone who does not engage in the truly obnoxious nationalism they espouse can't possibly care about America. These are generally very fearful people, who were taught things a certain way, and are scared to death to question it. Especially if they were taught it by their church. I'm hoping to dispel a few fears, maybe raise a few eyebrows, and state my case.
Merriam-Webster defines "Christianity" as "the religion that is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ." I can't possibly imagine Christ pledging allegiance to any government or any flag. Since Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ, it might be a nifty idea if people actually paid attention to what He had to say. Take it or leave it, call me un-American, I don't care.
Over and over, Christ blasts the rulemakers and writers of law, and flouts society's expectations. Not only do I believe that He would have completely disapproved of the pledge of allegiance, but as protective as He was of children, I imagine He would have been outraged that people would, in His name, subject children to reciting something that was generated as a government pledge. He exhorted his followers to not divide their loyalties, choosing God even over their own family members. I'm pretty sure He would have expected them to choose God over their own government.
I've read a little more of the Bible than many people assume. And the words of Christ show me a man who would be deeply disappointed, even outraged, at the dogma being thrown about as His will, in the name of mind control. Show me a Bible verse where Jesus exhorts us to pledge allegiance to any government or any flag. You won't find one.
Far too many people are not aware that the stipulation, "Under God," was not part of the original pledge. It was added in 1952, as a result of widespread fear-mongering. It was during this same time that "In God We Trust" was added to currency. It was during the Communist witch hunts. People inflicted great cruelty on one another and ruined lives and careers, over rumors and gossip. It was a shameful time. It hasn't seemed to make a big difference in human behavior to add this to our currency or pledge, has it. It hasn't resulted in a drop in crime, or an increase in human kindness. So what was the point? I don't think Jesus would approve of this mingling of church and state. He Himself says, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." (Matthew 22:21) How did our society become so deluded?
I feel so strongly about this because some people will do pretty much anything if they can be convinced that God is somehow behind it. And let's face it, some people don't take much convincing. I see the bigger picture, and it's not pretty. The whole "God and country" thing leaves me cold. That is not mutually inclusive, and it insinuates that our country has carte blanche to do anything it wants because it's already endorsed by God. Now THAT'S scary.
Many people have been misled that America is some sort of holy, benevolent giant. They seem to believe that pledging allegiance to our government makes them more Godly. I call it "obedient." As Voltaire said, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." I refuse to turn a blind eye to the atrocities that have been committed by our country, and so many others, all in the name of God. And I certainly will not pledge allegiance to any government or nation. I'm not ruled by, or addicted to fear, and won't be bullied by any Pharisees. I humbly submit that our highest common good cannot be accomplished through recited words, but through compassion, truth, and integrity.
First of all, reciting a pledge is not going to decrease terrorism, or make someone with terrorist leanings change his/her mind. Not reciting it is not going to turn anyone against America, or make them any less of a citizen. And forcing someone to recite something in the hopes they will espouse that belief is simply indoctrination. The idea to me of a crowd of children being taught, through recitation, blind obedience to their government does not comfort me in any way. It chills me to the bone. Most people don't give much thought to the fact that they are pledging allegiance to a particular government. They just think (because they've been told) that it's the "patriotic thing to do." Few people question it, but everyone should.
Either it's just words that don't mean anything, or a nostalgic tradition, in which case it's pointless, OR it's a serious commitment of lifelong allegiance. One's disingenuous and one's dangerous.
It amuses me when the "uneducated" call me "un-American" because I don't recite the pledge. Since "un" means "not," that literally translates to "not American," as in, "Anyone who disagrees with me is not American." Well, last time I checked, I am a legal citizen, born and raised here, and I won't make a fool of myself by acting like a sheep in the name of religion. I do, however, enjoy this seemingly un-American activity I like to call "thinking for myself."
I'm assuming, since Christ was from the Middle East, that He was "un-American" too, in the same way that I am "un-Chinese" or "un-Israeli," to the best of my knowledge. People who use the phrase "un-American" are probably trying to say "anti-American," which is a whole different matter. Their assumption is that anyone who does not engage in the truly obnoxious nationalism they espouse can't possibly care about America. These are generally very fearful people, who were taught things a certain way, and are scared to death to question it. Especially if they were taught it by their church. I'm hoping to dispel a few fears, maybe raise a few eyebrows, and state my case.
Merriam-Webster defines "Christianity" as "the religion that is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ." I can't possibly imagine Christ pledging allegiance to any government or any flag. Since Christianity is based on the teachings of Christ, it might be a nifty idea if people actually paid attention to what He had to say. Take it or leave it, call me un-American, I don't care.
Over and over, Christ blasts the rulemakers and writers of law, and flouts society's expectations. Not only do I believe that He would have completely disapproved of the pledge of allegiance, but as protective as He was of children, I imagine He would have been outraged that people would, in His name, subject children to reciting something that was generated as a government pledge. He exhorted his followers to not divide their loyalties, choosing God even over their own family members. I'm pretty sure He would have expected them to choose God over their own government.
I've read a little more of the Bible than many people assume. And the words of Christ show me a man who would be deeply disappointed, even outraged, at the dogma being thrown about as His will, in the name of mind control. Show me a Bible verse where Jesus exhorts us to pledge allegiance to any government or any flag. You won't find one.
Far too many people are not aware that the stipulation, "Under God," was not part of the original pledge. It was added in 1952, as a result of widespread fear-mongering. It was during this same time that "In God We Trust" was added to currency. It was during the Communist witch hunts. People inflicted great cruelty on one another and ruined lives and careers, over rumors and gossip. It was a shameful time. It hasn't seemed to make a big difference in human behavior to add this to our currency or pledge, has it. It hasn't resulted in a drop in crime, or an increase in human kindness. So what was the point? I don't think Jesus would approve of this mingling of church and state. He Himself says, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's." (Matthew 22:21) How did our society become so deluded?
I feel so strongly about this because some people will do pretty much anything if they can be convinced that God is somehow behind it. And let's face it, some people don't take much convincing. I see the bigger picture, and it's not pretty. The whole "God and country" thing leaves me cold. That is not mutually inclusive, and it insinuates that our country has carte blanche to do anything it wants because it's already endorsed by God. Now THAT'S scary.
Many people have been misled that America is some sort of holy, benevolent giant. They seem to believe that pledging allegiance to our government makes them more Godly. I call it "obedient." As Voltaire said, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." I refuse to turn a blind eye to the atrocities that have been committed by our country, and so many others, all in the name of God. And I certainly will not pledge allegiance to any government or nation. I'm not ruled by, or addicted to fear, and won't be bullied by any Pharisees. I humbly submit that our highest common good cannot be accomplished through recited words, but through compassion, truth, and integrity.
Ukraine
I've noticed over the past few months that I have a larger group of readers in Ukraine than in the United States. I found this fascinating, especially considering the size of Ukraine compared to the U.S., and the fact that I'm pretty certain I don't know anyone there. I have a friend who wrote a blog, and had a large following in a particular country. When he asked some of his readers in that country why they read his blog, they stated that they were learning English that way.
I like to think that, regardless of my logic or ideas, my English skills, grammar, and punctuation are pretty good, so that would not bother me one bit. It's a weird feeling to think about how somewhere, complete strangers from the other side of the planet are reading my blog. I never get any feedback from them, but I'd really like feedback right now.
If you are in the Ukraine and reading this post, I would love to hear more about what is really happening in your country. To say the least, American media is deceptive. My understanding is that the President of Ukraine, who is now in hiding, basically broke promises to the Ukrainian people, and cast his alliances in opposition to the will of the people. Then when peaceful protesters marched, they were gunned down. This of course, is a very over-simplified explanation of the situation.
