​The danger of art – Introducing Michael Longley
 
This morning I was listening to the most recent podcast of On Being with host Krista Tippett. This show was an interview with Irish poet Michael Longley who has written such powerful poems as Ceasefire and The Ice-Cream Man.   He has lived with and through the violence of Northern Ireland to the relative peace since the 1998 Good Friday Agreement only to see the same sort of strife which plagued his home country for so long take over so much of the rest of the world.
 
His poems make me smile,  often move me to tears and take me outside of my narrow range of thinking.
 
I was particularly interested in what he says about the role of art including poetry in our culture.  Mr.  Longley says in this conversation:
 
“I think what art can do is to tune you up. And good art, good poems is making people more human, making them more intelligent, making them more sensitive and emotionally pure than they might otherwise be. And one of the marvelous things about poetry is that it’s useless. It’s useless. “What use is poetry?” people occasionally ask in the butcher shop, say. They come up to me and they say, “What use is poetry?”
…And the answer is no use, but it doesn’t mean to say that it’s without value. It’s without use, but it is valuable.”
 
When I think of poetry dance, painting, sculpture and other forms of art I think of honesty and truth.  It seems to me that us humans have a need to know and to speak the truth even when we are fearful of it.  In my experience many poems force me to pay attention to uncomfortable truths or truths which I might enjoy but not ordinarily speak of in public.   Art cannot lie and this is its value.  The truth may not be pretty, pleasant or welcomed but there it is naked and often catching one unaware. I know better than to listen to or read poetry (in song or verse) in public space in which one’s naked emotions may burst forth without warning and make others uncomfortable.  I know this and, yet, I seem to forget and then find myself on the treadmill, rowing machine or doing some other exercise crying with joy or sadness as I was this morning.
 
Mr. Michael Longley talks of poetry being transcendental.  It does seem to transcend the mundaneness of the ordinary by making the ordinary speak it larger truth. The truth it forces us – certainly me – to face may be loudly broadcasting from the seeming negative or blank space.  For example, if I speak of this Presidential campaign in the United States and merely say:
 
“The passion of this United States Presidential Election campaign is intense.” I have not spoken in context of the hate and fear which has dominated the campaign.  Yet, we “know” that is the truth to which it is referring.   When Mr. Longley reads his powerful poem “Ceasefire” the distance one often has to travel to forgiveness is woven into the poem, but can be missed by the casual reader or the freshly grieving parent.
 
Just the other day, a friend asked me about the importance of music in my life.  I replied that it feeds my soul.  It connects me to the universe in a way which transcends the language in which the composer was feeling or thinking.    If I listen to Bach, Beethoven or Handel I do not need to listen in the native tongue of the composer.  The composer has tapped into the heart of our being which does not need the spoken language “de jour”. 
 
I feel an enormous debt to the artists who have the courage to reach into the depth of their being to share what the universal truth which are necessary if we are even to create a more just and loving world.  I invite the reader to experience the poetry of Michael Longley by listening to the podcast to which I have referred or reading one of the twenty books of his poems.
 
Written November 4, 2016

​Grandma says -  A stitch in time saves nine
 
As is true for many, as a young child and even a teenager. my sense of promptness in tackling a task often did not match the expectation of my grandmother (or my parents for that matter). She obviously thought that if she imparted the wisdom of “a stitch in time saves nine” often enough it would eventually slither past the mush of my brain and eventually take root and grow to a habit in all areas of my life.  
 
This is one of those oft repeated proverbs which has been sown or cross stitched into countless wall hanging.  It means exactly what it says.  When I was growing up new clothes were a rarity.   With any luck families living close to each other could pass along clothes to each other as children (and sometimes adults) grew and changed sizes.  The only items which might be purchased new were socks and underwear.  Even socks sometimes survived the countless darnings and could be passed along.  If and when a new item was absolutely necessary, very often the feed sacks or flour sacks provided the material.   Of course there were items which had to be store bought if there was no one of comparable size who was no longer wearing a needed item. The most difficult items to attain were frequently suits and shoes.  A man might have one suit which was his “Sunday suit”, funeral suit, and going to meetin suit.  Shoes were often worn until even the most talented of cobblers (usually a parent who kept an iron shoe fixing stand and repair nails and other materials handy) could not restore them.  If one happened to “forget” to change out of funeral or “meetin” clothes and got them dirty or tore them, one prayed for patience and mercy – patience to appear to be paying attention to the hour long – so it seemed – lecture about one’s lack of appreciation for the sacrifice it took to purchase a garment. Mercy that one be spared the 100 lashes. Reminders included, “money does not grow on trees” and “Do I look like a Rockefeller?” Obviously no Rockefeller beat their child for a smudge or a rent which just happens.
 
