Is there anything as enticingly beautiful as a nude female form? When done right it can evoke passion, wonder, and excitement, but so often the dark side is that the display of the female form leads to the objectivication of women and the result can be deadly. We look at those images and the woman in question is violated. Normally it doesn't seem to hurt anyone and the hurt is abstract, but the view of woman as a thing and not a person has consequence.
In Dehli a young girl was repeatedly raped. While porn may or may not have been at play in the background, certainly the view of a woman as a thing to be used was. Ironic that in a country which values life to the extreme, human life is so cheap.
Women are people too and any action that we take as humans which diminishes women as less than human, as less than deserving a decent life, any pattern of behavior which encourages bad behavior to another must be stopped, and now.
OK, reality check. Everything I said above is true. There is just one problem, there is nothing wrong with admiring the human form. The problem comes when she (or he) becomes it or a part of her/his-self. When we reduce people to their parts we walk over the line that creates behavior problems. An admiration for the human form, and the wonderful person who is that form, is healthy and necessary for the survival of the species. Violence to that form, to that person, is an abomination and a sacrilege. What happened in Dehli, what happens in rape, is not sex, it is not reproduction, it is simply violence to all of us and a thing to be punished severely.
It tests the limits of our civilization to consider such punishment. How can we fashion a punishment that meets the evil of the crime? Part of us thinks an iron bar jammed unceremoniously up the rectum of each perpetrator as they did to her would be a good start, but like all retribution it would lower us to their level. Mercy is unthinkable - I leave the conundrum to one wiser than myself.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Job creators, new name for rich people
"We are the job creators! You can't tax us because then we won't feel like doing any serious job creation." Yeah, right. Bottom line on job creation by rich investors. If they can make money in an investment they will. If they can whine their way to a greater profit they will. At the end of the day what America's economy, what the world economy needs is more good jobs. The whining job creators are talking about fast food jobs, we really don't need more working poor in the world, we need workers who can earn enough to support themselves and their families.
Real investors aren't sitting back waiting for someone to give them a hand out (while they complain about the 47%!) real investors are those who are looking for opportunity and then moving forward with it.. What I see is a lack of foresight, a lack of vision in the investing class. They are looking backward at the golden era of Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower and not remembering that Bill Clinton's White House had things rolling quite well. Trickle down helped the rich get richer but no evidence has been put forward that those beneficiaries changed one dollar of the profit into change for the middle class
When George W. Bush was first elected I foresaw the "MBA Presidency model" where we would divide up the assets of the country and then sell them off to the highest bidder. That is sort of what happened when Wall Street went hog wild over real estate junk bond style derivatives and the country has yet to recover, though the major banks seem to be doing just fine thank you very much for the too big to fail bail outs.
What we need is an increase to a fair share tax format and regulations designed to actually punish and prohibit ultra risky and criminal investment behavior. We need them and we need them now.
Real investors aren't sitting back waiting for someone to give them a hand out (while they complain about the 47%!) real investors are those who are looking for opportunity and then moving forward with it.. What I see is a lack of foresight, a lack of vision in the investing class. They are looking backward at the golden era of Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower and not remembering that Bill Clinton's White House had things rolling quite well. Trickle down helped the rich get richer but no evidence has been put forward that those beneficiaries changed one dollar of the profit into change for the middle class
When George W. Bush was first elected I foresaw the "MBA Presidency model" where we would divide up the assets of the country and then sell them off to the highest bidder. That is sort of what happened when Wall Street went hog wild over real estate junk bond style derivatives and the country has yet to recover, though the major banks seem to be doing just fine thank you very much for the too big to fail bail outs.
What we need is an increase to a fair share tax format and regulations designed to actually punish and prohibit ultra risky and criminal investment behavior. We need them and we need them now.
Thursday, September 13, 2012
Bullies Never Need to Apologize
In business one is confronted with upset clients all the time. The most disarming and effective words to use are "I'm sorry, what can I do?" Even if we don't fully believe that we are wrong, acknowledging the hurt goes a long way to resolving the problem. It is good business. It is also good manners.