To be honest, I could probably learn more from news sources, but I don't necessarily trust them. I view this as an opportunity to hear directly from the people impacted the most: the people of Ukraine. I would love to hear your comments about how you perceive the situation (whether you choose to comment on this post, or email me directly at carverromy@gmail.com). With your permission, I'd like to share your comments without identifying you. I also share my blog on my Facebook page.
I am frustrated that so much of what is going on in the world is being spun by my country's corporate media, to the point that the truth is unrecognizable, and I'd like to hear from you. For that matter, wherever you are, I'd like to hear from you. I'd like to hear about your viewpoints from whatever corner of the world you inhabit.
You all know a little about me and my viewpoints if you read my blog. I'd like to hear about you. I am inspired by populations that stand up and take back power from the despots and the tyrants. Your name may or may not end up in the history books, but only you can know the struggles you have endured, and you are the REAL game changers. The real changes in power throughout history have not taken place because of political leaders. The changes have happened when everyday people got fed up, stood up, spoke out, and made a difference. This takes an unbelievable amount of courage for the masses to put their lives on the line, join hands, and gather together in the name of justice.
God bless the people of Ukraine. May you be granted justice and peace, which go hand in hand. May the will of the people be heard, may bloodshed end, and may you come out stronger as a people through your sacrifice and struggle.
If there is something you would like to say to the rest of us out there, I would love to hear from you. Thank you for taking the time to read my blog.
I like to think that, regardless of my logic or ideas, my English skills, grammar, and punctuation are pretty good, so that would not bother me one bit. It's a weird feeling to think about how somewhere, complete strangers from the other side of the planet are reading my blog. I never get any feedback from them, but I'd really like feedback right now.
If you are in the Ukraine and reading this post, I would love to hear more about what is really happening in your country. To say the least, American media is deceptive. My understanding is that the President of Ukraine, who is now in hiding, basically broke promises to the Ukrainian people, and cast his alliances in opposition to the will of the people. Then when peaceful protesters marched, they were gunned down. This of course, is a very over-simplified explanation of the situation.
To be honest, I could probably learn more from news sources, but I don't necessarily trust them. I view this as an opportunity to hear directly from the people impacted the most: the people of Ukraine. I would love to hear your comments about how you perceive the situation (whether you choose to comment on this post, or email me directly at carverromy@gmail.com). With your permission, I'd like to share your comments without identifying you. I also share my blog on my Facebook page.
I am frustrated that so much of what is going on in the world is being spun by my country's corporate media, to the point that the truth is unrecognizable, and I'd like to hear from you. For that matter, wherever you are, I'd like to hear from you. I'd like to hear about your viewpoints from whatever corner of the world you inhabit.
You all know a little about me and my viewpoints if you read my blog. I'd like to hear about you. I am inspired by populations that stand up and take back power from the despots and the tyrants. Your name may or may not end up in the history books, but only you can know the struggles you have endured, and you are the REAL game changers. The real changes in power throughout history have not taken place because of political leaders. The changes have happened when everyday people got fed up, stood up, spoke out, and made a difference. This takes an unbelievable amount of courage for the masses to put their lives on the line, join hands, and gather together in the name of justice.
God bless the people of Ukraine. May you be granted justice and peace, which go hand in hand. May the will of the people be heard, may bloodshed end, and may you come out stronger as a people through your sacrifice and struggle.
If there is something you would like to say to the rest of us out there, I would love to hear from you. Thank you for taking the time to read my blog.
I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing...
I never thought I'd see the day when I'd be defending not only Superbowl commercials, but Coca-Cola as well, but here I am. Coca-Cola's human rights abuses as a company are legend, and I don't drink soda anyway, but here I feel the need to defend them from the knuckle-draggers who are throwing a fit over this lovely commercial:
2014 Superbowl Coke Ad
I watched very little of the Superbowl yesterday, but did manage to catch this particular ad, and found it touching. Apparently, some people didn't feel the same way, because (gasp!) the entire song wasn't sung in English. It never occurred to me that people would stoop to this level of bigotry, until I looked at Facebook today, and saw this meme (and others like it):
Particularly ironic about their complaints is the fact that three of the languages being sung were being spoken in this land called America for centuries before the arrival of English-speakers. Of course this irony would be lost on people who seem only to be intent on something to complain about.
They missed the entire point of the ad (besides selling soda) while they were busy spouting their vitriol: that the American ideal is people coming from all over to fulfill their dreams, being welcomed with open arms, and working together to create a great society. Or at least that's the drivel I was taught in school. Of course, growing older, I learned the truth: there is no equal playing field. Native Alaskans, Hawaiians, Native Americans, and Mexicans were driven off their land, or forced into slavery to benefit white masters. Africans were shipped here for similar purposes, and worse. Immigrants have historically been given the hardest, dirtiest, least respected jobs, while being blamed for crime rates, treated with suspicion, and persecuted. It happened with the Chinese, the Irish, and now the Mexicans. And God forbid someone move here from the Middle East, because that entire group is automatically assigned the title of "terrorists," by the same group invading, occupying, droning, and bombing the rest of the world. But I digress.
This ad could serve as a reminder of our common humanity... make us all want to try a little harder... to sing the same song, to be a team? I would like to believe more than soda unites us, things like freedom and equality. Apparently this group of Einsteins does not agree.
So now we have a patriotic American song being sung by people in different languages, and the xenophobes just can't deal with it. Since they don't appear to be the sharpest tools in the shed, I am going to craft my message to them in simple English words that they can understand and here it is:
"Get over it. The world does not 'belong' to English-speaking white people. Nobody is hurting you by singing a song you like in another language. I know it may be hard for you to believe, but there are wonderful, intelligent, thoughtful, kind people everywhere who don't speak a word of English. You are not superior. They are not inferior. It's not 'un-American' to show real Americans from another culture singing in a tongue you don't understand, just because they don't look and sound like you. You are not 'more' American than they are. People like you are the reason that people all over the world think Americans are stupid. You don't speak for me or any other intelligent, thinking American. Lastly, grow up."
Thank You, Bill O'Reilly
Looking back over my life, I recall many cringe-worthy moments, mostly composed of ill-informed good intentions. We're all on that continuum, hopefully learning and growing, but never really "arrived." I expect plenty of cringe-worthy moments in my future as well, and I'm okay with that, as long as I learn from them, right? So I can forgive myself for once not knowing what I know now, and for once having been a Fox News viewer.
In 2003, many of us were watching the war on TV. "Shock and Awe" was the phrase trumpeted repeatedly on the news, as we flew our yellow ribbons and hoped for the quick "liberation" of Iraq. The news anchors described the bombings with more than a hint of glee. They seemed more focused on the technological advances that enabled us to watch the war than on the war itself. As I watched the dazzling display of pyrotechnics on my TV screen, I couldn't help but notice something missing in the reporting: the Iraqi people. The light show I was watching was surely connected to painful explosions, death, and destruction of property and lives, yet there was little to no mention of that. The interviews were largely with U.S. correspondents in deserted streets or motel rooms. Nobody seemed to ask opinions of the people who actually lived there, but those bombs and missiles were hitting somebody. I found I just couldn't watch for very long, and an ugly sad feeling was growing inside me, that some fundamental truth was being ignored. An awareness was growing of an unearned privilege: of not living in a war zone. I felt a little guilty.
