To loot or not to loot

This article was lifted from Jack Cafferty's blog on CNN Politics by Ashley Manglona, a student at the University of Nevada, La Vegas, who posted it on her Facebook page. The responses to Mr. Cafferty's question about the nature of crime in the days following extrodinary natural disasters seemed refreshingly critical in their spontaneous condemnation of American morality against the backdrop of Japan's current example of civil obedience during its most severe national crisis since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. As usual, I am suspicious when so many people repeat the short list of possible explainations for a social phenomenon as complex as organizing order from the rubble of chaos. Here is an exerpt from Jack's blog followed by a sampleing of views of the situation from average citizens ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From CNN's Jack Cafferty:

In the wake of Japan's deadly earthquake, tsunami and nuclear power plant explosions, we have witnessed the almost indescribable chaos that follows a disaster of this magnitude: loss of life, severe injuries, homelessness, lack of water, food and proper medical care, the physical destruction of towns and cities, and a growing fear of radioactive contamination from power plants that seem beyond anyone's ability to control. But one heart-wrenching byproduct of disasters like this one has been missing in Japan, and that’s looting and lawlessness.
Looting is something we see after almost every tragedy; for example: last year's earthquakes in Haiti and Chile, the floods in England in 2007, and of course Hurricane Katrina back in 2005. It happens when some people who've seen life as they know it get tossed out the window feel that all morality has been tossed out too. It's survival of the fittest and whatever you can get your hands on is yours, no matter who it belongs to. But that's not happening in Japan. Journalist and social commentator Ed West wrote in the UK Telegraph yesterday how struck he was by the Japanese culture throughout this ordeal. He observed how supermarkets cut their prices in the days following the quake and how vending machine owners were giving out free drinks as "people work together to survive." And West was most surprised by the fact that there was no looting.
Many have pointed to the popularity of Japan's distinctive Buddhist and Shinto religions as well as how the values of conformity and consensus are considered virtues in their culture. That's one explanation, but it probably has something to do with remaining true to your moral code even in the darkest hours. Here’s my question to you: Why is there no looting in Japan? -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and here are some of the responses to Ashley's post:

Kevin Blank Yes, I've read about this in the news over the past several days. It's wonderful to know that at least some of us have evolved into a higher order of society for what ever the reasons, i.e. the comments posted at the end of this article. A friend of mine reminded me of a hurricane that we experienced in the latter part of the 80's on Long Island. It wasn't even a nasty hurricane at that. People were fighting on line to get into restaurants. I don't know how we've evolved into spoiled people with a sense of entitlement but it's disgusting.

Jim Mauro Answer - because they understand the meaning of the word, respect.

Steven Albanese the Japanese people show "Grace under pressure." In the US, when our teams win we light fires in the streets. I've seen more fighting on line at the A&P.

Jeff Thomas Japanese corporate executives work at companies equal in size to some of the largest and most successful in the United States yet earn salaries that would hardley excite a job hunting graduate from one of our Ivy league universities.Looting and selfish behavior are not simply impulses the Japanese pride themselves for avoiding, but most vexing to the children of our Western /Christian /Capitalistic struggle for the liberation and perfection of the individual, are actually manifestations of a vaccuum of such impulses, perhaps analogous to a nomad from the Sahara desert avoiding the impulse to make a snow sculpture. The Japanese have developed shame the way we in the West have cultivated guilt. The former serves to balance one's place within the greater community while the latter has the power to destroy an individual from within. Our sense of personal entitlement has enabled us to achieve many good things, one of which is a relatively advanced tolerance for diversity, from which we stand to gain the widest variety of progressive influences. We have always held disdain for those cultures with less to offer than we have to give. Our closest historical allies have always been from a relatively small and homogenous collection of European countries, yet our roots grow deep into the soils of many third world countries with plentiful natural resources. The Japanese on the other hand, have only recently addressed the eight hundred pound gorilla in the room, which is how to accept the idea of cultural diversity from the perspective of many centuries cultivation of the community as the unit measure of an individual's identity. We in the West have much to atone for; the sackings and plunder, the genocides and the swindling . . . and the slaves . . this is the price paid by those we have converted to our Christian/Capitalistic sensibilities who had little technological wampum to trade. Our entitlement was bestowed by Christ and has hovered ever since as our challenge. It will take much less than a hurricane for typical Americans to perform like underfed fighting dogs if so much as a rumor were leaked of a disruption in the supply chain. To engage in the world economy, old xenophobic traditions must fall behind the costumed sense of a new world enthusiasm for diversity. This is the current situation we are witnessing in Japan. The sense of being Japanese has always meant th...at one's intrinsic meaning was inseparable from the achievements of the community and hence the Nation. The hardest thing you can ask from an average American is to sacrifice his individuality for the good of his community or Country. This is simply a collateral consequence of our traditional need to be an individual in the eyes of our God, our community and/or our selves.

Ashley Manglona What do you mean by tolerance for diversity?

