Hating One At A Time

I think people tend to have an incomplete understanding of diversity.  At the very least, they have an incomplete understanding of the effect of diversity on society.  As a present-day society, we tend to see diversity at the surface level.  That is, we acknowledge skin color, sexual orientation, gender, religious affiliation, and economic backgrounds as factors behind this term.  We see that these factors can impact society through different percentages and groups in general communities.  We normally see (or should) that diversity plays an important role in society and should exist.

But why is it important?  It’s great to strive for diversity but to what end does it make sense or make a difference?  There has to be some goal behind having a diverse community of individuals, but we often hastily come to the conclusion that diversity exists for the sake of diversity.  The fact is, if this was its only purpose, it would not be so imperative, so essential, to stress its existence and to strive for more.  I listened to a speaker last night as he spoke over this topic and I came to believe that his words described this other, often overlooked side of diversity.  He said that we tend to fail at asking the question, “Why do we strive to have diversity?”  He said the reason is to learn how to care for one another.  He said that we attempt to have diversity for the purpose of understanding and thereby creating an environment of different people who can act as a community.

He also made the point that the result of forming such a close community is that the problems and prejudice out of each minority group are shared and discussed.  The speaker pointed out that when we pay attention to the life perspective of our neighbor then we will want to help him, even stand by his side and fight with him for his rights.

Diversity is not this shallow topic of how many people of color or how many Muslims there are in a given community.  It is much deeper than that.  It brings into play an entire spectrum of social justice; a platform and a medium through which to enact change.  This is the more full view and representation of diversity in my mind.

With that being said, the speaker urged the crowd to, “Maybe start out a little ignorant.”  He wanted us to start off with a little prejudice in mind, but, through interaction in the diverse community, he wanted that prejudice to eventually slip away.

There is a kind of a life philosophy that I grew hearing about from my dad.  He would talk about hating one person at a time.  At first I was skeptical.  “What??”  How is it helping the situation to begin by hating groups of people, or even just one person?  I had failed, though, to see the true point behind his words.  In an ideal society, no one would hate and prejudice and intolerance would be dispelled, but we do not live in an ideal world.  My dad was being realistic by making the assumption that we all had prejudice within us, to some degree.  The philosophy of hating one person at a time merely limits our options of prejudice and hate.  If the rule is that we have to choose one person, then we had better choose wisely.  In order to choose wisely, we need to get know the people in question, put ourselves in their shoes, immerse ourselves in trying to understand their point of view because we need to know why we hate them more than the rest of the world.

The result of learning about the people you thought you could hate is that you find out, “I can’t hate them.  I have no grounds to be so against them.  In fact, I really need to show them love.  Show them that I care.”  It changes the way you act and suddenly you find that hate can be taken away with the absence of prejudice.

The point I would stress is that it is important to engage others and understand their views.  If we make an effort to become accepting and to foster a desire to become more connected to everyone, then the community environment becomes one based out of love, not hate, and affection, not frustration.  It ceases to be a tolerant society, full of suppressed anger, and becomes a united society unafraid to show outward care for one another.  I challenge anyone to try and hate only one person.  See what the outcome is for you.

LYN -- Love Your Neighbor

These days, we tend to focus on the threat of terrorism.  It is a big and very partisan issue in the discussion of defense spending.  Though we tend to stereotype terrorists to have olive-colored skin and turbans, it’s important to realize that terrorism is not limited to acts done by those in the Middle East.  Terrorism exists right here in the United States.  As a matter of fact, it has grown quite rampant since 9/11.  I happen to live nearby a gathering place for terrorism promoters.  That’s right everyone; I live near a church.

There was a time in my life, and I think that there is still a time in anyone’s life, where the support of a church is really helpful.  In a time of struggle, in a time of crisis, the church can offer hope to the hurting and faith in the Father to the fearful.  However, I there is no question that in light of the “Great Scare” of this generation (i.e. post 9/11 America) there seems to be a surge to maintain a sizeable distance between Christians and Muslims.

Why should Christians be so afraid?  Last time I checked, it wasn’t my Muslim friends showing off their guns to every passerby.   It was not a Muslim who opened fire in a movie theater in Colorado.  As a matter of fact, the most recent, major news headline including Muslims was the Sikh Temple shooting where a white male opened fire against the men and women of this religion.

It is not fair and it is not right to assume this group is out to destroy American principles, as I have heard so many people say.  I cannot think of many, if any, amendments in the Constitution which means as much as the freedom of speech, expression and religion.  Are we a Christian nation? Yes, by foundation.  So what does that mean?  It means we OUGHT to love our neighbor.

Self-Confidence through Literature and Its Importance in Prompting Action

Below is an essay I recently wrote.  Tell me what you think.  I will have a follow-up blog up shortly concerning the main point:

~Paper~    

     In possibly every story, there is a lesson to be learned.  While these lessons may not be as clearly stated as the morals concluding Aesop’s Fables, there is normally some piece of information to be used as food for thought.  Certain themes are meant to give immediate awareness to issues and let history allow the work to often fade.  However, other themes are timeless.  These create an understanding which comes off the page and affects the reader.  It is the beauty of exceptional literature.  One of the most important themes in literature is that of self-confidence.  Oftentimes, man has difficult in believing that he can make a difference in the world, proving that this is a particularly important theme in any literary medium.  Indeed, the theme of self-confidence and courage can be seen not just through books, but also in poetry, essays, short stories, plays, and songs.  It becomes an essential part of the story when it can produce change, whether that change is on a personal level or for the whole of society.  The importance of being individual, unique, and fighting against the pull of society with confidence is supported through literature and a variety of other mediums.

