A Reflection upon
the Fragility of Life
The huge volcano under Yellowstone,
Which pushes up the ground a bit each year,
Is in my thoughts as I sit here alone,
Inspiring what you may describe as fear.
If it cuts loose, the swift, unmeasured blast,
Inflicting death across this continent,
Will mean that all familiar ways are past;
Survivors will inquire where their world went.
The Super Bowl won't matter anymore,
Nor fashion trends, nor Twitter, nor I-Pod.
Whoever's left won't have a fancy store
In which to buy new clothes to meet their God.
Perhaps we need specific threats; then we
Are prodded to recall eternity.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Saturday, February 5, 2011
Time Travel For A Six-Year-Old
Wow, I've left this blog untouched for quite awhile now! Well, I can truthfully give the excuse that real life, in many forms, has kept me occupied. This has included being concerned with the grave illness of the very minister who performed my wedding to Janalee. It has also included generous amounts of my being treated with indifference, disregard or contempt by some (certainly not all) women of my acquaintance.
But just lately, on the anniversary of the evening when I proposed to Mary, I enjoyed good bonding time with Mary's and my grandson Dominic. I was babysitting him, because his school was closed for severe weather.
Since Mary left this world before Dominic arrived in it, he has not yet been told about her life. But on Wednesday, I made a beginning. Some of my friends are familiar with my narrative poem "A Red-Haired Lady In Heaven," which envisions Mary's arrival on the other side. Now I told Dominic a story about "The Red-Haired Nurse" and a true adventure she had in Vermont. It was a beginning. One day, I hope to show Dominic the video I have of his Mom, his Grandpa Joe, AND his Grandma Mary, on a scenic vacation in 1989.
But just lately, on the anniversary of the evening when I proposed to Mary, I enjoyed good bonding time with Mary's and my grandson Dominic. I was babysitting him, because his school was closed for severe weather.
Since Mary left this world before Dominic arrived in it, he has not yet been told about her life. But on Wednesday, I made a beginning. Some of my friends are familiar with my narrative poem "A Red-Haired Lady In Heaven," which envisions Mary's arrival on the other side. Now I told Dominic a story about "The Red-Haired Nurse" and a true adventure she had in Vermont. It was a beginning. One day, I hope to show Dominic the video I have of his Mom, his Grandpa Joe, AND his Grandma Mary, on a scenic vacation in 1989.
Friday, October 29, 2010
Guilty Even When Proven Innocent
Tonight, a good-natured college girl of my acquaintance reacted in a disappointing way to my online statement that some accusations of racism are false. The young woman chose to line up with a boy who thought it was clever to say that all people are racists but not all are bigots. Whatever the heck _that_ distinction means. The young woman sought to refine this dogmatic assertion by "explaining" that if someone's racism wasn't obvious, well then, it simply was _subconscious_ racism. I was reminded of satires of witch trials, like the one in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail," where _every_ possible result of witch-finding tests is _equally_ treated as "proof" that the suspect is a witch. So I wrote the following to the college girl....
A belief in "subconscious" racism, in "subconscious" anything, can be a way of dismissing the need for _evidence_ of what one believes to be true about people. The people can go through every day of their lives without _acting_ like they ha...ve the quality that you insist they have--but that just means they _subconsciously_ have that quality! Then, no matter _what_ they do, it still somehow "proves" the same pre-chosen conclusion. This all-encompassing "subconscious" explanation covers all bases, trumps all contrary evidence.
________, you are the last young person I would have expected to use a "ghost in the machine" argument; but on your own showing, you see a racist ghost in the machine of every human mind. Whoever has encouraged you to think this way, must be smirking over their success--because, although your own friendly and appealing personality is NOT an arrogant and offensive one, this dogma of universally-present racism is causing you to do something which has the same _effect_ as arrogance. That is, it causes you to assume confidently that you know what is in my personality better than I know it. Well, you _don't_ know my personality better than I do.
