Sue Monk Kidd writes her own personal story of discovering how distorted her world view is because of her indoctrination by traditional views held by Christian communities. Essentially, she experiences the unfortunate side-effects of institutionalized paternalism.
Her gradual awakening and journey to the point where she can come to God as Woman to find her roots as a woman herself.
We all know that theologically God is genderless, but we humans do need to use our language constructs to talk about God. It is difficult to personalize a genderless being without reference to our pronouns that reference gender. At any rate, the author does discover herself as a woman by negotiating a road that brings her into dissonance with traditional Christianity.
Every woman should read at least some work that deals with this issue. There are many theologians (Elizabeth Johnson, Mary Daly,
Elisabeth Schüssler Fiorenza) who have devoted their careers to the understanding of God as Woman!
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
"Fire in the Blood" by Irene Nemirovsky
After reading "Suite Francaise", I became a fan of Irene Nemirovsky who suffered the fate of other born Jews in France by dying in Auschwitz. Both "Suite Francaise" and "Fire in the Blood" were found in hand-written form many, many years later by the author's daughter who worked to have them published.
This story is a gem! It involves a very small French community who intersect with the primary character (an senior who returns to the community after years away). As we learn the good and the bad of many of the citizens, we are led to believe that, contrasting to the pitfalls in the characters of some, one couple is singular in its portrayal of a loyal married couple.
We then find an unusual conclusion where even the couple considered without fault has a story that demonstrates that they too are human!
This story is a gem! It involves a very small French community who intersect with the primary character (an senior who returns to the community after years away). As we learn the good and the bad of many of the citizens, we are led to believe that, contrasting to the pitfalls in the characters of some, one couple is singular in its portrayal of a loyal married couple.
We then find an unusual conclusion where even the couple considered without fault has a story that demonstrates that they too are human!
"The Plot Against America" by Philip Roth
I had never read any book by Philip Roth until now. “The Plot Against America” was a great one to begin to catch up on this great author’s accomplishments.
The story is probably well-known to most. It is built on a perception that Charles Lindbergh was a sympathizer of Adolph Hilter and the Nazi government. The plot surrounds the election of Lindbergh as the successor to Roosevelt and the subsequent plight of American Jews.
What I found most enlightening is the impact of policies that penalize any group of people. It was specifically graphic to feel how stupid such biases are as they penetrate the walls of any defense that any ethnic group could materialize.
The story is probably well-known to most. It is built on a perception that Charles Lindbergh was a sympathizer of Adolph Hilter and the Nazi government. The plot surrounds the election of Lindbergh as the successor to Roosevelt and the subsequent plight of American Jews.
What I found most enlightening is the impact of policies that penalize any group of people. It was specifically graphic to feel how stupid such biases are as they penetrate the walls of any defense that any ethnic group could materialize.
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
"The Shock Doctrine" by Naomi Klein
While there is nothing in Naomi Klein’s book, “The Shock Doctrine”, which I did not have some knowledge of. Yet, this author presented in more detail and lucidity the direct correlation between the Chicago School of Economics and the series of gigantic economic disruptions in various nations.
Her work has been positively reviewed by the Dow Jones Business News, the New York Times, and the Guardian. I surely applaud her writing style: straightforward and clear. And, more importantly, I support her thoughtful insight to the need of introducing “shock” into a nation in order for it to bend to the principles of the Chicago School of Economics and its guru, Milton Friedman.
A shock to a nation or state, as in the case of Katrina’s impact on New Orleans and the State of Louisiana, can come from natural disasters, coups, e.g., Chile, major changes in government, e.g., collapse of Russia. In general, the situation becomes economically desperate requiring major infusion of capital from the World Bank or IMF. In each instance, the conditions of the loans require major transfer of assets from state-owned to private ownership (always to the benefit of the few). In each instance, the majority of people suffer: massive unemployment, loss of national assets, and often, death and torture of those resisting change.
The thesis of this work is consistent with my personal bias in favor of some type of “market socialism” (term provided by my economic advisor and guru who happens to be my son-in-law). Consistent with the writings of Kevin Phillips (I have not read his new book, “Bad Money”, but it is consistent with his other works), it is hard to understand how a nation can continue to prosper without mechanisms to ensure employment at all levels of economic strata. Without such a base, it is hard to understand how a nation can preserve its integrity to support its own peoples, and according to Kevin Phillips, when this happens, nations tend to decline in its role as a power.