     The band, Weezer, has a song called “I Want To Be Something.”  The chorus of the song is below:

I want to be something
Before I die
I feel it burning me inside
I want to be something
I don't know why
I want to know that at least I tried (Weezer 1)

Weezer’s lyrics suggest that men almost yearn to do something, anything, to prove their self-worth.  The broader point of the song, though, is that whatever this something is, it will make a difference in the person.  The song does not specify how large the impact must be, indeed, the size does not matter so long as it makes some kind of difference.  The question is learning what impact is right and how to go about it.

     Some authors tend to believe that the first step to having self-confidence and making an impact is simply to begin to try and achieve it.  Indeed, there is a certain point when all the theory in the world cannot replace action.  In his speech, “The American Scholar,” Ralph Waldo Emerson stated that, “Action is with the scholar subordinate, but it is essential.  Without it he is not yet man.  Without it thought can never ripen into truth (Emerson 90).”  Emerson makes a great point; although many men wish that action was an equation, ready to be solved without unexpected limits, living life requires action.  It takes courage, though, to stand up and make a point to be heard and be seen.  Life can sometimes be brutal in bringing people to this realization.  They begin to give up on themselves and settle for less than their best.  Dr. David Foster put it this way in the prologue to his book, Accept No Mediocre Life, “From the hospital to the home to the halls of higher learning, we’ve been labeled so long, we feel libeled and stifled.  Too many splendid, gifted men and women have accepted mediocre as their lot in life (Foster xi).”  There is no reason to feel mediocre, yet it is difficult to believe sometimes that man could be anything but average.  The fight, then, must go to those who say success cannot be achieved and impacts cannot be made by a single individual.  In his separate essay, “Self Reliance,” Emerson also states, “Trust thyself; every heart vibrates to that iron string (Emerson 151).”  This imagery creates an understanding with the reader that self-confidence is not only essential, but it is also good, even sensational, to the soul.  With self-confidence, a person can feel satisfied by his own accomplishments.

     An important point to mention is to never lose faith in oneself.  As stated quite well in the comedy TV show, “Seinfeld,” “A George divided against itself, cannot stand (Seinfeld 1)!”  Although this was intended for humorous purposes, there is much truth in it.  If a man defeats himself before ever trying to make a change or fight against an unjust system, then he cannot begin to hope that he can achieve his goal.  However, dedication to the task and self-confidence in one’s own ability, despite the harsh words of others will always bring good results.  An allegory to demonstrate this lesson is Ernest Hemingway’s book, The Old Man and the Sea.  The story concerns itself with the struggles of a poor fisherman who, though having a rich history of catching phenomenal fish, had not been able to catch a monster fish for a long time.  The book documents this man’s journey as he attempts to catch a massive fish on his own.  Though he succeeds in pulling such a fish in, sharks in the water eat all the flesh off of it, leaving only the head and skeleton of the creature.  When he returns to port, everyone initially believes that he had, once again, come back from the sea empty-handed.  However, people eventually begin to crowd around the large carcass, a symbol to credit that the old man did not give up and could, indeed, still catch the biggest fish (Hemingway 122-123).  Nothing is impossible when one puts his mind to it.  This is not only true for personal goals, but also in trying to create an ideal for society.

     Some of the greatest minds in writing on the matter of self-confidence and bravery have also been heavily involved in social activism.  For instance, perhaps the most profound piece of writing on the matter of the individual’s power to enact social change is Henry David Thoreau’s essay, “Civil Disobedience.”  Not only did Thoreau manage to empower men and women to take a stand and demonstrate their importance, but his work has continued to do so, even in the present day.  Thoreau makes a definite statement and asks a question to his readers, “Unjust laws exist:  shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them, and obey them until we have succeeded or shall we transgress them at once (Thoreau 272)?”  Later on in his essay, Thoreau makes a connection with a heavily controversial event at the time; the abolition of slavery.  He states:

I know this well, that if one thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could name, -- if ten honest men only, -- ay, if one man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw from this copartnership, and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would be the abolition of slavery in America.  For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be:  What is once well done is done forever. (Thoreau 274)

Thoreau’s powerful diction had a massive impact on lots of people because they felt a desire to have passion and compassion.  They could understand that change has to begin somewhere, so why not start small and make a stand?  One man who was influenced by Thoreau’s writing was Martin Luther King Jr.  King’s writing was involved with how to make a positive influence through civil disobedience.  While he kept his arms open to try and spread love, not hate, King was still firmly grounded in his place as a social activist.  Although wishing for issues to disappear, he realized that this was somewhat impossible.  In “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King writes an explanation of his movement to preachers who actively opposed his efforts.  One of the most memorable lines in his essay talks about the “timing” of these movements:

     We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed.  Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. (King Jr. 1)

King was comfortable in advocating for civil rights because they fell in line with what he believed and, having experienced it himself, had an understanding for the injustice at hand.  It is true that experience can lead to courage.  The House on Mango Street, by Sandra Cisneros is an example of this.  Cisneros’ book explores two related themes.  The more general one is the innocence of children who grow up as members of disadvantaged society.  The more specific theme deals with the ways in which a child is able to cope with these issues.  The chapters of the book are very short, sometimes only the length of a couple paragraphs.  There is one chapter which stands out named “Four Skinny Trees.”  In this chapter, the author makes an analogy between the predicament of the little girl and protagonist of the story to some thin trees that the protagonist sees.  The chapter begins:

They are the only ones who understand me.  I am the only one who understands them.  Four skinny trees with skinny necks and pointy elbows like mine.  Four who do not belong here but are here.  Four raggedy excuses planted by the city. (Cisneros 74)

The analogy explains the feelings of the main character living in her unprivileged world with little hope for survival.  This is a sad realization for any child to have, but she understands the trees’ pain and plight.  She connects to the trees because they have a common enemy; the city that wants to beat them down and to eat them up.  While the protagonist’s attitude seems negative at first, this is just the harshness of reality seeping through.  However, there is a great deal of positive reinforcement given by these tiny little trees to the main character.  At the end of the chapter, she makes the observations, “Four who grew despite concrete.  Four who reach and do not forget to reach.  Four whose only reason is to be and be (Cisneros 75).”

     The protagonist of Cisneros’ novel shows a character trait hidden within everyone.  This trait is described by Kurt Vonnegut in his short story, “Report on the Barnhouse Effect.”  Vonnegut explains the phenomenon of the brain.  He tells the reader that the Barnhouse Effect is named after Professor Barnhouse who discovered, “dynamophychism, or force of the mind (Vonnegut 173).”  The beauty of Vonnegut’s work, though, is that he pokes fun at the idea that only a select few are actually gifted enough to be able to harness “the force of the mind.”  In fact, Vonnegut describes Professor Barnhouse, “The man who disarms the world is single, shorter than the average American male, stout, and averse to exercise (Vonnegut 174).”  By making this statement, Vonnegut is sending a clear message to anyone who reads the story; that the world is within anyone’s grasp.  It is simply up to the reader to dedicate himself to that cause, and if he does, he can achieve anything he wants.

     In this quest for self-confidence, one must also be honest with himself.  Benjamin Franklin is quoted in saying, “Honesty is the best policy (Franklin 1).”  Similarly, one must not make the mistake of thinking that it is truthful to not state an opinion.  Although this can and should be done with tact, it is better to be forward with a subject, any subject, instead of remaining quiet.  Mark Twain wrote on this matter in his satirical essay, “On the Decay of the Art of Lying.”  At one point, he makes mention, “Among other common lies, we have the silent lie – the deception which one conveys by simply keeping still and concealing the truth (Twain 1).”  Twain makes it clear that a person who keeps silent does not tell the truth.  This is a novel way of approaching the matter because it very much defines lying as “the concealing of truth.”  If one is silent, then his lie will damage his ability to be honest with himself or believe in himself.  Comparatively, Thoreau says in his book, Walden, that, “The volatile truth of our words should continually betray the inadequacy of the residual statement (Thoreau 254).”  This colors and builds off of Twain’s work because it states that speaking out, indeed, speaking at all is “truth.”  Therefore, one should never be afraid to take a side and be heard.

     Perhaps one of the best works to demonstrate this idea of speaking up in the name of truth and goodness is Sophocles’ play, “Antigone,” the final installment of the Oedipus trilogy.  In the story, Antigone is a woman whose brother was killed in a battle.  Her brother had led a revolt against the kingdom, though, so his body was despised by the king.  The king made a law that no one would give this man a proper burial for his treasonous actions.  Instead, he ought to rot and be eaten by wild animals.  Antigone saw this as an injustice, for she loved her brother, so she disobeyed the law.  She is caught and speaks with the king as he asks why she knowingly disobeyed his creed.  Her response acknowledges a power above the king:

I dared.  It was not God’s proclamation.  That final Justice that rules the world below makes no such laws.

Your edict, King, was strong, but all your strength is weakness itself against the immortal unrecorded laws of God.  They are not merely now:  they were, and shall be, operative for ever, beyond man utterly. (Sophocles 208)

Antigone challenges the king on whether or not it is his right to make such a law and, if it is not his right, then the law ought to be broken.  This took a great deal of courage to stand up to the man who had the authority to have her murdered; however, she said what she believed and nothing less.  The truth of her words inspired a new revolution because she had confidence that what she was doing was right and proper by God.

     In conclusion, the timeless theme of self-confidence and courage is illustrated through an assortment of literary types to provide examples of why it is important to be unique, to speak out, and to be heard.  Through literature, the soul can be explained in generalities.  In explaining complex themes like courage and self confidence, books can examine the topic from different viewpoints.  In the examination of any subject, though, certain parts of the idea will remain constant.  Looking at this through the context of self-confidence and being individual, what matters in life is being heard and making a difference, however great or small.  By doing so, men can separate themselves from their contemporaries and be transcended.  They will no longer be bound by a lack of faith in their own abilities or haunted by the shadow of a silent lie.  Varun Nayar wrote a poem called “The Young.”  The final lines say this:

You will burn out,

and we, will burn into you,

because we are younger than our

inhibitions. 

We can live for as long as we like. (Nayar 54)

Should this not be the goal?  If one person can change the world, should he not try?  It is time for all to stand up, stand out, and be heard.  It is time to burn into others and produce a necessary and positive impact.

What An Address, Mr. President!