So why is it that some, many, Republicans are hung up on apologies? I always felt like the U.S. acted like a global bully in the build up to the Iraq war. Never apologizing for lies and misstatements, never acknowledging differences of opinion, our course was to kick butt and see our way clear. It didn't seem to get us very far in the world at large. America was viewed as a Cowboy Country, shooting first asking questions later, if ever. We were increasingly alone. Our supporters all felt pressure at home. President Obama was greeted warmly by the world community not because he apologized for everything or was ashamed or his country, but because he understands that America is not a nation of bullies, but a partner on the world stage, because he understands that our goals are better met in cooperation, that our security is met when we disarm anger rather than encourage it.
It is one thing to believe that you are the best, it is quite another to shove that idea down the throats of others. As a child I was taught that behavior like that was reprehensible, that apologies were the way that society smoothed out differences and that fighting was a last resort. Of course I was also told that Democrats started wars. Things change, but does that change bring any good? Republicans have been in charge for our last three major military excursions and a case can be made that Dwight D. Eisenhower got us fully involved in Viet Nam.
America, Mitt Romney would say is the tough guy on the block and if I understand right no need to apologize even when we offend. I'm sorry, I may be old fashioned, but that just isn't going to work so well.
So why is it that some, many, Republicans are hung up on apologies? I always felt like the U.S. acted like a global bully in the build up to the Iraq war. Never apologizing for lies and misstatements, never acknowledging differences of opinion, our course was to kick butt and see our way clear. It didn't seem to get us very far in the world at large. America was viewed as a Cowboy Country, shooting first asking questions later, if ever. We were increasingly alone. Our supporters all felt pressure at home. President Obama was greeted warmly by the world community not because he apologized for everything or was ashamed or his country, but because he understands that America is not a nation of bullies, but a partner on the world stage, because he understands that our goals are better met in cooperation, that our security is met when we disarm anger rather than encourage it.
It is one thing to believe that you are the best, it is quite another to shove that idea down the throats of others. As a child I was taught that behavior like that was reprehensible, that apologies were the way that society smoothed out differences and that fighting was a last resort. Of course I was also told that Democrats started wars. Things change, but does that change bring any good? Republicans have been in charge for our last three major military excursions and a case can be made that Dwight D. Eisenhower got us fully involved in Viet Nam.
America, Mitt Romney would say is the tough guy on the block and if I understand right no need to apologize even when we offend. I'm sorry, I may be old fashioned, but that just isn't going to work so well.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Embassy attacks a tale of two leaders
It will certainly come as no surprise when we discover that the attacks on the US embassy in Cairo and later in Libya were timed to celebrate 9/11. It certainly came as no surprise that Mitt Romney has criticized the reasoned response by the Obama administration. Does Mr. Romney not know that one does not throw gasoline on fires? In the midst of an attack one does not egg on the attackers unless one is really in a position to use force to repel the assault. As cool as it would be in a movie sending in a fleet of helicopter gunships to cut down the rioters, in real life that would constitute an act of war. In real time the statement that Mr. Romney condemns over and over was a reasoned response intended to sooth tensions as the crowd was in the initial stages of assault, before any actual breach. To call the mob out for a fight would be wrong, to say, let us reason together is the peaceful and dignified approach.
I have hears these strident calls to never apologize never back down before, they always lead to fights even when fights could be avoided. Sometimes it is time to listen to your mother's voice and find a way out. Sometimes what we really need to hear in a stressful situation is a well placed, "I'm sorry, I think there has been a misunderstanding."
An Embassy is a fragile thing, sitting as sovereign ground on foreign territory, armed only with a minimum of troops. Embassies rely on their host governments for protection and security. This case is even more than usually sensitive as we are trying to work with newly established governments in both Egypt and Libya. Diplomacy is a tough game and the Romney Campaign has not shown itself particularly adept at the fine art. It has increasingly found itself stirring the pot.
