Politics
Entries related to things political.
Sandy Hook Zettel
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Wed, 12/19/2012 - 07:44It has been a long week, with lots of thoughts, feelings, and ideas waiting to be written down. Many should be blog posts of their own, but I just don't have time, so I'm writing Sandy Hook Zettel. I take the word Zettel from Ludwig Wittengenstien.
Last night, I had another dream about being lost. This time, I was in visiting China, I think it was. I couldn't find my password, or any guidebooks. I set out from my hotel to explore and soon was lost. It was all the more difficult because I didn't speak Chinese. Eventually, I ended up on an elevated train platform with some Christian Bible Study group, with whom I could establish rudimentary communications.
I woke up, and the chant from Sunday's litany at Church went through my mind, "Oh Lord, hear my prayer…"
Last Thursday, I got home from work to find a "Dammit Doll" that had been sent to me. It came from a blogging friend that lives near Sandy Hook. She wanted me to review it on my blog. I had to rescue it from the dog who thought it was a chew toy for him. I brought it to work to show my co-workers and I've thought about Dammit Doll on the bar as a response to Elf on a Shelf.
In the evening, I sat up and watched the Geminids. I think I managed to get a picture of one. I need to get it off the camera and post it.
At work, I read the first reports of the shooting at Sandy Hook. As the horror started to become apparent, I wrote this:
"It's the most wonderful time of the year" blares from the loudspeaker outside my office. On my computer screen is a picture of some old guy with a vest, ten gallon hat and grey mustache with the caption, "You actually think that criminals will obey gun control laws? You're a special kind of stupid, aren't you?"
I had been thinking of posting a response, something to the effect, that even though burglars break into houses with locked doors, I still lock my doors in an effort to prevent crime.
I've been getting into lots of discussions about gun control and mental health online. Gun advocates have argued for arming more people, and suggested that we should follow Israel's gun control laws, but as I read things, Israel appears to have very strict gun control laws.
I've always been opposed to regulation of video games. On the other hand, most of the video games I've played have been pretty benign. I have played some first person shooter games, and didn't really like the way I felt afterwards. I have been focused on my media diet and these days watch almost no television. I even avoid good science fiction that has too much violence in it for me.
One meme that has been getting a lot of play online has been Mr. Rogers' "Look for the helpers". I think that is a great meme and one that I'm interested in expending. Be a helper. Spread the word about helpers.
On Saturday, I stopped at the Woodbridge Volunteer Fire Department for Santa's Visit. I spoke with Santa. He was very sad. He said his heart wasn't into it and he couldn't be jolly. He wanted to cancel, but his wife reminded him of the children that were counting on him. It felt like it came right out of a 1960's Hallmark Holiday Special. The Children were asking that Santa do something special for the children of Newtown. We talked about the first responders. Then ones in Sandy Hook need special prayers.
I work with some great helpers. Yet they are struggling too. Half the building I work in was out sick yesterday. Mostly respiratory illnesses. I don't think they were somatic, but I do believe that everyone is so run down that colds can easily spread. Take care of yourself.
Dicks' sporting goods is changing its policies on the guns it sells. A hedge fund is divesting its investment in the manufacturer of the gun used in the shooting. Both seem to be small positive steps. The question remains, is the NRA the association of regular moms and dads that happen to like guns, or are they the association of the gun sellers, people whipping up fear to sell their drug of choice.
And now, we are approaching the Mayan Apocalypse. It will start with a moment of silence for the victim of the shooting. The NRA will hold a press conference, and it is the longest night of the year. In Middletown, there will be a memorial service for homeless people that have died.
The next day, there will be a re-birthday party at the Buttonwood Tree. This fits nicely with the old story of what the caterpillar views as the end of the world, the butterfly sees as the beginning, and I believe it is closer to Mayan thought about human kind not coming to an end, but taking a quantum leap. Let us pray that it will be a leap to greater compassion.
Authority and Authors, Social Media and Social Contracts
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Wed, 11/28/2012 - 07:00As part of the CT Health Leaders Fellowship program, I've been challenged to come up with "S.M.A.R.T." goals about my personal leadership. I've been thinking a lot about this, and trying to think out what goals make the most sense for me.
I have a certain ambivalence to traditional views of leadership, as I mentioned in my previous post, where I posted the old question, "Are you a leader, are you a follower, are those the only two options?" To a certain extent, we are all leaders, if we are willing to take up our leadership, or to toss in another quote, "One man, with courage, is a majority".