Jeff Thomas I use "Cultural diversity" as a term to describe the integration of useful techniques and expressions from areas outside the arena of traditional Western philosophic sensibilities. It was not my intention to suggest that our embrace of Jazz or the Japanese wood block print is a testament for our embrace of the same people who inspired these discoveries and suffered under our prejudices.

Kevin Blank So, in other words, the people of Japan can be just as sinister as you and I (not that we're sinister at all) but prefer to conduct their dark side activities as a group for the benefit of all as opposed to the benefit on the one, right? Wh...y attack within as we'll only hurt our selves? They're society functions as a group, not as individuals making up a group, as does the ant. (no insult intended) After reflecting on my initial response and doing a bit of reading I find myself aligned with your thoughts on this matter. You’re so good, jt. They are no better or worse than you and/or I. They've been raised differently. The potential for ruthlessness as a group isn't any more respectful or honorable than ruthlessness as an individual. Just the same, it is nice to see what appears to be people getting along, wouldn't you say?

Jeff Thomas It is not my intention to level the playing field by directing more light onto the darker sides of our respective natures. I am simply fed up with individuals who lack the sensitivity for a direct challenge of the subtleties of any situation; those individuals who base an impulsive analysis on a superficial impression, yet fail to recognize the need to keep their half-baked opinions in the oven. I am simply a guy who fails to believe that any culture achieves an advantage before rationalizing the price of its success. I believe it is simplistic to assume that the code of discipline and cooperation represented by the Japanese people during this recent crisis can be adopted by societies like our own here in the west by merely emphasizing a collective inventory of our own moral intelligence based solely on the superficial behaviours observed during the current crisis we witness on our Television screens. The cry for a return to mutual respect among Americans is pointless without recognizing first that our Judeo/Christian definition of respect is profoundly alien to the principles indoctrinated into the Japanese culture; a dramatic disparity begun across the span of many centuries. Our Western crime of mutual antagonism, our anxious competition to out-perform our neighbors must be weighed against the very catalyst of its existance, our indoctrination into the cult of the individual. For all its substantive credit during times of crisis, Japan's long history of supression of the individual for the benefit of the greater community has rendered the assimilation of cultural diversity virtually ineffective, empowering the core of its unified identity but only at the cost of those traits which made the Western world singularly diverse and materially profitable. When my neighbor Bob, drove his brand new car up his driveway it was natural and reflexive of me to look over at my ten year old Jeep and wonder. Taking the time to analyze the benefits of my situation against Bob's recent good fortune was all it took to regain confidence in my ability to direct a sober action plan. Our situations were dissimilar enough to support the conclusion that I could either welcome his unique advantages and celebrate his good fortune or draft an strategy to achieve a similar goal. To simply look at Bob and curse my situation is not helpful. I am aware also that in my attempt to shake the situation somewhat, in the hopes of inspiring some of you other people to dig a little deeper and try to learn from the Japanese example, I have used gross generalities which open my flanks to criticism. I implore all of you to force my hand and see what the dealer is holding. That is what is called a dialogue in the truest and most American fashion. This, for all our faults, is what we do best.

Linda Frederick-Magee May I? A people groomed with far more self discipline....

Jeff Thomas
‎1] What features of self discipline alone could answer for this perpetual resistance of the sexier, more natural instinct to collect and possess that which is desirous and essential, as is offhandedly accredited to the Japanese society?
2] Would the economic achievements of the European/American civilization have been as fruitful without being as traditionally self serving?
3] Could our level of cultural and scientific development throughout the centuries have survived on equal terms in the absence of the philanthropic stimulus of our financial tyrants?
4] Where might Japan be today without a leg-up from scientific and technological/industrial achievements hard earned by Western scientist, technicians and tycoons?
5] Now that Japan has adopted a taste for the bitter fruit, what influences are unique enough to the Japanese culture to prevent a deterioration of the same culture of self-discipline which basted for centuries in the mutual suppression of the citizen as individual, the driving force of our western achievements?
6] Are we happier?; Are they happier?; What is the true measure of happiness?

through the looking glass

Dear Professor,

from The Las Vegas Sun:

A 12-year-old boy allegedly shot the father of a 9-year-old boy after the man intervened when the two boys were fighting late Sunday afternoon, Metro Police said. Lt. Ted Snodgrass said the shooting happened at 4:45 p.m. near 21st Street and Sunrise Avenue east of downtown Las Vegas. The 12-year-old pulled a gun and allegedly shot the younger child's father in the leg during the dispute, Snodgrass said. The man was taken to a hospital with injuries not believed to be life-threatening. Police said the boy is a known gang member (???) and was taken into custody. Authorities haven't released the name of the boy because of his age.

comment- I don't even know where to begin with this one.

- Hoople

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Hoop,

So another newspaper found the freak scoop; that tasty morsel of human tragedy which keeps the eyes sharp and the elbows juiced enough to work the ink-stained pages. This time, a precocious pubescent boy is acting out his interpretation from our worst examples of adulthood so that we can sit in our easy chairs and take comfort in the knowledge that our opinions are still on course.