Capitalism clearly does much that is good, but it does need a counterweight. Sweden and Norway seem to know something that works to the benefit of all. There is private ownership but no one is poor.
Her work has been positively reviewed by the Dow Jones Business News, the New York Times, and the Guardian. I surely applaud her writing style: straightforward and clear. And, more importantly, I support her thoughtful insight to the need of introducing “shock” into a nation in order for it to bend to the principles of the Chicago School of Economics and its guru, Milton Friedman.
A shock to a nation or state, as in the case of Katrina’s impact on New Orleans and the State of Louisiana, can come from natural disasters, coups, e.g., Chile, major changes in government, e.g., collapse of Russia. In general, the situation becomes economically desperate requiring major infusion of capital from the World Bank or IMF. In each instance, the conditions of the loans require major transfer of assets from state-owned to private ownership (always to the benefit of the few). In each instance, the majority of people suffer: massive unemployment, loss of national assets, and often, death and torture of those resisting change.
The thesis of this work is consistent with my personal bias in favor of some type of “market socialism” (term provided by my economic advisor and guru who happens to be my son-in-law). Consistent with the writings of Kevin Phillips (I have not read his new book, “Bad Money”, but it is consistent with his other works), it is hard to understand how a nation can continue to prosper without mechanisms to ensure employment at all levels of economic strata. Without such a base, it is hard to understand how a nation can preserve its integrity to support its own peoples, and according to Kevin Phillips, when this happens, nations tend to decline in its role as a power.
Capitalism clearly does much that is good, but it does need a counterweight. Sweden and Norway seem to know something that works to the benefit of all. There is private ownership but no one is poor.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
I am clearly no politician!
The debate last night in Philadelphia only confirmed that I could never have been a politician. Repeatedly I heard responses that were tailored to be politically correct rather than honest.
I cite one particularly controversial interaction.
Obama was taken over the coals for his association with a neighbor who is a college professor but was a member of the radical group, the Weathermen, about forty years ago. It turns out that he and Obama's pastor reacted to the 9/11 horrendous tragedy by voicing words of blame on the United States.
Clinton strongly indicated her disapproval of such discourse, as did Obama. They had virtually no choice! Politics would forbid their saying much else.
However, when I saw the tragedy unfold on 9/11, I told a friend that if I were President at the time, I would have fallen on my knees to beg God for insight to what have we done to sow such anger and hatred. And since then, it seems clear that only when we can restore our moral orientation towards other nations and peoples will we be able to claim any semblance of being above blame.
How often I hear our leaders (not just the President) say words relative to our greatness without ever referencing our horrible actions against others (our involvement in South America, the Phillipines, our contributions to the economic plights of poorer nations who get tangled up in the machinations of the World Bank and IMF).
It is hard for me to see 9/11 without some awareness of our sinister involvement throughout the world. We do cause others to be angry and hateful.
Surely, Obama could never have said such words during the debate, even if I think they are true.
I cite one particularly controversial interaction.
Obama was taken over the coals for his association with a neighbor who is a college professor but was a member of the radical group, the Weathermen, about forty years ago. It turns out that he and Obama's pastor reacted to the 9/11 horrendous tragedy by voicing words of blame on the United States.
Clinton strongly indicated her disapproval of such discourse, as did Obama. They had virtually no choice! Politics would forbid their saying much else.
However, when I saw the tragedy unfold on 9/11, I told a friend that if I were President at the time, I would have fallen on my knees to beg God for insight to what have we done to sow such anger and hatred. And since then, it seems clear that only when we can restore our moral orientation towards other nations and peoples will we be able to claim any semblance of being above blame.
How often I hear our leaders (not just the President) say words relative to our greatness without ever referencing our horrible actions against others (our involvement in South America, the Phillipines, our contributions to the economic plights of poorer nations who get tangled up in the machinations of the World Bank and IMF).
It is hard for me to see 9/11 without some awareness of our sinister involvement throughout the world. We do cause others to be angry and hateful.
Surely, Obama could never have said such words during the debate, even if I think they are true.
Lack of Accountability!
I share the same views of so many that the clergy sex abuse history remains a very sore point because no bishop has been held accountable. No bishop has lost his position; in fact, Cardinal Law's outcome was a perfect job for a senior person!