But I believe I know why it _seems_ as if racism is everywhere. For various reasons which are not _synonymous_ with genetic heredity, certain attitudes and preferences have come to be shared by large numbers of persons who also happen to share an ethnic background. For instance, when politicians spend decades relentlessly telling African-Americans that they are automatically entitled to welfare handouts, there _will_ be many African-Americans believing that they are automatically entitled to welfare handouts. Then, when someone like me _observes_ the concrete fact that many African-Americans have been taught to expect handouts, those who have themselves been _taught_ to see "racism" in everything, will think that they are seeing racism in me. But they're NOT seeing racism in me; what they're seeing is the fact that I'm aware of a _sociological_ process going on. There is enough real racism in the world, that statements NOT motivated by racism can get mistakenly lumped together with actual racist utterances.
Tossing me a bone by telling me that my supposed racism "isn't immoral" does nothing to negate the presumption of _telling_ me I'm a racist. I'm not claiming such conclusive knowledge of _your_ insides as you claim you have of my "subconscious" racism; but if it should ever occur that you wanted to dismiss some opinion of mine as unreasonable without needing to _prove_ it was unreasonable, it would be mighty handy to be able to say, "Well, Joseph just thinks that way because his racism is distorting his thinking."
________, however you personally came to have this belief in that sneaky goblin of invisible racism, it does happen to be identical with a presupposition used by a LOT of hardcore-leftwing politicians. They use it, not to promote understanding of human nature, but to _silence_ all disagreement with _their_ agendas. "If you don't see the _same_ solutions to social problems as we see, that's your subconscious racism impairing your judgment." Only, they're not usually as nice as you are; they'll go ahead and accuse dissenters of _intentional_ racism. But I don't buy it. You shouldn't buy it either; such a well-intentioned girl as you are ought not to fall into lockstep with this politically-correct falsehood.
The young woman then "clarified" further, by citing research findings which prove that people can't easily recognize differences in _visual_ appearance among members of a different ethnic group than they were brought up with. WELL, DUH! By the same token, I could fail to see visual differences among rocks or trees or machines or buildings of types that I was unfamiliar with. But the politically-correct establishment _will_ use this irrelevant fact of sight-perception to support its race-card playing; and this girl, highly intelligent but far from wise, is prepared to let them do it.
A belief in "subconscious" racism, in "subconscious" anything, can be a way of dismissing the need for _evidence_ of what one believes to be true about people. The people can go through every day of their lives without _acting_ like they ha...ve the quality that you insist they have--but that just means they _subconsciously_ have that quality! Then, no matter _what_ they do, it still somehow "proves" the same pre-chosen conclusion. This all-encompassing "subconscious" explanation covers all bases, trumps all contrary evidence.
________, you are the last young person I would have expected to use a "ghost in the machine" argument; but on your own showing, you see a racist ghost in the machine of every human mind. Whoever has encouraged you to think this way, must be smirking over their success--because, although your own friendly and appealing personality is NOT an arrogant and offensive one, this dogma of universally-present racism is causing you to do something which has the same _effect_ as arrogance. That is, it causes you to assume confidently that you know what is in my personality better than I know it. Well, you _don't_ know my personality better than I do.
But I believe I know why it _seems_ as if racism is everywhere. For various reasons which are not _synonymous_ with genetic heredity, certain attitudes and preferences have come to be shared by large numbers of persons who also happen to share an ethnic background. For instance, when politicians spend decades relentlessly telling African-Americans that they are automatically entitled to welfare handouts, there _will_ be many African-Americans believing that they are automatically entitled to welfare handouts. Then, when someone like me _observes_ the concrete fact that many African-Americans have been taught to expect handouts, those who have themselves been _taught_ to see "racism" in everything, will think that they are seeing racism in me. But they're NOT seeing racism in me; what they're seeing is the fact that I'm aware of a _sociological_ process going on. There is enough real racism in the world, that statements NOT motivated by racism can get mistakenly lumped together with actual racist utterances.
Tossing me a bone by telling me that my supposed racism "isn't immoral" does nothing to negate the presumption of _telling_ me I'm a racist. I'm not claiming such conclusive knowledge of _your_ insides as you claim you have of my "subconscious" racism; but if it should ever occur that you wanted to dismiss some opinion of mine as unreasonable without needing to _prove_ it was unreasonable, it would be mighty handy to be able to say, "Well, Joseph just thinks that way because his racism is distorting his thinking."