"There never was anything good gonna come out of these ghettos. Voting to increase spending to improve the infrastructure of these neighborhoods ignores the fact that these people are fundamentally different than us; they wouldn't know what to do with a new school anyway, but maybe tag it up with their spray paint and sell drugs to the kids there. So lets spend half that tax money paying cops to keep them in there place over there and outta my town."

Or perhaps:

"This is exactly why we need to spend money on schools and housing subsidies and outreach programs. People are dying in these streets and no one can convince me that a young boy should have no alternative to gang life and prison than becoming the victim of gang violence. Sex education, needle exchanges and HIV testing is essential to stop the cycle of premature deaths from preventable causes. Every child orphaned by an untimely death becomes another ward of the state system which is financially overstretched to begin with." . . .

and so the debate goes . . .

Law enforcement is represented by a well seasoned, powerful union skilled at directing money from state and local budgets to the payroll account of its members. Stories like this only keep the system strong by spreading the fear that without strong law enforcement, your neighborhood will be the home of the next victim. The problem has always been an impasse in the debate over who the victim or victims in this story are. I wonder what the world would look like if someone came into the picture with enough charisma to challenge the conventional approach to poverty, someone with a plan to starve these gangs of their attraction by offering a sexy alternative to poverty and the vacuum of drugs and violence it showcases.

These are the only perks that gangs can offer young recruits to compete with the healthcare and pension plans we in the "middle class" take for granted. Too many individuals from poor neighborhoods learn at an early age that they don't fit into the mainstream equation and channel their prepubescent hope and anger onto a more down-home system of gangland protocol, which at the very least bears a far greater familiarity to the tough homes they grew up into than some middle class society, which systematically refuses to absorb them. We spend our tax dollars quarantining "lost communities" and accept stories like this as the product of self-determination (like some twelve year old boy should spend the rest of his life shouldering the consequences of his underdeveloped choices); the inevitable sacrifices ; the "collateral damage" in the march toward progressing middle and upper class economies. This story happened to dispensable people who live in a parallel universe, untouched by me and me untouched by them; surreal horror stories from disposable pockets of the whole picture, safely contained by our high-octane police force and as relevant to our day to day experience as the struggle in Algeria, Lybia or last night's presentation of True blood.

Unlike many who suggest the answer lies in the slathering of tax dollars directly into programs focused on housing, heating, health and education, I object that these steps alone fail to address the eight hundred pound gorilla in the room. The latest threat to our Nation, described by the Office of Homeland Security as the number one threat to the security of United States was not Al Qaeda recruitment inside the country, not the destabilization of the Middle East by grassroots protests, but the collapse of the banking and securities industry in 2008 through today. The cycle of trust and honor that spent the last two hundred years capitalizing on our free market system, closing deals with a handshake, this same code of "ethics" manipulated the government of this country to deregulate the game to a degree so extensive, that any checks and balances legislated to prevent an implosion of the market were no longer in place and the system collapsed. (Think Sago or Knox mine disasters.)

The fact that a twelve year old boy chose to define himself as a thug might have just as much to do with his taste for a fundamental sense of control over issues unrelated singularly to poverty. I cannot help but think that the executives on Wall Street responsible for the housing scandal, the bundling of toxic assets for resale and inflated oil prices; who received immense government bailouts without forfeiting obscene bonuses; who developed intricate Ponzi schemes and broke the backs of orphanages, charities and pension plans for millions . . these princes from Wharton, Harvard and Yale were all the products of the very same system in whose absence we blame gang related crimes. This is not specifically a Black, ghetto thing. This is not specifically a product of academic or spiritual illiteracy; but is the manifestation of a condition called self-reliance and all the progress and consequences associated with it.

What answer could possibly explain the similarity between those crimes we simultaneously demonize and envy, such as the treasonous stock trading scumbags we punished with a slap on the wrist and the equally vulgar, petty crimes which reinforce our personal, smug sense of cultural elevation and moral superiority, such as those which stream out from our poor, dysfunctional neighborhoods. I will take a guess here and suggest that a twelve year old boy, carrying a loaded gun, a punk with the tenacity to pull the trigger at a human target, did not start his foray into the underworld a mere day or two ago. I will further speculate that the boy spent his first four years of life, like every one of us, absolutely dependent on his environment for food, clothing and other signals from his caretakers about social interaction, opinions, language development, and a sense of his own self worth. How can a couple of guys like you or me, from decent homes in suburban Long Island, comprehend the complex disfigurement of a personality who would assume the position of caretaker with rabid contempt? What does this baby, infant, toddler or child learn about his world and his place in it? How will more books, smaller class sizes and fresh painted halls undo five years, five immensely influential years, of abuse and indoctrination?