The clergy sex abuse situation would never have became such a disaster if the bishops had acted appropriately when each case was brought to his attention. Pediphiles are not relegated only to the Catholic clergy. However, only in the Catholic Church have pedophiles been "assisted" without facing the severe consequences of their behavior. If sanctions were appropriately administered, including jail, not only would there have been far fewer cases, but it would have alerted everyone to the repercussions of contemplating such behavior.
To think that no bishop has suffered any consequence for their conduct is itself a tragedy!
The clergy sex abuse situation would never have became such a disaster if the bishops had acted appropriately when each case was brought to his attention. Pediphiles are not relegated only to the Catholic clergy. However, only in the Catholic Church have pedophiles been "assisted" without facing the severe consequences of their behavior. If sanctions were appropriately administered, including jail, not only would there have been far fewer cases, but it would have alerted everyone to the repercussions of contemplating such behavior.
To think that no bishop has suffered any consequence for their conduct is itself a tragedy!
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Clinton vs Clinton
As indicated in prior entries, one of the prominent reasons for not wanting Hillary in the White House is that her husband will be there also. There have been a number of people who share this view. Some see this as outside the "spirit" of the Constitution. Some just cannot imagine the scene of Bill sharing his views on just about anything and its effects on those in the Hillary Administration.
Today, we have evidence of such a disagreement. Bill supports the Trade Agreement with Columbia and she doesn't. In and of itself, such disagreements are no big thing! We all have differences of opinions even with those we love. But, can you imagine what the impact would be if such views were known within the purview of the White House?
Today, we have evidence of such a disagreement. Bill supports the Trade Agreement with Columbia and she doesn't. In and of itself, such disagreements are no big thing! We all have differences of opinions even with those we love. But, can you imagine what the impact would be if such views were known within the purview of the White House?
Saturday, April 5, 2008
Unexpected Source of an Exit Strategy
Sometimes there is some real news! Two of Yale's best have written that there is a way out of Iraq!
Apparently, there are two bases for the legitimacy of the Iraq invasion. According to the congressional authorization, the first granted the President authority to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq." This basis no longer exists. There is no Iraq threat (apart from its own chaos!).
The second basis is the need to enforce all relevant UN resolutions. But, the resolution authorizing the United States to be at the head of the multinational force EXPIRES on 31 December. Without a new resolution, the president will have no authority to continue to operate.
Granted, Bush is trying to negotiate a bilateral agreement with Iraq for maintaining US presence in Iraq. However, without receiving Congressional approval (and it has been made clear that there is no intention to do so), the President will have no authority to continue to operate his "war on terror".
There is hope that we can see this catastrophe ended by necessity.
We can then focus on seeing how the Iraqis deal with this new environment. Admittedly, the scene in Basra is not too promising (so many of the military, including officers, fled the scene!).
Apparently, there are two bases for the legitimacy of the Iraq invasion. According to the congressional authorization, the first granted the President authority to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq." This basis no longer exists. There is no Iraq threat (apart from its own chaos!).
The second basis is the need to enforce all relevant UN resolutions. But, the resolution authorizing the United States to be at the head of the multinational force EXPIRES on 31 December. Without a new resolution, the president will have no authority to continue to operate.
Granted, Bush is trying to negotiate a bilateral agreement with Iraq for maintaining US presence in Iraq. However, without receiving Congressional approval (and it has been made clear that there is no intention to do so), the President will have no authority to continue to operate his "war on terror".
There is hope that we can see this catastrophe ended by necessity.
We can then focus on seeing how the Iraqis deal with this new environment. Admittedly, the scene in Basra is not too promising (so many of the military, including officers, fled the scene!).
Obama and His Pastor, Again!
Many people have contested Obama’s remaining in the Trinity Church, given the rather angry diatribes voiced by its pastor. In addition to the many who voiced their concerns in the public media, one of my brother-in-laws shared his concerns.
Given my history which has been shared and my past and current anger at policies and actions of the US government, I had virtually no problem in identifying with a person who listened to Pastor Wright and continued to remain in the church. Everything has to be heard in context and in the context of a church with mostly a black population, there was much that would evoke words of anger.
However, Juan Williams’ column regarding Pastor Wright in the context of the life of Martin Luther King pointed to another way of addressing the concerns that others felt. Rather than focus on the anger, Williams contrasted King’s style of seeking unity to Wright’s focus on division. The dreams of King were based on the assumption that we were all brothers and we could hold one another’s hand in a common brotherhood. Wright focused on the black’s current set of problems (admittedly numerous) as caused by white arrogance and prejudice.