That.  That was an inspiring speech.  President Obama came out swinging at the extremely slow and damaging idiocy which has now plagued America for so many years.  Obama seemed to take his fight to Congress through a quote by Emerson:

~Action is with the scholar subordinate, but it is essential.  Without it, he is not yet man.  Without it, thought can never ripen into truth ~

President Obama made a call to action, and made it clear that he, himself, is ready to act.  This is a position that, in the past, has not been seen because he has been too willing for compromise.  I want to see him make good on that end.

Moreover, the president spoke a lot of truth.  The fact is, we are still, as a country, suffering; however, we are not as far gone as we were two years ago.  As a matter of fact, we can come out on top if we put our minds to working together, unified, for the overall good of each other.

As a concerned American, I am happy to see my president being passionate.  It is important at this day in time to have strength coming from the people who we look for to lead.  I truly feel that, for the first time in his presidency, President Obama is ready to take up his position as the true champion for the people (that he talked about in his last campaign) for the next five years.  I look forward to it.

Justice?

I just finished reading “The Decay of the Art of Lying,” by Mark Twain.  It’s a satirical essay which explores the issue of brutal truth.  The essay, in turn, forced me to think about the possibility of brutal justice.  In other words, is there such a thing as an extreme form of justice which, in fact, becomes unjust?

In our society, I have seen examples of this:  the war that takes away thousands of lives to stop one extremist.  Tax cuts for the wealthy few when the lives of the lower and middle classes are in jeopardy.  How can we bring true justice and peace when the monstrous, negative effects of these acts become somehow justified by a small benefit?  Perhaps justice means something different than what is normally considered as “just.”

Socrates says this of injustice, “Then to injure a friend or anyone else is not the act of a just man, but of the opposite, who is the unjust.”  The actions described in the examples above are unjust, yet they are seemingly acceptable.  I mean, until recently with the Occupy movement, there has rarely been anyone who willingly disputes the problem with these issues.  So what is to be done?  Obviously some action must be engaged towards this false form of justice, but how many people actually believe in fighting against the system?  Most of us tend to stand idly by and passively hope for such injustice to pass over them.  Is this an approved way to act?  William Coffin would say, “No.”  He wrote, “Not to take sides is effectively to weigh in on the side of the stronger.”

When we analyze and then apply Coffin’s thought to our present society, we find that so called “justice” is held by those who have access to power--the judicial system, the war profiteers, the one percent, etc.  Their strategy is one where the rich and powerful always come out on top, because they are, themselves, rich and powerful.  How do you beat this corrupted view?  We must push against it.  It’s time to take back the true meaning of justice and dish it out where it is needed.

How do you push back against such inundated corruption?  Write to your congressman, get involved with your local Occupy group, or initiate your own original idea.  Writing, blogging, and speaking your own opinions is a vital action to producing change.  Remember, the first important act is simply taking a side.  Jesus said, “I know your deeds, that you are neither hot nor cold.  I wish you were one or the other!  So, because you are lukewarm – neither hot nor cold – I am about to spit you out of my mouth (NIV Rev. 3:15-16).”  We should all stand for something because we all truly matter.  Now let’s show the world.

A Deli Incident

Over the weekend, I witnessed something very upsetting; prejudice.  I was at a deli with a couple of my friends and I was waiting for my sandwich when a man walks to the counter.  His complaint, you might wonder?  He said that his grilled cheese was not melted enough.  He gave his sandwich to the cook, who obviously had some Spanish-speaking blood in her.  After the man handed her the sandwich, he told her to melt it more.  She smiled and nodded, but stood where she was, waiting for the man to leave.  It was, though, at this moment that the man decided the lady could not speak English.  He began to speak louder and louder, until he was yelling for the whole restaurant to hear, “MELT!  MELT!”  Then, he decided that speaking was futile, so he started smack his hands together, trying to indicate the melting.  All the while, the cook just stood, smiling and nodding.  When he finally left her line of vision, she immediately went to go and take care of his meal; however, he went to the cashier, asking for someone to speak Spanish because she clearly did not understand.

I was disgusted at this man’s attitude.  What, exactly, did he prove?  I guess he felt it was necessary to make a show for his girlfriend, or maybe he needed to feel “manly.”  Whatever the reason was, he made a false accusation that this woman could not speak English.

How do I know?

When she brought me my order, right after the big blow-up, she said, “Here you go, honey.”

The Battle At Wall Street

I wrote this poem this morning, inspired by the feudalism of Medieval Europe:

"The Battle At Wall Street"

I Feel America rising up and trumpeting a call to battle.

Gearing up for what’s to come; a clash with billy-clubs.

They process the lie that has been accepted

As they dress for war in rags.

Laying siege to the king’s castle and all the king’s friends

And wait until surrender.

Uprising, Uprising, Uprising again!

But this did not uproot these high-caliber men.

Although Project Occupation lost some ground

When they tried to “organize” their passion

The infamous “Battle at Wall Street”

Will never be forgotten.

Eviction of Occupy Wall Street and other Encampments

“The volatile truth of our words must continually betray the inadequacy of the residual statement.”

Henry David Thoreau, father of the concept of civil disobedience (though others came before him) wrote this in his book, Walden.  How true and prudent a statement it is, in light of the recent evictions of Occupy encampments in the past 48 hours.  The quote is passionate and salutes the effort to fight for what is right.  The Occupy movement has a powerful voice which speaks a “volatile truth” against the “residual statement,” the statement we have so long been brainwashed to follow; that we cannot be heard and/or helped, except through the intervention of the 1%.  The most important word in this quote, though, is “continually.”  We must speak the truth against this statement continually.  We must make our concerns known and righted continually.  And we must do so by occupying peacefully continually.  Stay strong all Occupy movements around the globe.  We stand in solidarity!