I continued watching Bill O'Reilly's talk show, the "No-Spin Zone," which may well be the most inaccurate description of a show in the entire television industry. I began to notice that Bill seemed to get lots of kudos for being snarky and mean-spirited. I noticed that he liked to talk over, interrupt, and belittle his guests. And it always seemed to be an intelligent, well-spoken guest who was simply trying to complete a statement I was interested in hearing. I began wondering what he was so frantic to stifle. It became annoying to hear him refer to anyone he disagreed with as a "pinhead," which seemed more in keeping with the behavior of an unschooled adolescent than a professional commentator.
It was Bill's childish behavior that led me to question his credibility. The more fact-checking I did, the more disgusted I became with the obscene ways that Bill was spinning and distorting facts. Bill was lying his tail off, and his cohorts were no better. I noticed that on Fox News in general, anyone who asked questions that I would ask, such as how liberated the Iraqi people really felt, was ridiculed, yelled over, and roundly dismissed as unpatriotic.
In the course of seeking truth, I rediscovered my old love of reading. Having always gravitated toward non-fiction, it was a short trip to find articles exposing the truth about the war. Reading the words of returning U.S. combat veterans and ordinary Iraqi and Afghani people validated my earlier concerns. My nation had been acting like a bully and I had been unwittingly complicit. I had always believed strongly in justice and equality, but now I understood patriotism vs. nationalism. Thanks to Bill O'Reilly, I now also understood news vs. commentary. There were three t hings to do: quit watching the propaganda machine that is Fox News, keep reading and learning, and speak out against the war machine.
Had he been more likeable, perhaps a little easier to defend, I may have hung around Fox News a little longer, wanting to deny the painful truth and believe them. So... thank you, Bill O'Reilly, for being indefensible. Thank you for exemplifying what spin looks like. Thank you for being rude, arrogant, spiteful, and smug. Thank you for showing me what laziness in fact-checking looks like, because it made it easy to see the opposite in my sources later. Thank you especially for being so blatant about it. Your "news" broadcasts focus mostly on the ego of the broadcaster, rather than actual events, and your buffoonery makes it impossible to take you seriously. At least it's entertaining if one feels that clowns make great newscasters. Thank you most of all for re-awakening my love of reading and research, even if it eventually debunked your lies, and created a passionate peacemonger, which I'm sure was not your intention. In spite of yourself, you managed to serve the higher good for this truth-seeker, and for that I am grateful.
Sincerely, a peace activist who values truth, equality, and justice, or as you would call it, a pinhead.
In 2003, many of us were watching the war on TV. "Shock and Awe" was the phrase trumpeted repeatedly on the news, as we flew our yellow ribbons and hoped for the quick "liberation" of Iraq. The news anchors described the bombings with more than a hint of glee. They seemed more focused on the technological advances that enabled us to watch the war than on the war itself. As I watched the dazzling display of pyrotechnics on my TV screen, I couldn't help but notice something missing in the reporting: the Iraqi people. The light show I was watching was surely connected to painful explosions, death, and destruction of property and lives, yet there was little to no mention of that. The interviews were largely with U.S. correspondents in deserted streets or motel rooms. Nobody seemed to ask opinions of the people who actually lived there, but those bombs and missiles were hitting somebody. I found I just couldn't watch for very long, and an ugly sad feeling was growing inside me, that some fundamental truth was being ignored. An awareness was growing of an unearned privilege: of not living in a war zone. I felt a little guilty.
I continued watching Bill O'Reilly's talk show, the "No-Spin Zone," which may well be the most inaccurate description of a show in the entire television industry. I began to notice that Bill seemed to get lots of kudos for being snarky and mean-spirited. I noticed that he liked to talk over, interrupt, and belittle his guests. And it always seemed to be an intelligent, well-spoken guest who was simply trying to complete a statement I was interested in hearing. I began wondering what he was so frantic to stifle. It became annoying to hear him refer to anyone he disagreed with as a "pinhead," which seemed more in keeping with the behavior of an unschooled adolescent than a professional commentator.
It was Bill's childish behavior that led me to question his credibility. The more fact-checking I did, the more disgusted I became with the obscene ways that Bill was spinning and distorting facts. Bill was lying his tail off, and his cohorts were no better. I noticed that on Fox News in general, anyone who asked questions that I would ask, such as how liberated the Iraqi people really felt, was ridiculed, yelled over, and roundly dismissed as unpatriotic.
In the course of seeking truth, I rediscovered my old love of reading. Having always gravitated toward non-fiction, it was a short trip to find articles exposing the truth about the war. Reading the words of returning U.S. combat veterans and ordinary Iraqi and Afghani people validated my earlier concerns. My nation had been acting like a bully and I had been unwittingly complicit. I had always believed strongly in justice and equality, but now I understood patriotism vs. nationalism. Thanks to Bill O'Reilly, I now also understood news vs. commentary. There were three t hings to do: quit watching the propaganda machine that is Fox News, keep reading and learning, and speak out against the war machine.
Had he been more likeable, perhaps a little easier to defend, I may have hung around Fox News a little longer, wanting to deny the painful truth and believe them. So... thank you, Bill O'Reilly, for being indefensible. Thank you for exemplifying what spin looks like. Thank you for being rude, arrogant, spiteful, and smug. Thank you for showing me what laziness in fact-checking looks like, because it made it easy to see the opposite in my sources later. Thank you especially for being so blatant about it. Your "news" broadcasts focus mostly on the ego of the broadcaster, rather than actual events, and your buffoonery makes it impossible to take you seriously. At least it's entertaining if one feels that clowns make great newscasters. Thank you most of all for re-awakening my love of reading and research, even if it eventually debunked your lies, and created a passionate peacemonger, which I'm sure was not your intention. In spite of yourself, you managed to serve the higher good for this truth-seeker, and for that I am grateful.
Sincerely, a peace activist who values truth, equality, and justice, or as you would call it, a pinhead.
Vanquishing Columbus
It’s funny, but not so funny… how the victors write
history. If I were to believe the
history books, Columbus, like so many other powerful historical figures, was a
hero. A great conqueror who “discovered”
America; apparently, the people already living here didn’t know it
existed. One of the legacies left by the
great historian Howard Zinn is that he gave us all a new perspective: history
written by the conquered, the marginalized, the trampled, the disenfranchised. In other words, the truth. No need for propaganda to rally the masses,
just the unvarnished and very ugly truth about some of the people our history
teachers taught us to worship and adore.
None of us are perfect.
But the varnish on some of these despots and villains is so thick, it takes a while to get through it. Then it’s
pretty embarrassing to realize that we once thought so highly of them. And once you’ve seen the truth, you’re no
longer in the mood for a good shellacking by the spin doctors who have peddled
our history books. A good example of
this is Christopher Columbus.
His name is so hallowed that books that are critical of him
are still banned from schools. In
January 2012, Tucson schools banned Rethinking Columbus by Bob Peterson
and Bill Bigelow. The only people who
would undertake to silence truth are those who would benefit greatly from
lies. And if we are compelled to believe
those lies, we are complicit in the very sorts of human rights abuses they are
trying to hide, that Columbus committed, and that our nation has continued to
commit, against people of color and other cultures.
It’s an effective way to keep those people invisible – those
people with faces, names, families – who were raped, tortured, murdered, and
enslaved by Columbus and his men.
I am ashamed that we were never taught as children the perspective
of Native Americans, who rightfully view Columbus’s arrival as an invasion that
resulted in genocide. It was only the
beginning of hell for an entire continent of human beings, resulting in untold
human agony. How can we, in good
conscience, celebrate this man? To do so
is to perpetuate that very harmful myth of American imperialism, and the notion
that there is glory in being a bully.