________, however you personally came to have this belief in that sneaky goblin of invisible racism, it does happen to be identical with a presupposition used by a LOT of hardcore-leftwing politicians. They use it, not to promote understanding of human nature, but to _silence_ all disagreement with _their_ agendas. "If you don't see the _same_ solutions to social problems as we see, that's your subconscious racism impairing your judgment." Only, they're not usually as nice as you are; they'll go ahead and accuse dissenters of _intentional_ racism. But I don't buy it. You shouldn't buy it either; such a well-intentioned girl as you are ought not to fall into lockstep with this politically-correct falsehood.
The young woman then "clarified" further, by citing research findings which prove that people can't easily recognize differences in _visual_ appearance among members of a different ethnic group than they were brought up with. WELL, DUH! By the same token, I could fail to see visual differences among rocks or trees or machines or buildings of types that I was unfamiliar with. But the politically-correct establishment _will_ use this irrelevant fact of sight-perception to support its race-card playing; and this girl, highly intelligent but far from wise, is prepared to let them do it.
Saturday, October 9, 2010
A Timely Intervention
I saw in the news that a schoolgirl in Fresno, California was kidnapped by a pervert. As the pervert was driving to reach whatever place he intended to use to have his evil way with his innocent victim, a man on the same road spotted him, and used his own vehicle to block the path of the kidnapper. This enabled the child to escape.
That's right: a citizen who was NOT a badge-carrying police officer intervened, and SAVED a crime victim. By the exact reasoning which is used AGAINST private gun ownership, this good man should have minded his own business, and said, "ONLY the police are allowed to do anything." Then the little girl would be dead now, but political correctness would be satisfied.
That's right: a citizen who was NOT a badge-carrying police officer intervened, and SAVED a crime victim. By the exact reasoning which is used AGAINST private gun ownership, this good man should have minded his own business, and said, "ONLY the police are allowed to do anything." Then the little girl would be dead now, but political correctness would be satisfied.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Root for the Home(school) Team
Today the online community where I am most active saw some really acrimonious debate over homeschooling. A teenage boy who had been homeschooled accurately identified the bigotry which is often directed AT homeschooling families, but in his bitterness he blamed homeschooling families themselves FOR that bigotry. So I weighed in with the following. (Note that I began by mentioning a forum member who was defending homeschooling.)
This will be courteous, but relevant. ________ and I have never been each other's rubber stamp, so when I take her side here it should be plain that I have a substantive reason.
It often happens with any kind of minority that its members resent _being_ in a minority, resent being treated as inferior outsiders by the majority. So they try to distance themselves _from_ their own group. Pop psychologists refer to this as "self-hatred;" and as usual, pop psychologists are off the mark. It is not _themselves_ that these resentful souls hate; they hate the _circumstance_ of being treated with disdain.
Be that as it may, history provides illustrations of minorities disassociating themselves from their own group. In Fifties America, for example, black women not only went to considerable trouble to straighten their hair, they even purchased cosmetic products to lighten the color of their skin. Persons pursuing self-worth in such ways may despise _others_ of their group--as if it were the fault of those peers that the group was disadvantaged; but they don't really hate themselves. If they truly hated themselves, they wouldn't be seeking to _give_ themselves an improved situation.
If a homeschooled kid rebels against homeschooling because in his or her case there was "cultic" abuse, that simply is not what I'm talking about. Those black women bleaching their skin in the Fifties did not necessarily have bad parents; they were trying to cope with a broader situation in society which affected them. Likewise, a homeschooler with _wonderful_ parents might _still_ rebel, because of pressures which are not at all of the parents' making.
It is alleged that homeschooling demands too much conformity. Excuse me, public school _doesn't_ demand conformity? I went through public school, Kay through Twelve, and THE CROWD there is quite capable of mercilessly persecuting the "different." The administration likewise; remember those kids in California who recently were told they couldn't be seen wearing American-flag shirts because it might "offend" the group the school was pandering to?
Public schools of some kind have to exist in a society which both is pluralistic and forces many households to have both parents working. But having tutored at numerous public schools, I have seen their shortcomings. All other things being equal, a homeschooled child _will_ emerge smarter than a public-school child, at least in the average public school as they are now. So the more families are able to make a go of homeschooling, the better.