At the same time that this drama has been playing on the world's news outlets, Mr. Romney's good friend Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has been sounding the alarm on Iran, requesting "red lines" be set against Iran - lines past which military action will inevitably happen. Make no mistake, such lines in the sand are dangerous brinksmanship and are, like defiance to the mobs in Cairo and Bengazhi, a sure way to bring on more trouble. In criticizing the administration response, Mr. Romney may well make his right wing supporters happy, but he loses sight of the need to America to live side by side with other nations in an increasingly hostile world.The only reasoned response to such activity is to call for calm, and seek to restore order. It is only after that that we can determine whether or not our missions to those countries can continue or if we wish to isolate ourselves by withdrawing from the world at large.
I have hears these strident calls to never apologize never back down before, they always lead to fights even when fights could be avoided. Sometimes it is time to listen to your mother's voice and find a way out. Sometimes what we really need to hear in a stressful situation is a well placed, "I'm sorry, I think there has been a misunderstanding."
An Embassy is a fragile thing, sitting as sovereign ground on foreign territory, armed only with a minimum of troops. Embassies rely on their host governments for protection and security. This case is even more than usually sensitive as we are trying to work with newly established governments in both Egypt and Libya. Diplomacy is a tough game and the Romney Campaign has not shown itself particularly adept at the fine art. It has increasingly found itself stirring the pot.
At the same time that this drama has been playing on the world's news outlets, Mr. Romney's good friend Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel has been sounding the alarm on Iran, requesting "red lines" be set against Iran - lines past which military action will inevitably happen. Make no mistake, such lines in the sand are dangerous brinksmanship and are, like defiance to the mobs in Cairo and Bengazhi, a sure way to bring on more trouble. In criticizing the administration response, Mr. Romney may well make his right wing supporters happy, but he loses sight of the need to America to live side by side with other nations in an increasingly hostile world.The only reasoned response to such activity is to call for calm, and seek to restore order. It is only after that that we can determine whether or not our missions to those countries can continue or if we wish to isolate ourselves by withdrawing from the world at large.
Sunday, August 19, 2012
Monday, July 30, 2012
Mitt Romney and the Arab Spring - leading to the Guns of August?
Mitt Romney has just announced that Israeli state has enjoyed success stating:
“And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things,” Romney said, citing an innovative business climate, the Jewish history of thriving in difficult circumstances and the “hand of providence.”
And he will do well with this statement as racist as it is because he was pandering to several rich patrons who share this limited view. Of course this view will do nothing to help quell the anger in the impoverished Gaza Strip or other areas where Arab Palestinians live in the impoverished shadow of Israel's glory Announcements like this only fuel the fire that America does not understand or respect the Arab world.
The Arab world is right in this regard. America's arrogance is unabashed. We went into Iraq promising to make it a democracy and free. We proclaimed that her people would welcome us as liberators, we were found to be conquerors and an occupying enemy instead. We wanted to plant democracy, but were unprepared for the anti-American sentiment of the people and hence a democracy that we could not trust.
We destabilized the control that we had created over Iran and now face growing concern in all corners of the Arab world. Wherever former dictators, who have largely been secular, have been replaced with popular governments, we find that those governments are increasingly Islamist and radically anti western in their bent. Rather than forging an alliance for the future our last ten years of influence in the middle east have resulted in a rising new order that is more than ever opposed to Western values. We have planted democracy but at the same time ensured that confrontation of value systems will escalate.
Candidate Romney may gather voter and financial support from his saber rattling in the Middle East, but whoever wins the White House will inherit a more hostile world. The chances for peace diminish in a climate of aggressive display, sooner or later someone will decide to stand their ground and the dominoes will fall.
“And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things,” Romney said, citing an innovative business climate, the Jewish history of thriving in difficult circumstances and the “hand of providence.”
And he will do well with this statement as racist as it is because he was pandering to several rich patrons who share this limited view. Of course this view will do nothing to help quell the anger in the impoverished Gaza Strip or other areas where Arab Palestinians live in the impoverished shadow of Israel's glory Announcements like this only fuel the fire that America does not understand or respect the Arab world.