This Monday is Columbus Day, and instead of honoring a
murderous slave trader, let’s honor the people who deserve it. Let’s do the right thing, and tell the truth…
about the Tainos, who were raped and enslaved.
If they failed to deliver the quota of gold Columbus demanded, he had
their hands cut off or had them chased down and attacked by vicious dogs. He reveled in the sale of young Native girls
as sexual slaves for his personal profit.
He was not a “brave adventurer.”
He was a rapacious terrorist with no regard for human life or
dignity.
Others who feel like I do have renamed Columbus Day as
Indigenous People’s Day. This Monday, I
hope you will join me in celebrating Indigenous People’s Day, by committing to
learn the truth about Columbus, and vowing to support indigenous peoples all
over the world, who continue to be terrorized.
The Zinn Education
Project (http://zinnedproject.org) has
some great articles about Columbus. To
learn more about the experience of the Tainos under Columbus, visit http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/taino/taino-conquest.htm. There are many other informative websites as
well.Let’s remove the varnish and uncover the truth. Let’s work together to create a world where perpetrators of violence are held accountable instead of glorified. We may not be able to change past history, but let’s not forget that we are responsible for the history our children and grandchildren will be taught.
Write your legislators!!
I recently wrote to Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley with my concerns about possible U.S. military action in Syria. He wrote me a well-reasoned response, while still leaving room to consider military action. To me, this is not acceptable. As his tax-paying constituent, who has seen an overwhelming lack of support for U.S. military action, I think he needed to hear a stronger message. Therefore, here is my reply to his email:
Good evening, Senator Merkley,
Thank you for my response to my concerns about Syria. It sounds like you have been very diligent in exploring a very complex situation. My views on this are less complex. I was against military action in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and everywhere else, and am now against military action in Syria. I am not some Johnny-come-lately who is anti-war because "it was Obama's idea." To be fair though, this is not a partisan issue; I literally have not heard a single one of my friends on either side of the aisle defend the idea of attacking Syria. The concept of "limited strikes" leaves me with the same sick feeling in the pit of my stomach as the image seared into my brain of G.W. Bush in his ill-fitting flight suit, proclaiming "Mission Accomplished." I'm not buying it for one minute.
Our military was founded to protect our country. It was the clear intent of the founding fathers to wisely mind our own business. Since then, the war profiteers have convinced decision makers otherwise, much to the horror of the people in the countries we occupy. I have yet to hear exactly what attack Syria has launched on us that we need to defend.
I currently have a young friend, an Iraqi refugee, who has traveled to Syria to support the people. The people of Syria DO NOT want us there. Since they are the proported victims of the attack (and there is contention about who exactly used the chemical weapons in the first place), shouldn't the victims have a say as to whether or not they will be further victimized? The people of Syria are being used as human shields; any attack on our part will merely further the corrupt agenda of the current regime.
Why is it that force is our first option instead of our last? What have we gained by this? I can tell you, sir, what we have lost... we have lost our standing and reputation internationally. We have lost generations of young men and women to combat, suicide, chronic disabilities and illness, exposure to deadly chemicals, PTSD, broken families, and ruined lives. Sadly, the children are watching, and our society's children are being raised on war, and learning that force is the way to solve problems... gee, I wonder why we have so much violence! We have destroyed our economy, while people are jobless and homeless in the streets. In Tillamook, our local Salvation Army Food Bank is shutting down, another victim of the war economy reality. Last Saturday, I spoke to a friend of mine, a middle aged woman raising grandchildren, who was in tears, because she doesn't know how she is going to survive without the food bank. We don't have the dollars to feed Oregonians, but we have them to send missiles to strike innocent people?! As your constituent, while I respect your research and willingness to see all sides, I am also waiting for you to condemn any military action in Syria, or anywhere.
We have sprayed chemical weapons such as white phosphorus, in violation of international law, near civilian populations such as Fallujah, causing some of the most horrific birth defects imaginable, not to mention the soaring illness rates in those areas. We use a drone program with an 80% accuracy rate. Would 80% be accurate enough for you if it were in your neighborhood? We have bombed villages, killed countless innocent people, destroyed schools, hospitals, entire neighborhoods, in our bloodthirst for the "terrorists." Then as the children's bodies are buried, we call it "collateral damage." Can you imagine, for one moment, trying to raise children in one of the places we invade? The horror is unthinkable.
Enough is enough!!!! Please speak out against this newest threat by the U.S. It is becoming increasingly obvious to the entire world who the real terrorists are. The Syrian people don't need our kind of "intervention." Better yet, let's provide the war dollars to the agencies who are actually reaching out and providing food and medical care. The profiteers will be mad, but they are obscenely wealthy already. It's not our job, and never was, to police the entire world and play God in the process. I am in full agreement with you that the international community needs to join together to address human rights abuses in Syria; I just think for once we need to be creative and find a non-military way to do so.
I am against all war, I am against this war, and, to quote a bumper sticker, I am already against the next war. Please join me in opposing more death and destruction.
Thank you for your time, again, and your willingness to hear all sides of the issue. That is why I voted for you.
Sincerely,
Romy Carver
Good evening, Senator Merkley,
Thank you for my response to my concerns about Syria. It sounds like you have been very diligent in exploring a very complex situation. My views on this are less complex. I was against military action in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, and everywhere else, and am now against military action in Syria. I am not some Johnny-come-lately who is anti-war because "it was Obama's idea." To be fair though, this is not a partisan issue; I literally have not heard a single one of my friends on either side of the aisle defend the idea of attacking Syria. The concept of "limited strikes" leaves me with the same sick feeling in the pit of my stomach as the image seared into my brain of G.W. Bush in his ill-fitting flight suit, proclaiming "Mission Accomplished." I'm not buying it for one minute.
Our military was founded to protect our country. It was the clear intent of the founding fathers to wisely mind our own business. Since then, the war profiteers have convinced decision makers otherwise, much to the horror of the people in the countries we occupy. I have yet to hear exactly what attack Syria has launched on us that we need to defend.
I currently have a young friend, an Iraqi refugee, who has traveled to Syria to support the people. The people of Syria DO NOT want us there. Since they are the proported victims of the attack (and there is contention about who exactly used the chemical weapons in the first place), shouldn't the victims have a say as to whether or not they will be further victimized? The people of Syria are being used as human shields; any attack on our part will merely further the corrupt agenda of the current regime.
Why is it that force is our first option instead of our last? What have we gained by this? I can tell you, sir, what we have lost... we have lost our standing and reputation internationally. We have lost generations of young men and women to combat, suicide, chronic disabilities and illness, exposure to deadly chemicals, PTSD, broken families, and ruined lives. Sadly, the children are watching, and our society's children are being raised on war, and learning that force is the way to solve problems... gee, I wonder why we have so much violence! We have destroyed our economy, while people are jobless and homeless in the streets. In Tillamook, our local Salvation Army Food Bank is shutting down, another victim of the war economy reality. Last Saturday, I spoke to a friend of mine, a middle aged woman raising grandchildren, who was in tears, because she doesn't know how she is going to survive without the food bank. We don't have the dollars to feed Oregonians, but we have them to send missiles to strike innocent people?! As your constituent, while I respect your research and willingness to see all sides, I am also waiting for you to condemn any military action in Syria, or anywhere.