While I still see how a person could remain in a church pastored by someone like Wright and am convinced that there is authenticity in his rhetoric within the context of his ministry, I do recognize that there is a higher road available to those who can see beyond division. In addition to the dreams of King, it is of interest that Bill Crosby (cf. May 2008 issue of Atlantic Monthly) has been going around the country with a message addressed to the black population that convicts them of using their problems, often attributed to white prejudice, as justification for their not assuming their responsibility for their behavior.
The complexity of the black population results in varying methods of addressing the recognized problems. The Kings, Wrights, Crosbys, and the multitude of other thinking people have a place at the table. We can get insights into solutions by listening to them all.
Given my history which has been shared and my past and current anger at policies and actions of the US government, I had virtually no problem in identifying with a person who listened to Pastor Wright and continued to remain in the church. Everything has to be heard in context and in the context of a church with mostly a black population, there was much that would evoke words of anger.
However, Juan Williams’ column regarding Pastor Wright in the context of the life of Martin Luther King pointed to another way of addressing the concerns that others felt. Rather than focus on the anger, Williams contrasted King’s style of seeking unity to Wright’s focus on division. The dreams of King were based on the assumption that we were all brothers and we could hold one another’s hand in a common brotherhood. Wright focused on the black’s current set of problems (admittedly numerous) as caused by white arrogance and prejudice.
While I still see how a person could remain in a church pastored by someone like Wright and am convinced that there is authenticity in his rhetoric within the context of his ministry, I do recognize that there is a higher road available to those who can see beyond division. In addition to the dreams of King, it is of interest that Bill Crosby (cf. May 2008 issue of Atlantic Monthly) has been going around the country with a message addressed to the black population that convicts them of using their problems, often attributed to white prejudice, as justification for their not assuming their responsibility for their behavior.
The complexity of the black population results in varying methods of addressing the recognized problems. The Kings, Wrights, Crosbys, and the multitude of other thinking people have a place at the table. We can get insights into solutions by listening to them all.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
"No End in Sight" and "Bush's War"
Our close friends in California strongly recommended watching the DVD, “No End in Sight”, a retelling of the incompetence and the distortions of the Bush administration in the planning of the Iraq invasion and the restoration of a society. Since then, I also watched “Bush’s War”, a documentary by Front Line. While the latter is far superior in terms of content and portrayal, they both are 100% consistent with the multiple books I have read about the ordeal. The difference is seeing in great detail the horrendous consequences of our actions.
My comments about these documentaries are placed within the context of my prior blog of 19 March, “Controversial Pastor of Obama”. In that commentary, I shared my understanding of how someone could be as angry regarding US policies as some of the words used by Pastor Wright.
While my wife discourages me from either reading any more books or watching any more documentaries that reference Bush and his policies, I do and, with every reiteration of what I already know and with every new information about this president, I admit that my anger grows more and more. What has happened to Iraq is beyond words! We have destroyed a nation (one could question whether it ever was a “nation”), inflamed ethnic tensions to the point of internal war, threatens the relative stability of Mideast and, finally, reward Iran by dismantling their Sunni enemies and establishing a Shiite stronghold within the Arab world.
My anger is great! I am totally embarrassed by the level of incompetency displayed by our government, Bush’s disregard of thoughtful input from high officials, and the subsequent loss of our status as a moral influence in international affairs.
In spite of my anger and revulsion about what we did, I personally do not know what should be done. While I support the intention to reduce our troops as quickly as possible, I am not sure that this will work. And, I recognize that we were the culprits in destroying the "nation". I have no confidence that leaving Iraq will work. I can well understand how the aftermath of our leaving will result in such great turmoil in the Mideast that WWII, Vietnam, Korea will all pale in comparison with the conflagration that could well occur. At the same time, I know that our presence is itself a stimulus for attacks. We have to leave even if we have to return! What a horrendous situation!
As an addendum, “No End in Sight” includes comments by Seth Moulton, an officer in the US Marines. Of interest, he comes from Marblehead, MA. His parents are both educators and a product of the Vietnam Era. They hate war. Their son, Seth, went to Harvard and, as he approached graduation, he decided to join the US Marines as an officer, to the horror of his parents. At this point in time, he is on third rotation (his enlistment ended and he was accepted into the Kennedy School of Government, but was personally enticed by Gen. Petraus to return to southern Iraq so that his expertise could help). His parents have come to terms with their son’s decision, but admittedly, we watch the papers to be sure that he is still alive.