When I think about traditional views of leadership, I think about inside/outside strategies. Are you a leader on the inside? Have you been authorized to lead within an existing empowered social structure? Are you a leader of an outside group, perhaps authorized by a different existing social structure, the loyal opposition, to challenge the existing empowered social structure? Again, are these the only two options? Are the only two options inside the box, or outside the box? Is being outside the box, still defining you in the context of the current box?
I've attended several Group Relations conferences. Their titles often begin with the word 'Authority'. This begs a question, where does authority come from? How does it get formed? It is worth noting that 'authority' and 'author' come from the same root, to increase or augment.
To the extent that a person is writing within an established system, their authorship, their authority, is recognized by people reading what has been written; by the writings being cited by other authors. These ideas form a framework for a social contract affecting the way people deal with one another.
In the age of the Internet, just about anyone can publish whatever they want. It's easy, just set up a blog. That's what I did. But setting up a blog doesn't mean that anyone will read what you've written, much less, agree, share, or act upon your words, or that enough people will act upon your words to grant you any real authority.
Through using social media, you can reach a larger audience and potentially find others for whom your writing will resonate. You can use social media, within your existing social context, to ask people to join you and share your thoughts, to create new coalitions, new contexts, and from there, establish authority that is less anchored to existing empowered social structures.
Yet what are the things in our lives that prevent us from becoming authors and developing new audiences, new coalitions, and new authority? How does it relate to the social structures we grew up in, in our families, in our schools, churches and communities?
These are important questions that need to be asked, to help add a little meat to the bones of new ideas about authority, authorship, social contracts and social media. For me, this meat on the bones needs to be S.M.A.R.T., Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Timely.
So, my current challenge is to come up with Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant and Timely goals around using social media to reevaluate our social contracts in the Internet Era. It seems very relevant and timely, the question becomes, what is specific measurable and attainable and what is blocking me from reaching these goals?
American Exceptionalism: A City Upon a Hill Lit by Golden Arches
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sat, 11/10/2012 - 11:16“You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.
This passage from the Bible has played a key role in our American experience. This idea of a city upon a hill was used in Governor John Winthrop's famous sermon, "A Model of Christian Charity" which he delivered on board the Arabella in 1630 on his way to Massachusetts. It has been used as the basis for the idea of American Exceptionalism, a recurring theme in American politics.
Because of God's blessing, the theory goes, the United States is exceptional. It is exempt from historical forces that would destroy other nations. It is an appealing theory, we all wish to be exceptional, to be blessed in some special way. Yet the way the theory is presented in American politics today seems very far from the message of Governor Winthrop nearly four centuries ago.
The sermon was about Christian Charity. It starts off talking about how there are always rich people and poor people and that a reason for this is "that every man might have need of others, and from hence they might be all knit more nearly together in the bonds of brotherly affection". Yes, the key idea here is that we SHOULD be dependent on one another, even though many of those arguing for American Exceptionalism are the same people that argue against social welfare programs that promote 'dependency'. These people seem to have missed the key point of the sermon. This is a sermon about charity, about giving to others.
Then, there is the final part of the sermon where Winthrop speaks about the city upon a hill.
For we must consider that we shall be as a city upon a hill. The eyes of all people are upon us. So that if we shall deal falsely with our God in this work we have undertaken, and so cause Him to withdraw His present help from us, we shall be made a story and a by-word through the world.
In the passage from scripture, the city on the hill is linked with the light to the world. Yet have we replaced that light with the light of golden arches? Have we replaced the golden calf of yore with golden arches? Has our consumerism and neglect of the poor dealt falsely with our God causing God to withdraw God's help from us and making American Exceptionalism a by-word through the world?
Yes, we should embrace American Exceptionalism, the pure American Exceptionalism that is based on love of our fellow man, rich and poor, and not on love of profits.
Even in Death, Forming a More Perfect Union
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sat, 07/07/2012 - 07:14It was a beautiful hot summer morning. The white clouds had piled up in the deep blue sky without a threatening tint of grey yet. The songbirds added their commentary as flies buzzed nearly and in the distance a lawn crew started their buzzing machines.
A large group of people gathered in the carefully manicured grass next to a gaping hole in the ground. The crowd was filled with dignitaries. The Lt. Governor, a former Lt. Governor. a former Secretary of the State, and a former State Senator who was now the head of the state Democratic Party. There was a State Representative, many activists and far more that I did not recognize.
My mind drifted to that great quote from the movie Norma Rae.
Also present were eight hundred and sixty-two members of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers and Cloth, Hat and Cap Makers' Union. Also members of his family. In death as in life, they stood at his side. They had fought battles with him, bound the wounds of battle with him, had earned bread together and had broken it together. When they spoke, they spoke in one voice, and they were heard. They were black, they were white, they were Irish, they were Polish, they were Catholic, they were Jews, they were one. That's what a union is: one
Yes, the union was there. There may have been representatives of one local or another, but it was the more perfect union that was there. These were people who had worked side by side
to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
It's how I had met Win, the mourning husband, as well as many of the others gathered to note the passing of his wife.