The Arab world is right in this regard. America's arrogance is unabashed. We went into Iraq promising to make it a democracy and free. We proclaimed that her people would welcome us as liberators, we were found to be conquerors and an occupying enemy instead. We wanted to plant democracy, but were unprepared for the anti-American sentiment of the people and hence a democracy that we could not trust.
We destabilized the control that we had created over Iran and now face growing concern in all corners of the Arab world. Wherever former dictators, who have largely been secular, have been replaced with popular governments, we find that those governments are increasingly Islamist and radically anti western in their bent. Rather than forging an alliance for the future our last ten years of influence in the middle east have resulted in a rising new order that is more than ever opposed to Western values. We have planted democracy but at the same time ensured that confrontation of value systems will escalate.
Candidate Romney may gather voter and financial support from his saber rattling in the Middle East, but whoever wins the White House will inherit a more hostile world. The chances for peace diminish in a climate of aggressive display, sooner or later someone will decide to stand their ground and the dominoes will fall.
Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Embarrassed millionaires and the health care controversy
It isn't your fault if you aren't in the 1%, but it is to your shame if you give the uber rich power and support their causes to your economic detriment.
Universal health care, like universal education benefits all citizens. Early access to health care reduces the strain on emergency rooms and the resulting financial drain on hospitals. Not surprisingly hospital stock went up when the health care decision came down. Access to healthcare promotes health and wellness and reduces the losses that come from write offs at the ER.
The only people who come to this country for health care are Saudi Princes and the like. People whose access to money allows them access to what I keep hearing is "the best health care in the world." For the rest of humanity it just isn't so. It ma be the best, but if it isn't available it might as well not exist.
Without insurance one can hardly afford preventative health care. When one looks at medications costing hundreds per month it takes a lot of income to survive. When one needs those medications often employment isn't in the picture. Shall we blame the sick or fight for health?
The sad truth is that hard work and perseverance more often than not will get you to the finish line tired and poor. Never the less many people who may never even make it to the upper 20% of Americans in wealth thus earning themselves a position which puts them in the middle wealth wise, people who could actually benefit from universal health care, are against it. It has confused me for years, but John Steinbeck understood it well:
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
― John Steinbeck
Universal health care, like universal education benefits all citizens. Early access to health care reduces the strain on emergency rooms and the resulting financial drain on hospitals. Not surprisingly hospital stock went up when the health care decision came down. Access to healthcare promotes health and wellness and reduces the losses that come from write offs at the ER.
The only people who come to this country for health care are Saudi Princes and the like. People whose access to money allows them access to what I keep hearing is "the best health care in the world." For the rest of humanity it just isn't so. It ma be the best, but if it isn't available it might as well not exist.
Without insurance one can hardly afford preventative health care. When one looks at medications costing hundreds per month it takes a lot of income to survive. When one needs those medications often employment isn't in the picture. Shall we blame the sick or fight for health?
The sad truth is that hard work and perseverance more often than not will get you to the finish line tired and poor. Never the less many people who may never even make it to the upper 20% of Americans in wealth thus earning themselves a position which puts them in the middle wealth wise, people who could actually benefit from universal health care, are against it. It has confused me for years, but John Steinbeck understood it well:
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
― John Steinbeck
Monday, July 16, 2012
Political Animals 40% of a great show.
The new show on USA is Political Animals. It is not about the Clintons. No, it really isn't because Bill Clinton would be fun to watch, even no drama Obama would be more fun to watch. Instead the writers have created a former First Lady turned Governor turned Secretary of State who is AMAZING and teamed her with a (ex)husband with no sense propriety, a egotist without charm. (and Bill had charm to burn).
Sigourney Weaver is absolutely incredible. I believe almost every scene with her in it, but the only other character that is even remotely interesting is the female reporter.played by Carla Cugino. If they could just limit it to them it would be an amazing show. The women have presence and spark and play well off of each other. It is a bit of a feminist manifesto that the men are totally expendable, but unfortunately for the viewers, the men's roles are big and important and therein lies the problem.