This will be courteous, but relevant. ________ and I have never been each other's rubber stamp, so when I take her side here it should be plain that I have a substantive reason.
It often happens with any kind of minority that its members resent _being_ in a minority, resent being treated as inferior outsiders by the majority. So they try to distance themselves _from_ their own group. Pop psychologists refer to this as "self-hatred;" and as usual, pop psychologists are off the mark. It is not _themselves_ that these resentful souls hate; they hate the _circumstance_ of being treated with disdain.
Be that as it may, history provides illustrations of minorities disassociating themselves from their own group. In Fifties America, for example, black women not only went to considerable trouble to straighten their hair, they even purchased cosmetic products to lighten the color of their skin. Persons pursuing self-worth in such ways may despise _others_ of their group--as if it were the fault of those peers that the group was disadvantaged; but they don't really hate themselves. If they truly hated themselves, they wouldn't be seeking to _give_ themselves an improved situation.
If a homeschooled kid rebels against homeschooling because in his or her case there was "cultic" abuse, that simply is not what I'm talking about. Those black women bleaching their skin in the Fifties did not necessarily have bad parents; they were trying to cope with a broader situation in society which affected them. Likewise, a homeschooler with _wonderful_ parents might _still_ rebel, because of pressures which are not at all of the parents' making.
It is alleged that homeschooling demands too much conformity. Excuse me, public school _doesn't_ demand conformity? I went through public school, Kay through Twelve, and THE CROWD there is quite capable of mercilessly persecuting the "different." The administration likewise; remember those kids in California who recently were told they couldn't be seen wearing American-flag shirts because it might "offend" the group the school was pandering to?
Public schools of some kind have to exist in a society which both is pluralistic and forces many households to have both parents working. But having tutored at numerous public schools, I have seen their shortcomings. All other things being equal, a homeschooled child _will_ emerge smarter than a public-school child, at least in the average public school as they are now. So the more families are able to make a go of homeschooling, the better.
Monday, September 13, 2010
A quick invitation
One of my Facebook friends is a Christian woman named Traycee who is a firefighter. She is also a patriotic American--AND an African-American who is NOT fooled by Barack Obama. Traycee started a separate pro-American forum, which I have joined. I recommend it to others. You can find it at:
http://patriotsforfreeamerica.com/
http://patriotsforfreeamerica.com/
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Addendum to my item about HR1388
Snopes.com recently made a big deal of insisting that HR1388 was not nearly as broad in scope as had been thought. (That was why I kept my language moderate on HR1388, though I stand by everything I said about the general issue of government monopolizing humanitarian service.) If the Snopes people have an agenda to cover for leftwing politicians, telling us to quit worrying about HR1388 could be a piece of illusionist's misdirection, to prevent us from looking at ANOTHER piece of legislation which IS more inclusive in its dictatorial effects.
HR5741, the Universal National Service Act, is that other piece of legislation-- which, if what I now hear is true, is FAR more destructive to our liberty than the other law that only affected students. What I am told is that the U.N.S.A. authorizes the President to create new service agencies at his unilateral discretion, and to compel even persons as old as forty to work for them, if those persons have not yet already served in the armed forces or some equivalent.
If anyone is actually looking, I urge you to investigate this act for yourself, and don't take ONLY Snopes.com's word about it. If Barack Obama cared about helping people AS SUCH, he would be just as happy to let private charity do its job. He wants government to GET ALL THE CREDIT for any humanitarian activity, so as to set in concrete our passive dependency ON the government.
HR5741, the Universal National Service Act, is that other piece of legislation-- which, if what I now hear is true, is FAR more destructive to our liberty than the other law that only affected students. What I am told is that the U.N.S.A. authorizes the President to create new service agencies at his unilateral discretion, and to compel even persons as old as forty to work for them, if those persons have not yet already served in the armed forces or some equivalent.
If anyone is actually looking, I urge you to investigate this act for yourself, and don't take ONLY Snopes.com's word about it. If Barack Obama cared about helping people AS SUCH, he would be just as happy to let private charity do its job. He wants government to GET ALL THE CREDIT for any humanitarian activity, so as to set in concrete our passive dependency ON the government.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)