C'mon Man!

Come on, Occupy Oakland!  Act right.  I support you guys and what you do, but it is unacceptable to resort to violence when the movement has gained so much ground through peace!  "Be the change you wish to see in the world."  You are supported across the country.  We know you're angry.  All of us are.  Don't contaminate Scott Olsen's power and the meaning of this movement because you let your anger get the best of you.  We stand in solidarity through peace!

Lesson of the Occupy Movement - The Ed Show and Hemingway

Last night, I was watching the Ed Show on MSNBC.  Ed had a guy on there who was talking about the 99% movement in terms of us needing to learn lessons from the occupiers.  It made me realize that many of these big name people have not been actively “doing” in the occupations around this country and the world.  I mean, I knew this, but it didn’t really register until last night.  I, on the other hand, have been involved.  I have done something these supposedly very smart people have not.  Why?  For two reasons:

·         First, I care about exhibiting whatever power I can to prove that there is a great injustice in this nation.

·         Second of all, I’m not afraid to “do.”

This second point is extremely important.  Indeed, all of you who need a lesson to learn from the occupiers; how about this?  Get out and DO!  It’s really very simple, but there are a ton of people scared to death of being involved.  At the same time, the movement would not be remotely the size it is today without people who are passionate and willing to march and occupy and, in some cases, be arrested.

I recently finished Ernest Hemingway’s book, For Whom the Bell Tolls.  It was a fantastic war novel which captured passion in both love and war.  Early on in the story, the main character, Robert Jordan is talking with two guerilla soldiers (occupiers) that are helping him out, Pablo and Anselmo.  Anselmo decides to draw attention to Pablo not wishing to fight, saying that he was afraid of the “fox.”  Thus, the man instigated an argument between himself and Pablo.  This is the dialogue which follows:

     “Very little,” said Anselmo scornfully.  “Very little in my judgment.  To steal, yes.  To eat well, yes.  To murder, yes.  To fight, no.”

     “You are an old man who will make himself trouble with his mouth.”

     “I am an old man who is afraid of no one,” Anselmo told him.  “Also I am an old man without horses.”

     “You are an old man who may not live long.”

     “I am an old man who will live until I die,” Anselmo said.  “And I am not afraid of foxes.”

Pablo said nothing but picked up the pack.

     “Nor of wolves either,” Anselmo said, picking up the other pack.” (Hemingway 16)

Therefore, I urge you to reflect about whether you are the fox, clever but without the courage to stand up for what you believe in?  Or are you prepared to fight the wolves?

Occupy Nashville Helps to Spark a Change

Last night, the police threw out the Occupy Nashville group.  About two dozen were arrested.  This came directly as a result of Bill Haslam and his extremely stupid laws that he has now tried to force on the occupiers.  So stupid, in fact, that the judge released all of those arrested and the ACLU is gearing up for a lawsuit against Tennessee.  Keep it up, police.  Keep it up, government.  Because you are about to see what many, capable and committed individuals can achieve.  The movement is still moving.  It won't be stopped until change is made, and action (though peaceful action) is about to be brought against those opposed to both, the 99% and justice.

The Biblical Meaning Behind Occupy Wall Street and the 99%

Now, I know the 99% movement is not a "segregated" movement.  I do not wish to create any boundaries or upset people of different faiths; however, as an accepting movement, we should all listen to each other's beliefs, both political and religious.  I had a bible study with my dad earlier this week and he pointed out James 5 in Bible.  For those of you who do not have access to it, it is reproduced below:

     Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you.  Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes.  Your gold and silver are corroded.  Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire.  You have hoarded wealth in the last days.  Look!  The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you.  The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Almighty.  You have lived on earth in luxury and self indulgence.  You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.  You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you.  ~James 5 (NIV)

To me, this chapter means a great deal.  It shows that nothing has changed in the last 5,000 years, at least!  We still have terrible injustices in the world, but it also shows that there are still people who are unafraid to stand up against this injustice.

A couple of lines particularly stand out for me.  The first is, "The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you."  Isn't that what's happening, hang on, right......NOW?!  So, there you have it.  After all of these years, the same groups still get together in an attempt to keep the filthy rich "honest."  But is the motive the same?  The second line verse that catches my eye is, "You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you."  To me, this holds a couple of different meanings.  First of all, this could mean any innocent person put to death via the death penalty, but it also means the people who have died fighting a war for oil!  It is absolute insanity to die for this.  Furthermore, it is also in response to the people who have died because they were denied medical insurance despite the fact that they had a condition which would, in time, take them from this world.

It doesn't matter that we have separate beliefs.  For many, the Bible is the Word of God, but for many others, it should be taken as a book of philosophy, much in the same way that the world looks at Thoreau's Walden.  Indeed, all religious texts are, first and foremost, philosophies on life.  Some parts are good; others are bad, but all are important in order to understand that the frustrating times we are all going through right now.