I will watch again, but fear that it will not be for long. So much promise, a bit like Gina Davis as President. :(
Sigourney Weaver is absolutely incredible. I believe almost every scene with her in it, but the only other character that is even remotely interesting is the female reporter.played by Carla Cugino. If they could just limit it to them it would be an amazing show. The women have presence and spark and play well off of each other. It is a bit of a feminist manifesto that the men are totally expendable, but unfortunately for the viewers, the men's roles are big and important and therein lies the problem.
I will watch again, but fear that it will not be for long. So much promise, a bit like Gina Davis as President. :(
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Did you really believe that?
My wife asked the other day if I really believed that. That being the Virgin birth and divinity of Jesus. She asked because well I have served as an ordained minister in a Protestant denomination. So it was a valid question. I had a hard time answering because it is so conditioned within us a Christians that certain truths are not only not non negotiable, they are so sacred that one does not even question whether questioning would be called for. The short answer for me has always been yes, I affirm the Divinity of the Christ, but I fear that the answer belies the truth as I believe fully and without equivocation in many scientific truths that a literally understanding of the Gospel would deny.
Indeed I have never been a very literal believer in most of the the sacred story. I have long been a believer in the story and a participant in the journey without actually being in word for word agreement. It was this dichotomy that led me to leave the ministry quite some time ago. My double think wasn't effective anymore, and though I longed to be a part of the host of saints, I was increasingly in the way of the beliefs of others.
So today I answer in a different way. No, I do not now, nor have I ever really believed that Jesus was born to a Virgin, never mind the controversy over whether she remained one after the birth. And I have never been totally sure of the claim of divinity. Jesus was and is for me a teacher and guide, a radical rabbi whose teachings of love and mutual understanding still resonate for me. I believe that in an inner way, Jesus was in touch with that quality of God that speaks to us. I believe that in the communion we are participating in a larger than life sharing of our common faith. It is easy for me to see myself a the table recreating an event that I share with those who have gone before and those who are yet to come. That is a part of my faith, an article of the mystery that has drawn me and continues to speak to me. But it is a dialogue that I largely share in private. There are a few who can understand the struggle as I do, there are far more who cannot comprehend that my struggle is valid.
Never the less, as oft I drink that cup or eat that bread I do it in memory of Him. He guides my walk and that, for me, makes me a Christian.
Indeed I have never been a very literal believer in most of the the sacred story. I have long been a believer in the story and a participant in the journey without actually being in word for word agreement. It was this dichotomy that led me to leave the ministry quite some time ago. My double think wasn't effective anymore, and though I longed to be a part of the host of saints, I was increasingly in the way of the beliefs of others.
So today I answer in a different way. No, I do not now, nor have I ever really believed that Jesus was born to a Virgin, never mind the controversy over whether she remained one after the birth. And I have never been totally sure of the claim of divinity. Jesus was and is for me a teacher and guide, a radical rabbi whose teachings of love and mutual understanding still resonate for me. I believe that in an inner way, Jesus was in touch with that quality of God that speaks to us. I believe that in the communion we are participating in a larger than life sharing of our common faith. It is easy for me to see myself a the table recreating an event that I share with those who have gone before and those who are yet to come. That is a part of my faith, an article of the mystery that has drawn me and continues to speak to me. But it is a dialogue that I largely share in private. There are a few who can understand the struggle as I do, there are far more who cannot comprehend that my struggle is valid.
Never the less, as oft I drink that cup or eat that bread I do it in memory of Him. He guides my walk and that, for me, makes me a Christian.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
You made me a better person
While going through the Classmates web site a few days ago, I came across a name that made me stop and reflect. It was the name of the first girl I ever dated, the first girl I ever kissed ( if memory can be trusted at all) and the first girl that my emotional stupidity ever hurt. In my defense I can only say I was young and dumb, but I need the world to know, I need her to know, that I am better for her confronting me on the issue and wish that I had the courage and insight to have properly apologized all those years ago.