What this kid needed twelve years ago was an environment that instilled, at the most rudimentary level, a sense of safety. This above all speaks to our most fundamental instinct, our will to survive. Without a sense of protection and security, it is understandable that a system of values contradictory to the trust and compassion associated with them would develop, quite naturally filling the void. People cannot stop learning; knowledge cannot be shut off. I believe it is very probable the boy quickly learned to distrust anyone who showed compassion, people who don't see the world equation from his handicapped perspective, thus gradually developing a sense of contempt for them. By this process the population at large becomes dehumanized, and a moral dilemma for you and I, such as pulling the trigger on a gun aimed directly at another human being, is evaluated against an alternative schematic of responses, one that does not hesitate to cause suffering and injury to another person. In addition, the mind of a twelve year old boy, unlike his white collar colleague in crime, is also unburdened by the complexities of consequence. He has conquered a brief, vulnerable lifetime of insecurity and fear by making decisions to behave in ways that reinforce his skill-set at becoming feared.

From this perspective, it can be assumed that the consequences of an equation as intense and desperate as shooting someone in broad daylight do not include variables such as moral anxiety, a long prison sentence and/or loss of family, home and savings, but are instead about as comprehensive to our sensibilities as anything Alice might have imagined on the other side of the looking glass; to have spared his victim would have compromised his instinctive need to earn respect among some group of like-minded individuals who, for the first time in his life, vindicated the warped sense of reality he cultivated since infancy. By allowing his victim to walk away unharmed, he would have sacrificed his only chance to conquer the sense of personal vulnerability which has haunted him from his earliest recollection. It is important for him to pull the trigger and very little in the way of a social contract stands between his impulses and the tragedy; therefore the consequences resulting from a failure to shoot the man far outweigh the alternative.

But as I continue to repeat, redirecting money from cops into social programs, building new schools, handing out condoms and filling generous pots on the stoves of soup kitchens will affect only those individuals with an inclination to reach out for the help. How are all those two and three year olds, who arguably need help the most, going to reach beyond the parental figure who is already deep, deep under the radar in a cycle of drugs, neglect and self loathing. The traditional response is that no dollar amount will ever exceed the right of even one young, disenfranchised American to be saved from the cycle. I ask if this approach, though noble and romantically valid, can possibly approach its objective before breaking down under the weight of its own promise. How do I justify asking hardworking families to take money away from their communities to help a disenfranchised community rise up from hell when no guarantee can be made on any return on the investment? And how can I ensure that their success will not alienate me? What if they raise alternative cultural values and traditions out from the ghetto with them? Might it not make more sense to keep this demographic quiet by distributing paltry living handouts than unleash their numbers and potential onto an already dismal job environment.

On the other hand, what sense does it make to avoid answering these questions and instead continue to perpetuate the system of poverty begetting poverty and paying cops to mop up the overspill. Either way we complain about wasting money on imperfect half measures while the decades pass and these children start having babies of their own; start having their own gang tattoos and addictions; and our newspapers will peep through their little gloryholes, watching and waiting for the next human meltdown so they can continue to entertain and we can keep the standoff at the status quo. How do you reach a kid like this? What is the return on your investment? How can you maximize your return? Is it even possible to turn the situation around? These are the questions I believe we should be asking after reading this story.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Prof. Giov

Still trying to blame the commercial fishing industry for the actions of the Somalia Pirates, aren't you? This kid has no parents? Are you going to slam me with some shit like they are less fortunate and as such don't have some sense of social etiquette because of a funding issue?

I have a funding issue but I've chosen to use it to my advantage. I'm teaching my kid about working hard and working smart to avoid the situation I'm in and it's working. You're not going to save them jt. And just because they have thumbs doesn't predicate a mandate to do so. I really don't want to drop the survival of the fittest card but I have no choice but to do just that. What ever conclusions you've reached in searching for a solution to this problem are near impossible to employ. Look at the logistics. Just as the alcoholic must make the decision to put his or her drink down, the parent of this less fortunate twelve year old will have to start making changes on their own.

You can't force the hand of someone who would prefer to collect a government check, use it to stay doped up, and neglect the responsibility that they took ownership of the day that boy was conceived. You can try. The suggestion of a clean drug test to receive government assistance is something I've mention in the past and one idea that I thought would help to stimulate the thought process of coming around for some of these individuals. You said no. Somewhere along the line personal responsibility must be accounted for regardless of the environment that chance has placed individuals in.

No, Sir. This doesn't fall into the hands of misappropriated government spending. The schools are there. They may be a little crowded and have old poser pictures but, as I understand, correct social behavior is still being taught. When the kids get home, lessons learned should be talked about, parallel lines drawn and the good of it all reaffirmed, that is if they're interested in who he is, what he's doing, how he's progressing and the other things that come along with loving and caring about your children. The lack of good parenting is not because Bernie Madoff's abyssal soul drove him to the ponzi scheme, breaking the financial backs of many, but hey, I'm sure you'll agree they're all from a different neighbor anyway . . . right? That is how it goes, isn't it? We "don't have" so please excuse us from living in harmony with our brother and sisters? I don't think so.