The Police of Wall Street

I can get not agreeing with the protesters of the 99% movement (though not without difficulty).  I can even get being angry with the protesters, but yesterday, when the occupiers of Wall Street were marching, a policeman decided to hit a woman.  Now, why on earth does a policeman need to put his hands on a woman who is participating in a nonviolent protest?  Today, when I participated in a march, they gave us the phone number of an attorney we could call in case we were arrested.  On today’s protest, luckily, the police set an example of what all police departments across the country should be like and protected us.  However, the actions of the police at Wall Street don’t make sense.  The actions shouldn’t make sense.  The policeman at Wall Street was probably just doing what he thought his job was; however, the fact is, he took his job to a terrible extreme that speaks ill of his group.  If it really was okay for him to do what he did, then his “orders” make him no better than any other abusive person and he, too, should be imprisoned with those that his fellow policemen took in yesterday.

The 99%

Throughout time, the world has seen many people and many groups of people walk its lands.  Most of these people generally, although sometimes begrudgingly, accept the policies of government and follow the rules of society.  However, there always seems to be one group at any given point which has challenged the system.  There was Christ, that is when he was preaching, and his followers, as well as the gypsies of Medieval Europe.  Skipping ahead, with the formation of America, the Transcendentalists made their mark early on in the history of America.  Since then, America has hardly been without a group who has challenged “the system.”  Abolitionists, the Knights of Labor, Beatniks, Hippies; all of these groups were speaking, expressing and, in some cases, fighting for freedom.  What’s more is that they have all managed to affect, however significant, change.

Where is this group today?  It has been a half of a century since the Hippies marched for a cause.  These people now look to a different generation.  Indeed, some of their kids look toward a new generation of leaders, of speakers; of people willing to fight for what is right.  These people must make it their mission to make a stand for Americans, as it is Americans who have been taken advantage of.

But what are these people making a stand for?  It is a thoughtful question.  As a group, there must be a set of ideals that we are fighting for.  Unlike in times before, the frustration most prevalent today is not focused on equal rights of a single, disadvantaged group.  Rather, it is directed more toward receiving care and having our voices heard for the purpose of equality for the extensive, disadvantaged majority.

Although it sometimes seems that there is not enough apparent frustration in America at present to start a group, something truly remarkable has come to pass in the last couple of weeks.  It seemed to be in direct response to the thoughts described above.  People have begun to protest.  First, it started on Wall Street in New York City.  Some college students began an occupation of Wall Street to declare their unhappiness with major corporations and the government.  The idea has now grown to become an international response to injustice.  Occupations have now begun in forty-five of the fifty United States.  These protesters call themselves the 99%, a name in response to the wealthiest 1% of America.  As of 2001, the wealthiest 1% of Americans held 38% of the nation’s wealth.

On Saturday, October 08, 2011, I attended a meeting of the “Occupy Nashville” group.  As a group, “Occupy Nashville” has now set up a permanent spot to “occupy.”  Protests are happening and it seems that the spirit of these committed individuals will continue to fight (like those around the country and globe) until reasonable change is made.  It is unacceptable to stand and watch as these corporations and the government take advantage of Americans who cannot afford to live in luxury, like that top 1%.

Currently, there are a lot of people out in the world who are feeling the khakified syndrome.  It is something they would normally dismiss as unfortunate but normal.  This time, a group has embraced this feeling, and has now inspired people to think, as John Steinbeck wrote, “If I’ve missed this, what else have I failed to see?”  This is a movement full of, not people looking for an easy way out, not people who just want to be angry, but people who have a reason to be angry because of the injustice they have had to endure for so long.

Take that, Herman Cain!

The American Flag

The groundbreaking ceremony for the Muslim mosque was yesterday.  It came as a great, positive moment for this group in Murfreesboro.  Two to three hundred people showed-up to take part in the ceremony.  As I watched and talked with attendees of the event, I listened to the Muslim adults on why they had come to America.  Their answers were basically the same:  they had come here for freedom, something they are very grateful for.  Furthermore, they talked about how their friends and family, who are still overseas, long for America.  What a testament to the ideals of this country.

However, in the parking lot of the church next to the building site, three men stood and stared with disapproval.  They came in a big, Ford truck with a fiery bald eagle on the side and a massive American flag flying in the bed.

So let me get this straight…These men were protesting the freedom of these Muslim people with the symbols of America and the freedom it embodies?  Seeing these men and their flag made me rethink what that symbol stands for.  The Muslim community looked upon the flag as a symbol of hope, of the possibility of new things.  For the Muslim people, yesterday marked an advancement of their culture for future generations in this area.

The “other guys” took the flag to mean that America was a place for safety and security.  It was their belief that their freedoms were being taken away because a group of people, they hated, were being given rights.  It’s perverted logic, but it is how they rationalize their misplaced fear.  They told the local news that it was the Muslim belief system which was so dangerous.  I guess they missed the point that the Muslim religion worships the same God as Christians and they believe in Jesus too.

So what does the flag really stand for?  We like to think it stands for “liberty,” but if we put stipulations on who can have liberty, then exactly what does our flag symbolize?  What has happened to the flag’s meaning?  What is clear is that the Muslim people find great hope and opportunity from it.  This other meaning, though, is ugly.  The American Flag does not seem to stand for what it used to, so I now question what America stands for:  Freedom?  Justice?  These values used to be understood and available to all.  If our country is to regain this kind of position, then we are going to need “change”.  We must have change in our hearts, our minds and our actions, from being interfering to being accepting.  Americans can do this, but the direction we move in must be positive.

Corner of Your Eye

Sometimes we do not see what is so plainly against the laws of goodness and fairness and equality in life.  We can walk past it, run over it and push through it without a conscious thought towards its unfair state.  It is only when we stop and stare at it that we finally see the pain it causes.