We have sprayed chemical weapons such as white phosphorus, in violation of international law, near civilian populations such as Fallujah, causing some of the most horrific birth defects imaginable, not to mention the soaring illness rates in those areas. We use a drone program with an 80% accuracy rate. Would 80% be accurate enough for you if it were in your neighborhood? We have bombed villages, killed countless innocent people, destroyed schools, hospitals, entire neighborhoods, in our bloodthirst for the "terrorists." Then as the children's bodies are buried, we call it "collateral damage." Can you imagine, for one moment, trying to raise children in one of the places we invade? The horror is unthinkable.
Enough is enough!!!! Please speak out against this newest threat by the U.S. It is becoming increasingly obvious to the entire world who the real terrorists are. The Syrian people don't need our kind of "intervention." Better yet, let's provide the war dollars to the agencies who are actually reaching out and providing food and medical care. The profiteers will be mad, but they are obscenely wealthy already. It's not our job, and never was, to police the entire world and play God in the process. I am in full agreement with you that the international community needs to join together to address human rights abuses in Syria; I just think for once we need to be creative and find a non-military way to do so.
I am against all war, I am against this war, and, to quote a bumper sticker, I am already against the next war. Please join me in opposing more death and destruction.
Thank you for your time, again, and your willingness to hear all sides of the issue. That is why I voted for you.
Sincerely,
Romy Carver
A Time for Reflection, Part III of III
This is the third installment in my three-part series, “A Time for Reflection.” It is a commentary on the Newtown, CT shootings earlier this year. My first installment was about lack of access to mental health, my second installment was about gun control, and this, the most difficult installment, is about the violence that is so accepted and prevalent in our society. It is so entrenched and goes so deep into our collective consciousness that it can be hard to grasp, and therefore, it took me weeks to write this post.
We live in a violent society. We all acknowledge it, and I have a theory about WHY we’re so violent: all violence stems from fear. Numerous studies have shown that human beings are not inherently violent, but become so in response to fear. We are the most prosperous and militarily powerful nation on earth, yet we are consumed, as a society, with fear: fear of terrorism, criminal attacks, economic collapse, apocalypse, viruses… and one another. The media deserves a large share of the blame, with their constant fear mongering. The TV “news” does not reflect the whole reality of our world; it is carefully chosen and filtered by someone else for us to view. The intention is to create emotion and sensation, and keep us tuning in for more. Our “news” channels are nothing more than a propaganda machine. Even today’s game shows are for more dangerous and humiliating for contestants than those of 30 years ago.
It’s impossible to turn on the TV without being bombarded for ads for pills, for every conceivable “condition.” Two things I’d like to point out about the pills: First off, these pharmaceutical companies do not altruistically focus on a particular disease, with the intention of finding a cure. They mix chemicals and test them on humans. When they find a combination that treats a particular symptom, they spend copious amounts of money to promote it, regardless of potential dangers, including death. When you buy prescriptions, generally speaking, you are paying more for ads than research… pure profit for this monster industry.
My second point is that one thing many mass shooters seem to have in common is their use of these psychotropic prescription medications. Was their violence the result of their mental instability, or the dangerous, under-regulated chemicals coursing through their bodies? Other nations have banned some of these chemicals, but not ours. It’s irresponsible to talk about the violence in our society without taking a look at the violence committed by those with a legally altered consciousness, on drugs known to create erratic, even violent behavior.
We are a nation built on violence, exploitation, and subjugation. I mention this because fear begets greed, which begets violence. From the genocide, rape, and land theft against the Native peoples, to the kidnapping, trafficking, and enslavement of the African tribes, and the exploitation, trafficking, and blatant racism toward Chinese, Irish, and now Hispanic immigrants, we have continued our bloody, shameful legacy. We have been an oligarchy, run by the very wealthy, right from the start. The people who run this country want nothing more than to keep us fearful, medicated, and violent toward one another. So I believe that fear, greed, and violence are incorporated into our cultural psyche.
But I’d like to take it one layer deeper: Why do we buy into the fear? I believe it has to do with how we define power. Fear is generally the result of feeling a threat of losing power or control, over someone or something. We have all we need as a nation, yet it is never enough. The entitlement is burned into our collective psyche, and like a spoiled child, we are overly competitive and insecure, because we perceive power as “things,” and we fear having it all stripped away.
We tend toward violence as a quick solution, in much the same way we rush to take a pill to solve our problems, rather than change our lifestyle. We put a higher value on people who have power manifested externally, such as physical prowess and wealth, rather than valuing every person equally. When we dehumanize people in this way, we pave the way for justifying violence.
I once heard a story I will never forget: in WWII, our soldiers were enlisting by the thousands to serve their country, but were reluctant to kill other humans…we humans aren’t hard-wired for violence, remember. The war propagandists put their heads together, and hired a young cartoonist, named Walt Disney, to draw caricatures of Germans and Japanese with rat and pig faces. This dehumanization had the desired effect, making them “the enemy.“ Americans were more willing to see them as less than human and kill them.
Being aware of how violence is ingrained in our culture is the first step to changing it. It’s also important to understand, especially as we are in the longest war in our history, that violence on higher levels supports violence on lower levels. Everything from domestic violence, to bullying, to racism, to global aggression is part of the same continuum, and is self-perpetuating. In other words, the same excuses we use to hurt those close to us are the same ones we use to justify global violence.
There will always be a tiny percentage of the population that will be psychopathic, and delight in the suffering of others. But much violence in general can be alleviated if we change our outlook. What if we switched our focus on valuing living things instead of inanimate ones? What if we stopped cutting funding to arts and music programs, while glorifying sports in our schools (which sends a message that athletes are the “important” kids)? What if we taught our kids more about cooperation than competition, and giving instead of achieving?
It’s truly up to us to re-evaluate what power really means, and look at authentic power. Picture the last street person you saw and think of your reaction to that person. Was your initial reaction to them based on fear? Gratitude it wasn’t you? Now imagine that same person, cleaned up, in expensive clothing. How would your response be different? This is how we need to shift our thinking if we are going to learn to value one another as equals in our society.
I wonder if things might have turned out differently in Newtown if the shooter’s mother had not been so fearful. She apparently stockpiled food and guns in preparation for something she believed and feared would happen. Even though she had knowledge of her son’s mental instability, she chose to take him to the shooting range to teach him to protect himself from some perceived danger. The danger, in this case, was himself. How incredibly sad for so many people.
We are at an exciting juncture and this is a great time to be alive. We can begin to consciously choose non-violence, and act as inspiration to one another, or we can continue the same old patterns of greed, fear, oppression and violence. We can strive to address the violence on all levels of society, be it interpersonal or international. When we honor and value each human being, there is nothing to fear. When we stop believing that the evening news reflects the norm, we begin to realize that the world is not such a horrible, hateful place. I personally see acts of love and kindness on a daily basis that will never make the news. When we rid ourselves of “us and them,” and understand that we are all “we,” the violence begins to end. Without fear, there is no need anymore.
I write this at the very tail end of 2012, and I am optimistic that we as a species, and hopefully as a society, will continue to evolve spiritually, and learn to love and care for one another… not become more isolated and fearful. I believe in the human spirit’s ability to rise above adversity. Here is my favorite quote of all time, which I find more inspiring than anything I will ever write. I hope you will carry it in your heart this coming year, and that it brings you peace:
“To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places—and there are so many—where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction. And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.”
Howard Zinn
We live in a violent society. We all acknowledge it, and I have a theory about WHY we’re so violent: all violence stems from fear. Numerous studies have shown that human beings are not inherently violent, but become so in response to fear. We are the most prosperous and militarily powerful nation on earth, yet we are consumed, as a society, with fear: fear of terrorism, criminal attacks, economic collapse, apocalypse, viruses… and one another. The media deserves a large share of the blame, with their constant fear mongering. The TV “news” does not reflect the whole reality of our world; it is carefully chosen and filtered by someone else for us to view. The intention is to create emotion and sensation, and keep us tuning in for more. Our “news” channels are nothing more than a propaganda machine. Even today’s game shows are for more dangerous and humiliating for contestants than those of 30 years ago.