Frustration with all of the "whys" does not exclude anyone from striving for a better way of life. You like to say that problems on Wall Street, mis-allocated funding, and the need for respectful folks to turn a blind eye has helped to fuel the fires of disdain beneath under achieving and poorly behaved youngsters. Maybe, and yes, its ultimately all wrapped together but that's only because the Ten Commandments apply to every aspect of life. If you were Al Gore you'd be able to bring Global Warming into this as cause and effect, but you are not Al Gore so I wouldn't buy it. Your passion for the misdirected agenda of society's ability to care for his brother is grand and definitely has a place in a debate. But what about this youngsters parents?

You've always said strength in numbers. For example, get everyone out to vote. Most of these folks can't come together in their own kitchen no less getting the community together and lobbying the government to help in a better direction. Society? They haven't helped the situation by demanding softer disciplinary actions because after all, it's a politically correct direction for the year 2011. "Don't yell at my boy 'cause you'll hurt his feelings". It was to someone's advantage to say "lighten up" so it was done and it has grossly snowballed. Some of these boys, if you don't mind me saying, really need a good ass kicking. We've been through our share of corporal punishment my friend and I think we came out the other side with good moral standards. I can't recall ever tagging the back of a Walmart with you. (mustaches on the pictures of local government figures at the mall not included) I certainly don't remember shooting a friend's Dad in the leg after an argument about whether I was safe or out either.

I'm aware I've skipped through the social sciences of your "what's happening to the inner cities" but I have to. I've made choices to improve my life and that requires my time and hard work. I'm not a bad guy or indifferent to the challenges that anyone of a number of communities face but the healing must start in the home. Reach out and eventually your hand will be received. I don't think I'm too far from general consensus. Just ask America. You can find them in anyone of your local Starbucks.

your friend,

hoop

the chains of democracy

a little Q and A for a snowy Friday

‎- Influence of campaign contributions on elected officials?
. . . imagine winning without them
- Influence of election results on House and Senate majorities?
. . . everything
- Limit to campaign contributions from anonymous individuals?...
. . . no limit
- Contribution status of Corporations as per recent Citizens United vs. United States decision of Supreme Court?
. . . Corporations are Individuals (aka: "persons") entitled to anonymously stuff as much cash into a campaign kitty as they can manage to scrape together
- Benefit of recent Tax Break extension approved by (Corporate friendly) Congress last month, for Corporations and remaining wealthiest 2% of Americans?
. . . continued reinvestment of American tax dollars into expansion of foreign job creation (major factor in job losses stateside) = continued tax free growth for these Global Corporations
‎- Benefit of same recent Tax Break, approved by Congress last month, for remaining 98% of middle and lower income Americans ??
. . . 9+% nationwide unemployment; cash strapped State economies; rising credit interest rates; steady pace of Home ...foreclosures; harassing phone calls from Filipino Debt collection clerks; little encouragement from Federal Officials that situation will/can reverse itself without cooperation of Capitalist (say "Corporate") intervention
- Status of these Corporations sending US jobs and salaries overseas?
. . . The US Supreme Court protects the right of these "persons" to use their foreign made fortunes to intimidate elections; stuffing both Houses of Congress with "representatives" who are inclined/beholden to perpetuate this cycle.
- Solution?
. . . Lets work to reverse the current Conservative/Tea Party/Big Business tendency to equate Federal Oversight or Regulations with Fascism or Communism and get some momentum from the significant population of remaining Americans to remind these Fat Cats and their hoodwinked minion Who does the real working and spending and soldiering and child rearing and writing and composing and cooking and welding . . . and lets regain the system's original intention of working for a decent quality of life for all off us here in America. Hell, somebody got these illegitimate ideas into the minds of millions of earnestly arrogant, "faith-based, real-Americans". I merely insist that Truth fits through the same sized door as Fiction. The real trick is figuring out how to clear the room to fit it. I will go to my grave believing in the superiority of a compelling articulation of the facts as the most effective option to accomplishing this. We must remind the Republican Congress that we are not serfs in some Capitalist nightmare, but are instead reasonably informed voters protected by one hell of a Constitution.
----------------------------------------------
Jen: We're not? War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. The revolution is complete.
. . . . . (props and a nod to G.O.)
----------------------------------------------
Kevin: So, I should write a stern letter to my Congressperson and/or Senator? Then what? The receipt of a rubber stamped letter. A letter loaded with sincere rhetoric of empty concern and campaign jargon asking for my support. A letter loaded with all of the visions we see but will never be put forward to a vote because our representation has been bought. I’m not satisfied with the service either but it will take one hell of an action to change the course. Anyone up for it?

. . . thought I heard a cricket
----------------------------------------------
Prof. Hot Wind: Whenever I get frustrated about the size of the whole picture I do three things:
1] ask myself if the situation would improve if I did/said nothing.
2] give credit to the problem for its sheer enormity; to myself for getting my head around most of it; and forgive the public for being so exhausted by living it, fighting it and settling on the demands of the compromises it dictates, that they subcontract the media to distill their opinions for them . . . and
3] put my objections and thoughts on paper. Here I can reduce the situation into manageable pieces and function.
Get your friends to hear a second opinion. Be ready to expose a lie with aplomb.
Many an individuals impression of the current mess is formed by overhearing uninformed people pontificating in public places. The quantitative damage to the truth of this scenario might be better understood if we were describing someone with the flu, coughing freely into the confined space of a pub.