It all began innocently enough. I was at boarding school, a dreary place that I detested. Letters from home were about the only thing that made life good, so I wrote to anyone, everyone. Not even when I was in Vietnam did I write so much. One night I wrote two letters, one to a girl that I was trying to impress and one to one that I was writing to because - well, I suppose because I still needed her in my life though we were no longer seeing each other. So I wrote and addressed both letters, put one in the envelope and posted it. I then went back to my room only to find the other letter with the wrong envelope. I knew I was in for it. Somewhere in my peanut sized brain it had seemed right to try to impress the new girl by comparing her to the old. I waited and it wasn't long before the dreaded response came back. "I knew at once that your letter wasn't meant for me, but . . ."
Mary, I was so dumb, such a heel, believe me when I say that moment has been etched eternally and whatever wrong, bad or stupid relationship things I have done since, I have assiduously refrained from such comparisons.
I never really got a proper chance to make amends Now may be too late, but I did learn that each of us comes to another fresh and memories of the past are sacred texts that are shared only in the most careful and sincere ways. I honestly do not know what I said in that letter. It isn't as important as the realization that it hurt you and that was never the intent. Intent, however, as I learned, has nothing at all to do with results. Intent is a legal fiction. I caused hurt and that was wrong. You never deserved to be hurt. and I fully deserved your wrath. You may never see this, although a part of me hopes you do. Whether you read these words or not, I am sorry that I caused you pain, I was stupid, but I have learned and the good news, that I hope you realized even then, is that the other person never read what you were sent.
That and I have never heard Herman's Hermits singing "Mrs. Brown you've got a lovely daughter," without thinking fondly of you.
It all began innocently enough. I was at boarding school, a dreary place that I detested. Letters from home were about the only thing that made life good, so I wrote to anyone, everyone. Not even when I was in Vietnam did I write so much. One night I wrote two letters, one to a girl that I was trying to impress and one to one that I was writing to because - well, I suppose because I still needed her in my life though we were no longer seeing each other. So I wrote and addressed both letters, put one in the envelope and posted it. I then went back to my room only to find the other letter with the wrong envelope. I knew I was in for it. Somewhere in my peanut sized brain it had seemed right to try to impress the new girl by comparing her to the old. I waited and it wasn't long before the dreaded response came back. "I knew at once that your letter wasn't meant for me, but . . ."
Mary, I was so dumb, such a heel, believe me when I say that moment has been etched eternally and whatever wrong, bad or stupid relationship things I have done since, I have assiduously refrained from such comparisons.
I never really got a proper chance to make amends Now may be too late, but I did learn that each of us comes to another fresh and memories of the past are sacred texts that are shared only in the most careful and sincere ways. I honestly do not know what I said in that letter. It isn't as important as the realization that it hurt you and that was never the intent. Intent, however, as I learned, has nothing at all to do with results. Intent is a legal fiction. I caused hurt and that was wrong. You never deserved to be hurt. and I fully deserved your wrath. You may never see this, although a part of me hopes you do. Whether you read these words or not, I am sorry that I caused you pain, I was stupid, but I have learned and the good news, that I hope you realized even then, is that the other person never read what you were sent.
That and I have never heard Herman's Hermits singing "Mrs. Brown you've got a lovely daughter," without thinking fondly of you.
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Stand your ground: The battle of Trayvon and George
It is clear by now that Trayvon Martin wasn't the cute kid in the early photos, nor is George Zimmerman quite as rough as he looked in his early on line shots, and yet some things remain the same. George Zimmerman left his vehicle with the expressed purpose of stopping a black male from "getting away with" something. He was advised by the police to stay put, he didn't and he took his gun with him. At that point he was not standing his ground, he was hunting. It appears that his prey didn't like being hunted. Didn't Trayvon have the right to be unmolested and free?
We will never know for sure what made Trayvon react, but we can suspect that he felt a threat to his security. I would and I'm a 60 something white guy. Imagine what a teenager from Miami must have felt when this guy starts following him at night. Something happened that we will never know, but there are two things that I am sure of.
George Zimmerman should have never left his car and George Zimmerman did not need the gun in the first place.