It’s impossible to turn on the TV without being bombarded for ads for pills, for every conceivable “condition.” Two things I’d like to point out about the pills: First off, these pharmaceutical companies do not altruistically focus on a particular disease, with the intention of finding a cure. They mix chemicals and test them on humans. When they find a combination that treats a particular symptom, they spend copious amounts of money to promote it, regardless of potential dangers, including death. When you buy prescriptions, generally speaking, you are paying more for ads than research… pure profit for this monster industry.
My second point is that one thing many mass shooters seem to have in common is their use of these psychotropic prescription medications. Was their violence the result of their mental instability, or the dangerous, under-regulated chemicals coursing through their bodies? Other nations have banned some of these chemicals, but not ours. It’s irresponsible to talk about the violence in our society without taking a look at the violence committed by those with a legally altered consciousness, on drugs known to create erratic, even violent behavior.
We are a nation built on violence, exploitation, and subjugation. I mention this because fear begets greed, which begets violence. From the genocide, rape, and land theft against the Native peoples, to the kidnapping, trafficking, and enslavement of the African tribes, and the exploitation, trafficking, and blatant racism toward Chinese, Irish, and now Hispanic immigrants, we have continued our bloody, shameful legacy. We have been an oligarchy, run by the very wealthy, right from the start. The people who run this country want nothing more than to keep us fearful, medicated, and violent toward one another. So I believe that fear, greed, and violence are incorporated into our cultural psyche.
But I’d like to take it one layer deeper: Why do we buy into the fear? I believe it has to do with how we define power. Fear is generally the result of feeling a threat of losing power or control, over someone or something. We have all we need as a nation, yet it is never enough. The entitlement is burned into our collective psyche, and like a spoiled child, we are overly competitive and insecure, because we perceive power as “things,” and we fear having it all stripped away.
We tend toward violence as a quick solution, in much the same way we rush to take a pill to solve our problems, rather than change our lifestyle. We put a higher value on people who have power manifested externally, such as physical prowess and wealth, rather than valuing every person equally. When we dehumanize people in this way, we pave the way for justifying violence.
I once heard a story I will never forget: in WWII, our soldiers were enlisting by the thousands to serve their country, but were reluctant to kill other humans…we humans aren’t hard-wired for violence, remember. The war propagandists put their heads together, and hired a young cartoonist, named Walt Disney, to draw caricatures of Germans and Japanese with rat and pig faces. This dehumanization had the desired effect, making them “the enemy.“ Americans were more willing to see them as less than human and kill them.
Being aware of how violence is ingrained in our culture is the first step to changing it. It’s also important to understand, especially as we are in the longest war in our history, that violence on higher levels supports violence on lower levels. Everything from domestic violence, to bullying, to racism, to global aggression is part of the same continuum, and is self-perpetuating. In other words, the same excuses we use to hurt those close to us are the same ones we use to justify global violence.
There will always be a tiny percentage of the population that will be psychopathic, and delight in the suffering of others. But much violence in general can be alleviated if we change our outlook. What if we switched our focus on valuing living things instead of inanimate ones? What if we stopped cutting funding to arts and music programs, while glorifying sports in our schools (which sends a message that athletes are the “important” kids)? What if we taught our kids more about cooperation than competition, and giving instead of achieving?
It’s truly up to us to re-evaluate what power really means, and look at authentic power. Picture the last street person you saw and think of your reaction to that person. Was your initial reaction to them based on fear? Gratitude it wasn’t you? Now imagine that same person, cleaned up, in expensive clothing. How would your response be different? This is how we need to shift our thinking if we are going to learn to value one another as equals in our society.
I wonder if things might have turned out differently in Newtown if the shooter’s mother had not been so fearful. She apparently stockpiled food and guns in preparation for something she believed and feared would happen. Even though she had knowledge of her son’s mental instability, she chose to take him to the shooting range to teach him to protect himself from some perceived danger. The danger, in this case, was himself. How incredibly sad for so many people.
We are at an exciting juncture and this is a great time to be alive. We can begin to consciously choose non-violence, and act as inspiration to one another, or we can continue the same old patterns of greed, fear, oppression and violence. We can strive to address the violence on all levels of society, be it interpersonal or international. When we honor and value each human being, there is nothing to fear. When we stop believing that the evening news reflects the norm, we begin to realize that the world is not such a horrible, hateful place. I personally see acts of love and kindness on a daily basis that will never make the news. When we rid ourselves of “us and them,” and understand that we are all “we,” the violence begins to end. Without fear, there is no need anymore.
I write this at the very tail end of 2012, and I am optimistic that we as a species, and hopefully as a society, will continue to evolve spiritually, and learn to love and care for one another… not become more isolated and fearful. I believe in the human spirit’s ability to rise above adversity. Here is my favorite quote of all time, which I find more inspiring than anything I will ever write. I hope you will carry it in your heart this coming year, and that it brings you peace:
“To be hopeful in bad times is not just foolishly romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion, sacrifice, courage, kindness. What we choose to emphasize in this complex history will determine our lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity to do something. If we remember those times and places—and there are so many—where people have behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act, and at least the possibility of sending this spinning top of a world in a different direction. And if we do act, in however small a way, we don’t have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as we think human beings should live, in defiance of all that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.”
Howard Zinn
A Time for Reflection, Part II of III
Here is Part II of my three-part installment on the Newtown, CT shootings. As I stated before, I see three very strong factors behind the current incident. I’m not trying to minimize the complexity of this incident, or “place the blame” on any one thing, just outlining my own beliefs about three factors that may have made a difference. Part I of the my blog post was about barriers to access for mental health treatment. Part II is about gun ownership.
I haven’t heard anyone advocate for taking away everyone’s guns, yet I have never seen such vitriol and paranoia, in the mass or social media. People are entrenched in a very contentious national argument right now, both sides are polarized, and I’m going to say what needs to be said: We need to ban assault weapons. Period. Assault weapons are for one thing: killing as many as possible as quickly as possible. And in this case, I believe that if assault weapons were illegal, this young man might not have gotten one. Here is why I believe this:
It so happens that the weapons belonged to his mother, a gun enthusiast who purchased them legally. He had tried to purchase a gun and was denied. His mother was not a criminal, so if they were illegal, it is unlikely she would have them. Like most of these mass shooters, he was a socially awkward, mentally disturbed person, not a hardened criminal with a network of gun-running associates. While it is possible that if his mother hadn’t have had the guns, he would have gotten one, it’s not probable. Yes, criminals will still have guns, and people will still do bad things… but there would be fewer of them available, and they would be harder to access, especially for a withdrawn, emotionally disturbed kid with few connections or friends.
I’m sick to death of hearing, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people.” Well, what do people use to kill people? It’s easier to import guns in this country than it is to import bananas, yet people don’t kill people with bananas. Shouldn’t it be at least as difficult to import guns? No, guns don’t self-animate and shoot people. But it’s equally hard for a madman (or woman) to kill dozens of innocent people in mere seconds WITHOUT a gun. So yes, people kill people, but it’s pretty damn easy to kill lots of them, very quickly, from a distance, without getting sweaty or even getting blood on you, with a gun. Makes it nice and convenient, doesn’t it.