Darning or otherwise repairing garments was, it seemed” a nightly chore usually performed in the rocking chair by grandmother, mother or later an older female sibling.  In those days only men were tailors. Women were the seamstress who did not earn real money as did tailors. 
 
At any rate, a stick in time saves nine, was applied not only to the darning or repair of a garments it was called into duty for all manner of tasks including homework, wood chopping, or any other chore which had the potential of being postponed or avoided.   It is true, of course, that “time was of the essence” in that there were many chores which, if postponed, affected the ability to cook, heat, bathe or otherwise survive.  
 
These days, of course, for some of us, sock darning and stitching repairs on a garment is very foreign.   Even passing along clothes other than perhaps baby clothes, is reserved for the truly poor. Even then it is more common to shop at a thrift store such as the Salvation Army or a consignment shop. It is less common to have a relationship which includes the intimacy of sharing “hand me downs”.  Busy schedules and more availability of cheaper clothing may mean that one is less likely to patch, repair or alter a garment.  Even finding a seamstress who alters or repairs garments is not an easy tass and may, at times, cost more than purchasing a new garment.
 
Still, one may hear the phrase “a stitch in time saves nine” amongst the old folks.  To be honest, I seem to have taken this advice to heart.  I may be found darning a sock or getting out my little portable sewing machine to make a repair.  To the frustration of my son or others with whom I have a close relationship I am “Johnny on the spot” when it comes to performing needed tasks.  Whether it is ironing as soon as I take clothes out of dryer or from the drying rack, making the bed as soon as I am dressed, washing the dishes immediately after a meal, doing paperwork as soon as I receive it, or responding daily to correspondence, I can drive friend’s crazy with my audible and silent “A stitch in time saves nine.” reminders.
 
Grandmother, would, however, be very pleased that I had taken her advice or was it a warning to heart.  My son, on the other hand, might be less thrilled with my insistence on the wisdom of this proverb. 
 
Written November 3, 2016
 
For more information on the origin of this and other proverbs google “phrases.org.uk”

​School Bells – Current Affairs – Grade 1 – Week 12
If you were a presidential candidate
 
I am excited to meet with the first grade students today. Their assignment for this week was: “For next week since it is getting close to the presidential election each of you make up the perfect presidential candidate, pretend to be that person and talk about a problem you would try to fix if you were president.”  I had sent home this suggestion as well as all the ways the students suggested dealing with the bully since there seems to have been a lot of bullying going on among the candidates for various offices this year I thought it was a good idea to connect the two.
 
Here come the students now.
 
Me:  Good morning class.
 
Class:  Good morning Mr. Jim!
 
Me: Oh me!  Some of you have on adult masks this morning which I assume is because of the assignment. That is great.  I am so excited to hear all of the presidential candidates.
 
Class:  Cookies!  Cookies!
 
Me:  That does not sound very presidential!!  I am sorry Mr. and Ms. Potential Presidents but I did not bring snacks to carry you through your busy schedule. I guess I was not thinking very clearly.  I will bring cookies next week.
 
Class: (Collective sigh!)
 
Me:  Well, I think, unless someone has a more pressing social issue to discuss we need to get started.  Who wants to start by introducing themselves and talking about a problem they will attempt to fix if they are elected president?  Any other pressing concerns?
 
(No one says anything or raises their hands.)
 
 
Me: Okay then.  Who wants to go first?   Great!  Tara come up to the front Ms. Potential President.   Please introduce yourself.
 
Tara:  I am Mrs. Smithers.  I am your best choice for president. If you elect me I will make sure every first grader has an iPad and internet service at home.   At our house everyone has an iPad for homework and to play family games on.  A lot of kids I know don’t even have a computer at home.   If everyone does better in school everyone will get a good job and no one will be angry.
 
Me:  That is impressive Mrs. Smithers. Does anyone have any questions for Mrs. Smithers?
 
Ahmes:  Mrs. Smithers (giggle) won’t everyone use them just to play games on or to watch movies?
 
Ms. Smithers:  In our home children are not allowed to take their iPad to their rooms.  The parents can also find out what the children have been doing with them.  The iPad is like a big sister or brother who tells on you.  It tells parents all the places you visited.
 
Sue:  Ms. Smithers what sort of family games? Violent ones?
 
Ms. Smithers:  Violent games are not allowed in our family. We play games where we have to find out certain information and the person who finds it first or finds something no one else found wins.
 