This may not make sense to a lot of people.  Indeed, they have most likely fallen victim to this idea that all is fair in love and war, but it’s not.  When you see the homeless man on the side of the street begging for food, what thoughts pass through your head?  Probably things like, “He deserves this,” or, “That’s just too bad.”  Maybe, if you are filled with compassion, you will pledge yourself to try and help people like him; however, this will almost immediately become like a New Year’s Resolution; something you would like to do, but without enough gumption to ever start.

It doesn’t even have to be someone who is so obviously struggling.  How about the married man who has lost his income, but is still trying to keep his family together?  This man may have it worse than the homeless man; for he must persevere for his family and be strong for those he loves despite the little hope that exists.  The struggle can make one lose faith and dignity, a terrible blow with defeat so near.

Whoever it is, we rarely take out the time to see and to feel the pain that they are going through.  In the first episode, of the first season of “Doctor Who” with Matt Smith as the Doctor, there is an alien hiding in a house with a simple cloaking device around the room he stays in.  The way the cloaking device works is that the room directs your attention slightly to the right or left of the door, thereby making it invisible.  The Doctor locates the room by looking out of the “corner of his eye.”  The subliminal message behind this episode is that one can see something that he/she hasn’t before, by simply paying attention in a different way.

This is a necessary part of life if the whole story is to be attained.  It has always been said that one must weigh and think and let ideas simmer on both sides to get the whole story.  If this is not done, then one group will think it is better than another and conflicts begin to arise.  A great way of explaining this comes from the book, Mountains Beyond Mountains, by Tracy Kidder.  Kidder’s book documents some of the great things that the protagonist, Paul Farmer, did while helping people from Haiti.  In one paragraph, Kidder explains Farmer’s use of the word comma:

     This was for me one of the first of many encounters with Farmer’s use of the word comma, placed at the end of a sentence.  It stood for the word that would follow the comma, which was asshole.  I understood he wasn’t calling me one – he would never do that; he was almost invariably courteous.  Comma was always directed at third parties, at those who felt comfortable with the current distribution of money and medicine in the world.  And the implication, of course, was that you weren’t one of those.  Were you? (Kidder, 24)

This explains the issue of a one-sided approach.  It is important to research both or all (for many issues are not double- but rather multi-sided) sides of a problem before creating any judgment whatsoever.

In the end, we must make a difference, however small, in changing some aspect of the world.  Even if it is changing someone’s belief, this change is one more step in the right direction.  Why, one might ask, is this so important?  One little change in attitude cannot make enough of a difference.  My answer is because we care.  We ought to care because it is right to care.  Comma.

The Middle Class

     I had an epiphany this week about my blog.  Recently, I have not been able to focus.  This changed, though, when I realized the breadth of my mission here.  The idea behind khakified is not as narrow a subject as I had originally thought.  Oftentimes, I can get caught up in the lower class or peace as my subject, and certainly, this is a major part of my blog; however, the khakified syndrome, this distinct feeling of invisibility, also applies to the middle-class.  As I started thinking, it occurred to me that middle-class men and women are normally forgotten about.  More than that, though, they are okay with this.  So long as their values are not threatened, so long as their lifestyles are not likely to change, they do not and will not speak up.  For this, my blog also encompasses those in the middle-class who wish to speak up, but are afraid to do so.

     The majority of the middle class suffers from the syndrome of khakified.  They put up with miserable jobs and give up any chance to enjoy life just to try and ensure the safety of not sinking further in the socioeconomic classes.  Albert Einstein said that the definition of insanity was, “doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.  There is a lot of insanity involved with this boring routine of doing things over and over again.  But these people are not expecting different results.  In fact, they want the same results.  A feeling of invisibility and even more, a lack of action on their part, makes them incapable to stand on their own for justice, both for themselves and for others.  It seems that the middle class is more susceptible to being khakified than the lower classes.  The government also helps to create this mess.  It is true that they spend their time addressing needs for either the upper or lower class, but rarely the middle.

     In the end, so long as there is a voice that speaks for this large part of American society, progress can help lead to major change.  The middle class is khakified, but hopefully this blog will be able to produce a spark that turns into a fire.

Trainwrecks

I’ve been pondering recently on people.  How and why do we interact with each other?  What makes us “individuals?”  The answers to these questions are curious because it seems that they are different for each person.  Because there is no consistency, sometimes it seems that some people are more powerful or respectable.  In truth, every person is great because of their unique approaches to life.  There is a recent song by the band, Weezer, called “Trainwrecks.”  The song’s lyrics are very insightful into this discussion.  Here is a link to the song and the lyrics are below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoYHOhqeyO8

We sleep all day and rock the night
We just get up to start another fight
We kiss and then we bite
We are Trainwrecks

You don't keep house and I'm a slob
You're freakin' out cause I can't keep a job
We don't update our blogs
We are Trainwrecks

People love to tell us what to do
That's just cause they're jealous of me and you

We're digging through the couch for cash
We're taking cabs cause both our cars are trashed
But we're still kicking ass
We are Trainwrecks
Trainwrecks
We're still kicking ass
We are Trainwrecks

We think it's uncool to be on time
Mooching off our friends is not a federal crime

Someday we'll cut our critics down to size
And crash a Diddy party in disguise
We fall, but then we rise
We are Trainwrecks

That's the story of our lives
We are Trainwrecks

I love this song because of its message.  The last two verses really make the message stand out:

We fall, but then we rise

We are Trainwrecks

That’s the story of our lives

We are Trainwrecks

It expresses this idea that humans, in general, are just a little messed up.  We have quirky habits and annoying tendencies that drive even those close to us insane.  Yet, the more major takeaway from the song is that these habits are part of each and every one of us and it is what makes us so unique.  It means that we were created in a one of a kind shape and continue to grow.