Does anyone honestly believe that someone who walks into a crowd with, say a knife, is going to do the same amount of damage, in the same amount of time, as someone carrying an assault weapon? Case in point: the same day the Newtown shooting took place, a man in China entered a classroom with a knife and stabbed 22 schoolchildren. As horrific as this is, NOBODY DIED. I am told that in the Newtown shooting, the medical examiners used photos for parents to identify their children because viewing their grisly little bodies would be too traumatic. Such is the damage done by a high-caliber assault weapon: it did more than kill them; it annihilated them. How can we defend these weapons?
I am all for people having guns to defend and feed their families. I grew up shooting guns, and I support the Second Amendment. But this was written at a time when assault weapons did not exist, when it took 15 seconds to reload the single shot muskets that were being used at that time. I do not support the ownership of assault rifles. I maintain that this shooting may well have been prevented if this young man had not had legal, easy access to a weapon of mass destruction. And while he could have perhaps made an explosive or used another weapon, that would not have been as easy or convenient as grabbing a legal, readily available instrument of death.
There is also a sad fascination with guns in our culture; they denote power and glory. They are in all the video games, movies, etc. How often do you see the hero “blow the bad guys away” with a knife, or a homemade explosive? No, there he stands in all his glory, with his high-powered assault rifles. When things get out of hand, we “bring in the big guns,” don’t we. And what is cooler in our society than going out in a “blaze of glory?” Guns are cool, just ask the NRA. Oh never mind, they’re being a little quiet right now.
I’ve talked to several people with varying views on gun control. I think I now understand the irrational rage and hostility people exhibit when anyone dares to suggest banning these dangerous assault weapons. It’s FEAR. That’s right, behind the mask of bravado, behind the Monday morning quarterbacking of “I carry a concealed weapon and could have stopped him,” behind the cries of, “Arm the teachers!!” is stone cold fear. When I ask people why they think we need these weapons, they are scared to death… of government takeover, of zombies (no, I am not kidding), of deadly viruses (because we all know how handy a Bushmaster can be to blow away that pesky flu virus), of economic collapse and their homes being attacked, and the list goes on.
These people are so taken in by the culture of fear which is stoked by the NRA, gun manufacturers, and the mainstream media outlets, that they have lost their common sense. They are willing to scream with outrage about gun owner’s rights, yet these same people are silent about the rights of schoolchildren and teachers to return home alive each day. I’m not saying they don’t care; they are just so consumed with fear that their priorities have been warped.
It is time for a serious conversation about an assault weapons ban, stricter regulations around gun ownership, such as training requirements, etc., and consequences for those who choose not to behave like responsible gun owners. We owe it to the victims of last weeks shooting, and their families. And this needs to be a conversation devoid of hysterics, false bravado, and paranoia. We owe it to them to be adults and TALK.
This leads me to my next installment, while I will post tomorrow, about our culture of violence. It is deeply enmeshed in our culture of fear, and greatly contributes to the misguided belief that our world is an unsafe place without an arsenal of assault weapons.
I have posted several posts on gun control on my Facebook page, which have set off a firestorm of arguments, rants, and personal attacks. When I posted a link to an article that provided information about direct ways to help the shooting victims’ families and community last weekend, only one person “liked” it, nobody commented, and nobody shared it. They were too busy fighting about gun owner’s rights. Here’s the link, in case anyone is interested in learning more about how to actually help: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/14/connecticut-elementary-school-shooting-how-to-help_n_2302760.html
A Time for Reflection, Part I of III
Like everyone, I have been rocked to my core by the recent massacre of 20 small children and seven adults in Newtown, Connecticut. My first thoughts were of my children and my grandchildren, and trying to imagine a world with one of them ripped so violently away. This attack defies logic and reason, and we may never truly know what motivated the killer to do what he did.
As we can’t really comprehend why, then we can only speculate as to how to prevent such a horrific tragedy from happening again. It seems to me that three things really need to be addressed: Access to mental health services, gun ownership, and our society’s addiction to violence. Any one of these three issues can make for one overwhelming conversation, and I don’t claim to have any easy answers, but I'd like to try to address it.
This is the first of three installments on this subject. This first post is about mental health services. The second post will be about gun ownership, and the third will be about society's addiction to violence.
According to sources I have read, the shooter had a history of emotional and behavioral troubles; his mother had attempted to get mental health care for him, and was basically told it wasn’t available until he “did something bad.” This is a common theme in our society, and I believe there are two reasons for this:
One reason is that programs serving the mentally ill, and other marginalized populations, have been drastically cut. This leaves providers the unpleasant task of putting out fires, rather than providing early intervention for at-risk kids. It also seems to create a tendency to “throw pills” at the problem, which certainly creates a big risk of its own, since a common side effect of some of these pharmaceuticals is irrational, violent, or suicidal behavior. It's a lot less effort to fill out a prescription pad than to strategize effectively with parents on techniques that might help the child. And sedated kids are a lot less effort for teachers and caregivers than hyper/troublesome kids. Certainly an entire blog post could be easily written on the corruption of the pharmaceutical industry alone, and its collusion in causing violence.
The other reason that people often can’t/don't access help, besides the obvious financial one, is overly restrictive involuntary commitment laws. These laws, which were set up to protect people from being wrongly committed to institutions, has some negative unintended consequences. Anosognosia, a physiologically-caused lack of awareness about one’s illness, prevents approximately half of severely mentally ill people from taking their meds or seeking treatment. Many are unlikely to get help unless others step in, in the form of attempting an involuntary commitment. In Oregon, that means that at least two family members have to sign a sanity hearing petition, which results in a court hearing to review whether or not that person should be committed. It has to be proven that the person in question is a danger to himself/others, or can’t meet his own needs, at least in Oregon. It is not enough for that person to have bizarre behavior, be vulnerable and living in a box under an overpass, or in danger. It usually means “something bad” has to happen.
The Treatment Advocacy Center is a national non-profit dedicated to eliminating barriers to treatment for those with mental illness.
http://www.treatmentadvocacycenter.org/
According to their website, Connecticut has an estimated 140,000 people with severe mental illness, of whom approximately one-half are untreated at any given time. It is one of only six states without a law authorizing court-ordered outpatient treatment for qualifying individuals with severe mental illness. Between 2005 and 2010, the state eliminated 17% of its public hospital beds, leaving it with only 43% of the number deemed minimally adequate to meet public needs, and has twice as many people with severe mental illness behind bars as in psychiatric hospital beds.
If the young shooter had received mental health care, would those 20 children be alive today? Perhaps. It certainly is an important factor, as the majority of these mass killers seem to share a profile of long-standing, and often untreated, mental instability. This should be an intense part of our current national discussion. If we truly care about the safety of our children, and the overall health of our population, we MUST start finding ways to fund, and make accessible, better mental health care.
The Fight Before Christmas
A little poem I wrote that hopefully brings you a smile:
‘Twas the fight before Christmas, and all through the land,
People were shouting and taking a stand.
“Happy Holidays!” “No, Merry Christmas!” they shouted,
As claims of “un-Christian” behavior were spouted.
“You’re taking the Christ out of Christmas!” they roared,
As the actual meanings of words were ignored.
For “holiday” means “holy day” to the Dutch,
And I honestly don’t mind being wished THAT too much.
As for Christ-mass, its roots are of Pagan proclaim,
And Christ never once lit a tree in his name…
So it seems like a whole lot of fuss and ado
‘Bout a “war against Christmas” that hasn’t come true,
But by keeping us all in a climate of fear,
We ensure peace and brotherhood never come near.
And we miss opportunities here with this drama,
To learn more about what we all have in common.