Had he stayed still for two minutes, the police would have been there and Trayvon would have had a chance to drink that iced tea.
Hunting people is not standing your ground and should be classified as what it is - attempted murder once commenced and murder once the first victim falls. I just can't see blaming the victim. "I was just hunting him down when he attacked officer, so I pulled my gun and shot him." Is that the kind of wild west legacy we give to our children? The traditional self defense test made sense, you can't provoke the fight that you end with a gun.
We will never know for sure what made Trayvon react, but we can suspect that he felt a threat to his security. I would and I'm a 60 something white guy. Imagine what a teenager from Miami must have felt when this guy starts following him at night. Something happened that we will never know, but there are two things that I am sure of.
George Zimmerman should have never left his car and George Zimmerman did not need the gun in the first place.
Had he stayed still for two minutes, the police would have been there and Trayvon would have had a chance to drink that iced tea.
Hunting people is not standing your ground and should be classified as what it is - attempted murder once commenced and murder once the first victim falls. I just can't see blaming the victim. "I was just hunting him down when he attacked officer, so I pulled my gun and shot him." Is that the kind of wild west legacy we give to our children? The traditional self defense test made sense, you can't provoke the fight that you end with a gun.
Friday, January 27, 2012
A funny thing happened on the way to the Forum
Karl Marx once wrote about the abuse of the worker by the capitalist system and the use of labor pools as capital. Fast forward a 100 + years and where do we find labor as capital being exploited to its extreme? China, one of the few "Communist" countries left in the world, is also the greatest manufacturing power by virtue not of its raw materials, coal, steel etc, but by virtue of its incredibly large and for the most part docile labor supply.
It is indeed ironic, and yet it would not surprise Marx at all for he never envisioned a Communist society in the agrarian peasant society that was China until quite recently. So just to go out on a limb, the next communist revolution seems due in none other than the Communist controlled, labor rich, state capitalist system know as China. It is an irony that would have made Marx smile sadly.
As one reads of Apple factories springing up overnight and labor abuses that would never be allowed in the West, one recalls George Orwell's simple yet elegant treatise, Animal Farm where t he pigs sit down with the farmers and feast while the animals toil to supply the party.
It is indeed ironic, and yet it would not surprise Marx at all for he never envisioned a Communist society in the agrarian peasant society that was China until quite recently. So just to go out on a limb, the next communist revolution seems due in none other than the Communist controlled, labor rich, state capitalist system know as China. It is an irony that would have made Marx smile sadly.
As one reads of Apple factories springing up overnight and labor abuses that would never be allowed in the West, one recalls George Orwell's simple yet elegant treatise, Animal Farm where t he pigs sit down with the farmers and feast while the animals toil to supply the party.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Even an Apostate has to Call Foul
Even an apostate Christian must call foul when Mormons claim to be Christian. First of all Christians adhere to a rigorous understanding of the interrelationship of God, Son and Spirit in the one God that is represented by the Trinity, Mormons do not make that distinction at all and regularly see the three parts as separate and not even equal players . Heavenly Father (and the unspoken but presumed Heavenly Mother) rule and Jesus Christ acts as a good son doing the Father's bidding and trying to set things straight with Heavenly Father's other more wayward children. At best Mormons are Arians, but at their heart they are Polytheists believing not only that Jesus could become God, but that we might also become such.
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Top heavy cruise ships
For the past 15 years cruse ships have been getting bigger and bigger and taller and taller. The recent disaster on the Costa Concordia highlights this issue. As soon as the ship started taking on water it started to list heavily hampering evacuation efforts. We have all seen the pictures of the ship aground and on its side.
It is up to engineers and architects to determine if the listing was the fault of the design or not, but it has long been the buzz of passengers that these ships are being designed without regard for the effects of too much weight too high above the water line. It is time to look at ships design with this safety issue in mind.
It is up to engineers and architects to determine if the listing was the fault of the design or not, but it has long been the buzz of passengers that these ships are being designed without regard for the effects of too much weight too high above the water line. It is time to look at ships design with this safety issue in mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)