Remember: the bottom line in this game is the Vote. In itself the vote is free. The tools used to persuade the Voter however, are not. Sophisticated tools such as market demographic analysis and wide media exposure are generally an exclusive provision of large corporate interests with arsenals of cash, working to disfigure public agendas in a manner that caricatures their "personal" balance sheets at the expense of General Public works, wrestling for the same Federal allowance. This approach has the well exercised advantage of pimping the Truth into performing as its cell-mate bitch, which efficiently confuses the marginally attentive voter . . . . . The truth is NOT free!

I get my "facts" from Public Radio, the Times, Harpers mag, MSNBC and the Internet. The idea that these sources are reliable enough to form a Truth is a compromise I made some time ago to preserve my sanity. My occasional dalliances into Conservative media, (i.e.: The Journal, FOX news, Nat'l Review...) are helpful reminders that this is a very large, very diverse country, where Truth gets pounded against the ropes on all four sides of the ring by opposing heavyweights, quilting patchwork scenarios from the same box of rags in calculated, varying proportions. . . .

Want to do something to fight the Advantaged Elite sucking money away from your Health care for an extension on their summer home in Costa Rica?

Then give to the organizations who made you aware of Global Warming, of Tax breaks for the Rich, of the Oil Spill in the Gulf and the illegitimate War in Iraq . . .

Donate to NPR, subscribe to publications that match wits with your common sense. This is the best way for millions of us "financially insignificant" Americans to pool our resources and expose the "Corrupt-Truth" of the Powers-That-Be, currently taking control of OUR Congress.
------------------------------------------------
Kevin: I get it! Scream louder. Kinda like, as I understand the story, Barabbas won his freedom at the Passover Feast. So, we back our favorite "news" channel, get some pop-corn and wait for this to be played out in high definition, right? How about a system of accountability that doesn't allow the chosen ones, (voted into office on a platform of promises by which they won the right to represent us) permission to walk away after they compromised our visions? Sounds like something we have now . . . Election day!

It's not working. I find myself voting for the lesser of two evils. Don't get me wrong. I agree with your standards but the media methodology for finding a truth is just as corrupt as big business involvement in our government. Fact has turned into opinion. I'm not throwing my hands up but some cancers are unsurvivable.
Oh, and the Barabbas thing? That didn't work out too well . . .
------------------------------------------------
Prf H W: I'm moved to agree, by virtue of your passion, that you're "onto" something, but it would be a disservice to this dialogue to conclude that "something" is an understanding of me. We share a belief that the government is composed of people who increasingly pass laws much less representative of the needs and wishes of We the People and more favorable to the opposing special interests of an extremely powerful, fabulously wealthy minority.

I will liken good governance to the center of a Target. (I write "good" and not "perfect" governance to emphasize that there will never be progress absent the old "quid pro quo".) For the sake of understanding, I will calibrate my analogy by suggesting the creation of Social Security was a bulls-eye. (Others will surely disagree.)

I think its safe to state that in spite of all the rhetoric about individual marksmanship, our current Congress is far more focused on those matters existing outside the perimeter of our target than any red or white colored ring inside it. My whole contention is that we accept "good governance" as intending only that which legislates behavior on the basis of an analysis of all the available, objective facts. (Issues of morality and environmental protection, for example, score high on my scale of objective reasoning, as their neglect or abuse will, in every probability, create an acceleration of expanding conditions contributing to a deteriorating quality of life. )

One's marksmanship is analogous to one's understanding of, and relationship to, the facts. Big Business has been using the media to manipulate the general population, too preoccupied with job and family, by using their extraordinary media influence to move the target toward their own special interests and away from its proper, natural coordinates as the destination of the greater public good. In any sport, getting caught cheating is penalized . . . any sport I guess but politics.

Your frustration has possessed you to mistakenly conclude that the solution is to either close down and concede defeat or roll a cannon onto the target range. I like the image but reject the sentiment. I wrote above that votes are free to the voter but expensive for the campaigns. Good "Grouping" wins elections, but success for the "People" can only be served by "Grouping" one's arrows nearest the bulls-eye. It is the goal of the intellectual Progressive that everyone be educated to distinguish a legitimate target from a Corporate hoax when called on to pull the ballot lever. If information fell like leaves from the trees, Big Business would never succeed in influencing elections and our Congress would look remarkably different than it does today. Your cannon would create more collateral complications than our current economic situation could effectively contain.

The Truth however is not raked from the ground but harvested from the top-most branches of the tree. It takes work to form an educated opinion which is why America is so damn confused today. If you can't find a ladder, GIVE to those organizations you trust to harvest the data for you and bring it home to your intellectual kitchen.