For each major religion has love as it creed,
What they all have in common is God as their seed.
Just IMAGINE what peace and good will we’d create,
If we’d just accept love, and stop acting in hate.
So go Kwanzaa, go Christmas, go Hanukkah too,
Enjoy your traditions, Happy Holidays to you!
On Civil War
There is a war taking place today in Oregon. Sides have been chosen, and changing sides is tantamount to treason. Uniforms have been donned, and participants have geared up for battle. And like other recent wars, many will watch this war from the comfort of home on a TV set, far removed, and numbingly remote, from the reality.
This “war” is a college football game here in Oregon, between two rivals, called a “civil war.” I hate the term “civil war” when it is used to describe something as trivial as a college football game. It trivializes the true horrors of war itself. To anyone who has actually been in combat, or lived in a war zone, it’s no game. There’s no buzzer sounding the end of “play.” I admit that “civil war” sounds catchy, but there has got to be a better term than this. It’s insensitive and socially irresponsible.
Frankly, we continually trivialize war in our culture. We declare war on drugs, crime, poverty, and homelessness, but it hasn’t gotten us far. It seems when we “declare war,” there’s an implication that the “experts” (soldiers) are in charge, leaving us to cheer them on. There is no sense of societal responsibility. Compare the concept of “declaring war on poverty,” to “working together to end poverty,” or even “to eradicate” or “to dismantle” poverty. We don’t change norms or better society in any way by “declaring war” on anything. All that does is declare that it’s bad, not proactively work together to fix it.
As George Carlin accurately observed, “we are a warlike people.” Some tribal societies that we smugly refer to as “primitive,” are far more peaceful than we. Even the games their children play are based more on cooperation than competition because they understand that working together ensures their survival. In our society, we not only win, we “beat” the other person or team, we “kick ass.” We crush, kill, annihilate, destroy, and defeat the other team. I bet you can come up with at least a half dozen violent verbs of your own. That mindset of might seems to permeate our foreign policy as well. As a result, other than a few isolated terror incidents, we are the aggressors. We spend more on weapons of death than all other countries combined, and attack other nations with impunity. We also have tens of thousands of handgun related deaths annually in our country, as compared to a few dozen at the most in other countries. It’s not the guns that are the problem; it’s us.
It’s easy to trivialize something that isn’t in our faces on a daily basis. Right now we are at war in the Middle East. For the majority of Americans, it’s entirely possible to tune out this fact, other than brief (and slanted) updates on the evening news. After all, our houses are not being bombed; our loved ones are not being killed with drones, and generally we can send our children to school in the morning with a reasonable expectation that they will not be killed in a school bus bombing that day. Our houses are not being razed, and loved ones not being dragged out in the middle of the night and detained. Nope, that’s all happening somewhere else. That makes it very easy to see war as something much smaller than it is, even as we fund the carnage with our tax dollars.
As for the Civil War, after which these college rivalry games are often named, there is no history book or movie that can adequately describe its horrors. Men died at the end of bayonets held by their own brothers. It is arguably the most shameful, grisly, horrific period of U.S. history, along with the slave trade which characterized that era. A disproportionate number of those fighting and dying were poor, many of them newly freed slaves. Referring to any game as a “civil war” glorifies this national tragedy, while trivializing its lasting impact. War is not a game, and a game is not war.
It’s a slap in the face to our veterans, to survivors of war crimes, and to those who have been killed, maimed, displaced, raped, orphaned, or trafficked because of war. I’ve studied this topic extensively, enough to be ashamed at the minimization of the suffering by the mainstream media. If everyone saw the pictures, and read the stories of the magnitude of the human suffering caused by our need to dominate, we would not be calling anything war that isn’t war. And don't even get me started on video games that glorify war, and desensitize kids to violence.
I realize that some will read this with rolling eyes. This may be seen as some liberal, overly sensitive, overly PC, whining rant. If that is your perception, I would like to remind you that where the REAL war is happening, there aren’t party snacks and tailgate parties, no “after-game” celebrations. Just the groans and screams of the wounded and the grieving, and the silence of death.
War is Not a Game by Bill Durston
This “war” is a college football game here in Oregon, between two rivals, called a “civil war.” I hate the term “civil war” when it is used to describe something as trivial as a college football game. It trivializes the true horrors of war itself. To anyone who has actually been in combat, or lived in a war zone, it’s no game. There’s no buzzer sounding the end of “play.” I admit that “civil war” sounds catchy, but there has got to be a better term than this. It’s insensitive and socially irresponsible.
Frankly, we continually trivialize war in our culture. We declare war on drugs, crime, poverty, and homelessness, but it hasn’t gotten us far. It seems when we “declare war,” there’s an implication that the “experts” (soldiers) are in charge, leaving us to cheer them on. There is no sense of societal responsibility. Compare the concept of “declaring war on poverty,” to “working together to end poverty,” or even “to eradicate” or “to dismantle” poverty. We don’t change norms or better society in any way by “declaring war” on anything. All that does is declare that it’s bad, not proactively work together to fix it.
As George Carlin accurately observed, “we are a warlike people.” Some tribal societies that we smugly refer to as “primitive,” are far more peaceful than we. Even the games their children play are based more on cooperation than competition because they understand that working together ensures their survival. In our society, we not only win, we “beat” the other person or team, we “kick ass.” We crush, kill, annihilate, destroy, and defeat the other team. I bet you can come up with at least a half dozen violent verbs of your own. That mindset of might seems to permeate our foreign policy as well. As a result, other than a few isolated terror incidents, we are the aggressors. We spend more on weapons of death than all other countries combined, and attack other nations with impunity. We also have tens of thousands of handgun related deaths annually in our country, as compared to a few dozen at the most in other countries. It’s not the guns that are the problem; it’s us.
It’s easy to trivialize something that isn’t in our faces on a daily basis. Right now we are at war in the Middle East. For the majority of Americans, it’s entirely possible to tune out this fact, other than brief (and slanted) updates on the evening news. After all, our houses are not being bombed; our loved ones are not being killed with drones, and generally we can send our children to school in the morning with a reasonable expectation that they will not be killed in a school bus bombing that day. Our houses are not being razed, and loved ones not being dragged out in the middle of the night and detained. Nope, that’s all happening somewhere else. That makes it very easy to see war as something much smaller than it is, even as we fund the carnage with our tax dollars.
As for the Civil War, after which these college rivalry games are often named, there is no history book or movie that can adequately describe its horrors. Men died at the end of bayonets held by their own brothers. It is arguably the most shameful, grisly, horrific period of U.S. history, along with the slave trade which characterized that era. A disproportionate number of those fighting and dying were poor, many of them newly freed slaves. Referring to any game as a “civil war” glorifies this national tragedy, while trivializing its lasting impact. War is not a game, and a game is not war.
It’s a slap in the face to our veterans, to survivors of war crimes, and to those who have been killed, maimed, displaced, raped, orphaned, or trafficked because of war. I’ve studied this topic extensively, enough to be ashamed at the minimization of the suffering by the mainstream media. If everyone saw the pictures, and read the stories of the magnitude of the human suffering caused by our need to dominate, we would not be calling anything war that isn’t war. And don't even get me started on video games that glorify war, and desensitize kids to violence.
I realize that some will read this with rolling eyes. This may be seen as some liberal, overly sensitive, overly PC, whining rant. If that is your perception, I would like to remind you that where the REAL war is happening, there aren’t party snacks and tailgate parties, no “after-game” celebrations. Just the groans and screams of the wounded and the grieving, and the silence of death.
War is Not a Game by Bill Durston
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)