To add, this same idea reminds me of a quote by Ralph Waldo Emerson.  He said this in his essay, “Self-Reliance,”

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines.  With consistency, a great soul has simply nothing to do.  He may as well concern himself with his shadow upon the wall.  Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. – ‘Ah so you will be misunderstood.’  Is it is so bad, then, to be misunderstood?  Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every wise and pure spirit that ever took flesh.  To be great is to be misunderstood.

The common thought between the song and the quote is clear; humans are original, they are unpredictable, and each one is amazing because of this quality.  No matter if it is the homeless man begging on the side of the street or the rich millionaire who earned his money through hard work and perseverance, men and women from all backgrounds are amazing!  The writers of the British science fiction TV show, Doctor Who, exemplified this by showing how struck the Doctor is at the capabilities of the human race.  He always vouches for the survival of humans because he has faith in their abilities.  Because we are worth saving!  We are worth the experiences life has to offer, because we all experience them in a separate fashion.  The beauty of people comes from the distinguishing characteristics that they carry.  Therefore, we should learn to embrace our own traits and, just as important, accept those of the people around us.

Why Peace?

There are two time periods in American History which I believe are the most interesting to study.  These periods, seemingly, were also the most productive in U.S. History.  They were:  the time between the end of the War of 1812 (1814) and the Annexation of Texas (about 1846), and the time between the conclusion of the Civil War (1865) and the Spanish-American War (1898).

The first time period, mentioned above, was a time of unity in the country that had not been seen since before the Revolution.  It was a time for major reform, whether it was critical thinking, religious enlightenment, or social class.  This was the era of Thoreau, Emerson, and Whitman; the Transcendentalists.  Yet, while these men are quite notable, they were merely the teachers and a few of the makers of change which came to define this era and redefine America.

The second period was known as the Reconstruction, or the Industrial Revolution, and had a newfound emphasis on business.  This time is marked by the corporate giants and “robber barons” of Andrew Carnegie, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and John D. Rockefeller.  Twain and Steinbeck, too, began their writing careers at this.

Judging by this information, things were going generally well.  What can we attribute this to?  Despite a couple of shortfalls, it would seem that there is really no connection between these two eras.  Could it have been a commitment (and, in the case of the Reconstruction, a recommitment) to do and make things work properly for the people?  I believe this is part of it, but what allowed them to focus on this, versus some war or something?

There lies the answer to these periods’ successes; there was no war.  The first period of time that was addressed is the longest period that America has been at peace, thirty-two years.  The second period was the second longest, at thirty-three years.  Now, one could make the point that today, we are making more progress than we did in these past eras, but are we, really?  I’m talking in the sense of original thoughts.  Today, we focus almost all of our energies on regurgitating and improving that which has already been designed.  In my mind, two new versions of the iPad in one year are not nearly as impressive as the dishwasher, escalator, and diesel engine in twelve years.

The point I am trying to make here does not deal as much with the disadvantaged as it does about what is right and progressive.  Progress, of course, will breed positive action for the disadvantaged, eventually, but the main point in all this is to address what we could accomplish without unnecessary war.  The current budget of the US asks for 663 billion dollars for “defense.”  Compare this with the United Nation’s estimate of 195 billion dollars to end world hunger, yet we can’t seem to bring ourselves to do something actually good for mankind.  What could we accomplish?  This is the real importance of peace.

The Circle

The circle is a masterpiece.

What do you think of when you see a circle?  Generally speaking, it brings to mind a perpetuation of things, such as the circle of life.  However, the circle also symbolizes deeper meanings.  Think about how you would draw a circle?  If you just drew a quick one on a piece of paper, chances are that you would end up being uneven on more than one part of your shape.  Therefore, I believe that the circle is the most difficult shape to draw well.  Likewise, a well-rounded life is a most difficult way to live.  Why is this?  Perhaps the difference is ignited with the distinction of straight and curved lines.  A shape with straight lines, such as a square or a triangle, has clear and defined intervals of change.  As such, one can trace exactly where change has to be or has been made.  However, with a circle, there are no such intervals of change. 

If you look at a circle, it can represent a much more accurate spectrum than a line.  Take good and bad.  If you put “good” 180 degrees away from “bad” on a circle, then they seem pretty far apart.  However, sometimes someone who is trying to show good-will at an extreme level can end up doing harm and someone who is trying to be terrible can end up doing something good.  Sometimes the extreme actually becomes the opposite point of view.  This is often true in life, but two great examples come in popularity and politics.

We can apply this to real life.  It is easier to go through life when there are clearer boundaries of what we perceive as positive and negative actions.  It is another thing entirely when these boundaries flow together, because it challenges us on what we believe to be true.  However, the flowing boundaries of a circle are like a path less travelled, and are the most fulfilling.  We find the most joy and feel the most accomplished when we have completed them.  Many people follow the already well-worn path of the majority, exiling themselves to a life of boredom and unhappiness.  The challenge is to overcome the easiness of falling into that lifestyle and reap the rewards of persevering.