Distrust of subcontracted Data Collection, (the feedback loop of the true paranoid) can be tamed by trusting in one's own reason and moral compass. I once learned that physics cannot explain how the helicopter lifts up and away from the ground; and yet it does. So when Oil-backed "experts" tell me that Global Warming is a myth, I make a withdrawal from my media accounts, like Scientific American or National Geographic where I learn about diminishing populations of Polar Bears and Emperor Penguins and choose to dismiss one source over the other. This news then squeezes into conversations with friends and strangers and eventually into the ballot box. This is called Democracy. And in spite of your anxiety Hoople, it works.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kevin: Oh yes, democracy, very nice. Great theory and has worked well for so many years. But its in need of an overhaul, wouldn't you say? Democracy’s ability to be fair has been compromised. The very system you praise will prevent said system from evolving out of the corrupt state it’s currently in to one that’s fair and balanced for We The People. Loop holes have been exposed, fail safes have been compromised. The representation we’ve voted for needs to close the loop holes and stabilize the fail safes. This can’t be done without the compromise of the position they’ve been bought and paid to represent; a position that included campaign funding thus a nice job, and money for all the “toys”. Do you really believe sending a couple dollars to NPR and walking around with a sign declaring your discontent will sway a Senator from his/her current allegiance to big business? I think not.

Sir, I don’t have cannon to aim at What’ll never be fixed. But I’d be more than willing to give couple dollars to someone that does. When the smoke clears, you can thank me for eliminating the face you’ve continuously, and to no avail preferred to strike with a glove. I’m not trying to suggest trading in your powdered wig for a civil defense helmet but you may want to consider a gauntlet as opposed to a glove.
----------------------------------------------
Prf H W: You and I continue to talk past each other. Could it possibly be this difficult to talk someone off the ledge? You write in theory about replacing the current system by employing practices that are un-Constitutional. I write about re-energizing the voter base to use the Constitution to clean its own house. I sincerely believe my method represents the only remaining option to achieve our common objective. I believe also that you underestimate the persuasive power of ideas; the punch of a well reasoned, strategically delivered exposure of false truths.

I've only to ask you for an explanation, in light of your bleak, pessimistic evaluation of the health of our Congress and the Constitution, how the voice of American underdogs like Gays and Trans genders achieved the formal, legal representation they earned last month with the repeal of DADT.

How about the unregulated exploration for shale oil in the Country's subterranean world of precious, irreplaceable aquifers (called Fracking) that was recently ordered a degree of unprecedented protection against the reckless injection of dangerous chemicals previously endorsed by an environmentally unfriendly Bush administration? This took energy, intelligence and perseverance to make happen. . . But it happened.

From issues like Iraq to the Gulf oil spill, the government begins operations under the mistaken premise that it is somehow beyond the scrutiny of investigation and therefore immune from consequence. Somehow We the People stopped an unchallenged, open ended waltz into the oil fields of Iraq and demanded answers to the lies that "justified" it and a timetable to end it.

Obama's attempt to diminish the extent of the Exxon oil leak (manipulate the public's reaction) was also exposed by nonpartisan experts from the private sector and the truth that quantities of oil ten times the "official" estimates were hemorrhaging off the Louisiana coast became public knowledge. In both cases it wouldn't be a stretch to suspect that large Petroleum interests used their considerable influence to steer the course of Government outside the perimeters of public dialogue. What stopped them? What reversed the course of unchecked government autonomy and Big Business ruthlessness?

No Kevin, for you alone I'll hang on to my powered wig and gloves for the remainder of the dance , but God help the cad who tries to cut in.

----------------------------------------------------------
Kevin: The shooting of Congresswoman Gifford was truly unfortunate and my heart goes out to her family. Shot by a lunatic . . . a crazy man, so the media reports. Can you imagine if his actions were truly politically motivated? Could the media present this truth to the listening and upset public. Not just upset about the shooting itself but by the current political atmosphere as well? No, they need to tell us it was an isolated act of an imbalanced man. They had to tell us that he was a secluded thinker acting out of inner turmoils raised to an elevation so high that his only outlet was a violent act and his actions had nothing to do with politics.

How many other people might be on the edge of "going postal" over current conditions? His thinking may be twisted but if you recall his did post some youtube videos. In one, the burning of an American Flag showing his disdain for something. How out of touch are we, really? The media had to play this up as one person gone astray. I don't see myself picking up a weapon and charging the Capitol but I'm sure there is a growing movement of people that are tired of words alone, especially in Arizona. If you think that anarchy isn't on the doorstep of what should be done next, check out Europe.

Saying no, repeated, to a rapist usually doesn't work. Thus pepper spray, tasers, and the right to conceal carry. We aren't talking about one on one. This is one on millions, a passive oppression by our government with respect to We The People or one businessman on the financially stressed masses. When the public gets it's hackle up high enough and the court house doesn't seem to be effective, do you think for one minute the public won't deny themselves a lynching?

respectfully, Kevin (rope salesman on the unemployment line)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Prf H W: Maybe it's the models we're using; maybe it's the research we do; maybe it's the context we manipulate to frame the models; or maybe it's just a fundamental difference in how we view ourselves in the whole messy drama. My instincts lean toward every conceivable combination of the four. Whatever the explanation, we seem incapable of reaching one another on some important issues. But as long as you have a response; something to say that you want the world to hear, I promise to make every attempt to write back, provided we actually discuss things and avoid spinning in separate, rhetorical orbits.