Traditions were observed and family members spoke. A woman sang a show tune from South Pacific that she had often sung with now deceased sister.
Dites-moi Pourquoi La vie est belle. Dies-moi Pourquoi La vie est gai, Dites-moi Pourquoi, Chere Mad'moiselle, Est-ce que Parce que Vous m'aimez?
Why is life beautiful and gay? Because of the love we have for one another; even in death.
There were the comments about the different deaths. The death of the body and the death of being forgotten. Carol was well remember at the service and my mind went to "Samuel Mendelsson: A Man Who Must Not Be Forgotten". It is a book about a man who died in the holocaust which was given to me by his great granddaughter.
The Kaddish was recited and my thoughts went to Allen Ginsburg's poem of the same name
Strange now to think of you, gone without corsets & eyes, while I walk on
the sunny pavement of Greenwich Village….
We formed two lines as the mourners passed between us, on their way back to their daily lives. But first, we all gathered for food. As one friend once said to me, all of Jewish history can be summed up in the phrase, "We faced great odds. We prevailed. Let's eat."
So as we ate, we talked about the great odds we continue to face in forming a more perfect union, the struggles for justice and domestic tranquility, and how we can best promote the general welfare.
Rest in Peace, Carol. Your life is well reflected in your loving husband, siblings and children.
Ralph Waldo Emerson and Originalism
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sun, 06/24/2012 - 20:37This week, the Supreme Court is expected to rule on one of the most politically charged cases in our lifetimes, the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. There have been lots of discussions about what most people think, what the implications of one ruling or another will be, and when we can expect a decision.
One means of interpreting the Constitution is based on a theory called 'Originalism'. This is broken into two branches, original intent, and original meaning and they beg a question. Did the framers of the constitution originally intend for people to base hundreds of years of jurisprudence on a literal interpretations of their texts.
Some of the current justices seem committed to originalism, and I would submit that this reflects poorly on their own intellectual capabilities, or at least their belief in themselves. I would also submit that it goes contrary to the spirit of the great American experiment.
I can see how some can be drawn to this form of legal fundamentalism, and believe it is not far removed from the fundamentalism of some Christians and for that matter the fundamentalism of some Muslims, especially those that wish to wage jihad against America.
As I flew to Arkansas for a conference this week, I spent a little time re-reading Ralph Waldo Emerson's great essay, "The American Scholar". One of my favorite quotes of Emerson is in that essay,
Meek young men grow up in libraries, believing it their duty to accept the views which Cicero, which Locke, which Bacon, have given; forgetful that Cicero, Locke and Bacon were only young men in libraries when they wrote these books.
A little later on, it is followed by the quote,
Books are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst.
It made me think of the whole 'originalism' debate. With that, not mere accepting the views of Emerson, but building upon them into an ongoing discourse about The American Scholar as it relates to our American Experience, it seems like a paraphrase is in order.
Meek Supreme Court Justices sitting in their chambers, believing it their duty to accept the views which Jefferson, which Adams, which Madison, have given; forgetful that Jefferson, Adams and Madison were only men in politics when they wrote this text. Constitutions are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst.
This is not to say we should completely abandon the text. Instead, we should engage in discourse around the text, so that the original underlying intent can be maintained.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Establishing justice, insuring domestic tranquility, promoting the general welfare and security the blessings of liberty are noble goals, and they may best be achieved, not be pursuing a literal interpretation of what the framers wrote, but by seeking to understand how in every generation we need to form an even more perfect union.
This needs to be done, not by splitting hairs about the interpretation of the commerce clause in such as way that it promotes the welfare of the newly declared persons of our country, the corporations, but in broadly seeking whether the laws are truly establishing a general welfare for all the people of our county.
This gets to how Constitutions are the best of things, well used. When they broadly seek to maintain and enhance the general welfare of all people, they are well used, and the best of things. When they are narrowly interpreted to promote one small group or class of citizens, such as extremely wealthy conservatives at the expense of the general population, as it seems the Roberts court continually does, they are among the worst.
Somehow, I don't expect that much from our current Supreme Court, and I suspect that history may end up looking at the Roberts Court as being not that much different from the Taney Court.
For Chief Justice Roberts' sake, I hope he learns from history, not only the history of Jefferson, Adams, and Madison, but also from the whole scope of American history from Ralph Waldo Emerson to Roger Taney, that his legacy might not be as bad as Taney's has become.