My comments about these documentaries are placed within the context of my prior blog of 19 March, “Controversial Pastor of Obama”. In that commentary, I shared my understanding of how someone could be as angry regarding US policies as some of the words used by Pastor Wright.
While my wife discourages me from either reading any more books or watching any more documentaries that reference Bush and his policies, I do and, with every reiteration of what I already know and with every new information about this president, I admit that my anger grows more and more. What has happened to Iraq is beyond words! We have destroyed a nation (one could question whether it ever was a “nation”), inflamed ethnic tensions to the point of internal war, threatens the relative stability of Mideast and, finally, reward Iran by dismantling their Sunni enemies and establishing a Shiite stronghold within the Arab world.
My anger is great! I am totally embarrassed by the level of incompetency displayed by our government, Bush’s disregard of thoughtful input from high officials, and the subsequent loss of our status as a moral influence in international affairs.
In spite of my anger and revulsion about what we did, I personally do not know what should be done. While I support the intention to reduce our troops as quickly as possible, I am not sure that this will work. And, I recognize that we were the culprits in destroying the "nation". I have no confidence that leaving Iraq will work. I can well understand how the aftermath of our leaving will result in such great turmoil in the Mideast that WWII, Vietnam, Korea will all pale in comparison with the conflagration that could well occur. At the same time, I know that our presence is itself a stimulus for attacks. We have to leave even if we have to return! What a horrendous situation!
As an addendum, “No End in Sight” includes comments by Seth Moulton, an officer in the US Marines. Of interest, he comes from Marblehead, MA. His parents are both educators and a product of the Vietnam Era. They hate war. Their son, Seth, went to Harvard and, as he approached graduation, he decided to join the US Marines as an officer, to the horror of his parents. At this point in time, he is on third rotation (his enlistment ended and he was accepted into the Kennedy School of Government, but was personally enticed by Gen. Petraus to return to southern Iraq so that his expertise could help). His parents have come to terms with their son’s decision, but admittedly, we watch the papers to be sure that he is still alive.
Tuesday, April 1, 2008
Fitna
Over the past few years, I have paid more attention to an aspect of Islam that is very disturbing. I recall starting from the basic position that Islam is inherently good, but the Koran can be abused as is the Scriptures. Then, slowly I started to read more and watch events with a different mind set. I realized that there was some hatred evidenced in the Koran that was inherent rather than a warped interpretation. Granted, there are many Muslim leaders who reject violence against those who are "unbelievers", but it is their ability to reinterpret the Koran that permits them to disregard the actual content. And, then, as opposed to Jesus, it is hard to discount that Islam was founded by a violent warrior.
It is important to put the views of religious texts within the wider view that religion does appear to present a rather negative perspective on life. Without minimizing the positive words, even the Jewish and Christian scriptures contain much that has to be either discounted or reinterpreted to avoid falling into the same extremism associated with those who practice jihad. The writings of Sam Harris ("End of Faith" and "Letter to a Christian Nation") that I referenced in another blog in February 2007 describe in detail the various texts that have to be "reinterpreted" in order to satisfy the expectations of modern man.
I could not resist watching YouTube's english version of Fitna, the Dutch short film by Geert Wilders, the well-known Dutch politician who has taken on the cause of addressing what he sees are the inherent hatred and violence associated with Islam. It is hard not to give some credence to what is portrayed since we know that it exists. Admittedly, there is much other that warrants support, but unless Muslim leaders come out strongly to condemn Muslim extremists, it is hard not to include the religion in one's condemnation.
It is important to put the views of religious texts within the wider view that religion does appear to present a rather negative perspective on life. Without minimizing the positive words, even the Jewish and Christian scriptures contain much that has to be either discounted or reinterpreted to avoid falling into the same extremism associated with those who practice jihad. The writings of Sam Harris ("End of Faith" and "Letter to a Christian Nation") that I referenced in another blog in February 2007 describe in detail the various texts that have to be "reinterpreted" in order to satisfy the expectations of modern man.
I could not resist watching YouTube's english version of Fitna, the Dutch short film by Geert Wilders, the well-known Dutch politician who has taken on the cause of addressing what he sees are the inherent hatred and violence associated with Islam. It is hard not to give some credence to what is portrayed since we know that it exists. Admittedly, there is much other that warrants support, but unless Muslim leaders come out strongly to condemn Muslim extremists, it is hard not to include the religion in one's condemnation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)