Let me start by critiquing the models you are using to persuade me. In the first paragraph of your last message, you clearly describe a fact that you and I, to differing degrees, can use as a starting point of understanding: that Governments use "the Media" to control their "agenda(s)".

The surgical sting of this statement draws on a common phobia best articulated in the classic Orwellian call to due diligence, 1984 and the introduction of his sublime creation, Big Brother. Government unscrutinized will invariably fall to the temptation of power. That citizens are crushed to serve the ruling oligarchy is not insulting enough. No, you and I share Orwell's more sadistic vision that the public are being subliminally manipulated to resign their God given impulses and eventually, willingly, surrender their instincts. But this telling of the story alone is insufficient to sustain my suspicions of the current state of our national dilemma. Unlike the model, our real government is a fragmented body of many constituencies at odds over who should read the map and who should drive.

One body works to manipulate the press and the other body to expose, then shame, the first. What you and I continue to call "the Government" is in reality "the government" or "a government". The distinction is critical to our discussion, for without recognizing its significance we are sentenced to talk our talk on seperate sides of a thick glass wall forever.

I believe the key to understanding one another lies in examining our techniques. Though inspired by our day to day perceptions of everything the world has used to injure, to insult us; our witness to greed in all its raw, contemptible complexity, we essentially describe these events to each other in codes, in models, in extremes. Orwell could introduce us to his world only after he had offensively invented it, as it was the consequence of its existance and not its birth that established a point from which to begin; a consequence that was essential to his statement on the savagery of rule and the unforgiveable sin of complacency. 1984 was a model of the highest order, yet logically speaking, having been stripped of birth, an enigmatic orphan from its place among living, breathing political practicality, where it ironically enjoys undying acclaim.

But you and I are not writing a morality play here. We have been speaking to each other in maxims for too long now. Outside our comfort zones, we have chosen to focus in this discussion much too closely on the models which best express our anxieties, failing to remain faithful to the real world of government and hence, real world logic. We are attempting to create equations of life, from life, by distilling our impressions of life's hand selected offences and further reducing them to the least common denominator; not simply once, but over and over again.

Representatives who continue to write laws on behalf of you and me, only to have them defeated in caucus, deserve my attempt at understanding their struggle. It is my responsibility to go out in the real world and make people understand that these things need to be done; that those people are standing between getting them done and destroying any chance of doing them.

And as much can be said of the Press as I have mentioned of the government. From the top oozes the story, picked up by the dog, finished by the crow and buried by worms; enough stench to go around. Let's face it, the Press, like everything else in this country, is divided along as many philosophic alliances as there are communities, churches and social clubs across the land; some for sale, some bought, some independent. One editor's lie is another editors scoop. It is our responsibility, if we want to continue exercising our right to complain, to discern for ourselves whose story most logically fits the model we obsessively protect in our minds.

And this brings us to the worms, We the People. You speak quite a bit about people at the end of their rope, extremists and psychos with automatic weapons and counter-revolutionary organizations preparing to signal the attack; you even had a rapist in a cameo appearance some where in your most recent response. I will attempt to tie this line of debate up in one sack and pass any future reference to the topic over to the professionals who pay their bills keeping these guys looking over their shoulder.

For all the noise a single gun can make; I think of Lincoln and Kennedy
For all the noise a bomb can make; I think of Oklahoma and the Trade Towers
For all the noise a paramilitary bunch of suspended-pubscent Nazi Skin Heads can make; I think of the Civil War, Waco, the Weathermen and the Ku Klux Klan;


I think of how little effect these people and organizations had on our Constitution and the idiots in Congress who run it into the ground. I have just listed some of the most heartbreaking losses in our collective memory as a nation, but it is important to note that each and every one of these threats were met with our complete intelligence, justice and wrath.

For the purpose of our continuing dialogue, I ask/want you to examine certain choices you make when forming your anologies. The use of pepper spray for instance, or mace when confronted with a rapist would be a superb metaphor if our situation were no longer in the hands of men and women with whom we simply and vehemently disagree, but have acted outside the Constitution and parameters of international civility or law.

If you and I were discussing arrests without Miranda, the sanctioned use of violent force to silence any and all peaceful protests; the abduction of writers and leaders involved in the advance of opposition philosophies or perhaps the disappearance of innocent civilians, never to be heard from again, you would have scored some very big points with your example. But using a rapist to characterize the need for aggressive techniques to replace Constitutional law in our effort to stand against Congress' choice to extend income tax breaks for the wealthiest 2% of Americans, without the least regard for whether the lives of the remaining 304,000,000 Americans, our jobs or our children's future could benefit from them, well that's just what one might call a nonsequitor. They might be creeps but they ain't crazy. They simply don't give a damn. And on this point I yield the floor to my distinguished colleague from Las Vegas.