Me:  Thank you Ms. Smithers. I wish we had more time but we want to give all the candidates who are prepared to speak a chance.  Let’s give Ms. Smithers a round of applause for her concern about education.
 
Class claps.
 
Me: What is next?  Steve I see your hand.  Come on up.
 
Steve:  I am Stephen Tucker.   I am running for president because I think that we need more trains.   My grandparents said there used to be a lot more trains and trolleys.  All those cars keep people from getting where they need to go.  My mom says that even driverless cars are still cars and will still keep traffic bad. When I visit my uncle in New York, we never drive.  We take the subway or the bus.
 
Sam:  Mr. Tucker what if you need to run to the grocery store.  You cannot wait on a train to get a gallon of milk.
 
Mr. Tucker:  I thought about that. More places are delivering groceries and my grandma says that in the old days - She talks a lot about the old days. (class sighs) – if you ran out of milk you just waited until the next day.
 
Sofia:  My uncle has his own cows. Could everyone have a cow?
 
Mr. Tucker:  I am sorry but you cannot have a cow in an apartment.  They do the bathroom thing anywhere.  That would not be good.
 
Sue:  What about people like me Mr. Tucker?
 
Mr. Tucker:  My aunt is in a wheelchair and there is a van which will pick her up and take her places.
 
Me: Mr. Tucker you seem to have given a lot of thought to this idea.    Class, please give a round of applause to Mr. Tucker.
Thank you Mr. Tucker.    Who wants to go next?  Sue, come on up.
 
Sue:  I am Susan Carnes and I am running for president because I am tired of the bullies.  It seems as if lots of the adults who are running countries or trying to get elected try to scare everyone. They are just bullies. If I were president, I would make all the bullies go into a room and not come up until they learned to play nice. That is what happens when my siblings and I are not being nice to each other.    At first we are still mean to each other but then we know we better start pretending to be nice if we want to ever get out of that room. Soon we forget that we are pretending and we really are nice to each other.
 
Susie:  Ms. Carnes.   We already have a lot of bullies in jail and there are just more bullies. On TV when they go into the jail room they do not play nice.
 
Ms. Carnes:  It does not seem as if jails are nice places. Even the guards do not play nice in jails.  My plan is not jails but small groups of people.  At home if we cannot learn to play nice by ourselves one of our parents comes in to help us.   Maybe those bullies did not have a good mommy and daddy.
 
Me:  Thank you Ms. Carnes. Let’s applaud Ms. Carnes for her passion for making bullies learn how to play nice.  We only have time for one more candidate. Who want to present their plan? Sam? Great.   Come on up.
 
Sam: I am Ms. Sam Jones.  I think all of the candidates have very good ideas.  If you elect me as president, I am going to invite all the candidates to work as a team with me.   When I was growing up in my family we decided together what problems or chores we would spend time on. We had to all agree.  It was called consen .  Consen…
 
Me: Excuse me Ms. Jones.   I think that the word you want is consensus.  
 
Ms. Jones:  Thank you.  That is when we have to keep talking until everyone in the family agrees.  If it is a bad decision, there is no one to blame.
 
Ahmes:  Ms. Jones I do not understand how that works.  We could spend all day deciding what to eat for dinner.
 
Mrs.  Jones: Some decisions are assigned to certain people in the family.  In our family what to eat is determined by the two-person team responsible for dinner that night.
 
Me:  This is a subject which we could spend a lot of time talking about.  There are groups of people such as Quakers who make all big decisions this way.   Everyone has to agree or they do not do anything.
 
I am again so impressed with everyone.  We have time for one more.  I would like Ahmes to have a chance to present her proposals.
 
Ahmes:  I am Ahmes Khouri.  I am running for president because I think that we need to quit using words like immigrant, Muslim and foreigner to determine who we are or how we want to treat someone.   People think they know my family and me just because of where we are from or because we came to this country or because we are Muslim.  My family knows that there has to be ways to say who is citizen but we work hard and are good neighbors.  It is true that we are Egyptian, Muslim and immigrants but I do not think you know us if you just know those things.
 
Sam:  Ms. Khouri why did you come to this country?
 
Ms. Khouri:  My mother does medical research and the university wanted her to help them.  My siblings and I like going to school here also.
 
Me:  Thank you Ms. Khouri.  I am sorry we have run out of time.  Let’s give Ms. Khouri a round of applause for reminding us that we are more than a religion, a country, or a status such as immigrant. Those words do not tell us who we are.
 
I wish we had a lot more time.  I am convinced that some of you have been more thoughtful about what it means to be president then some of those who are running.
 
Next week the election will be over.  How about we talk about how we make up after an argument and saying mean things to each other. When some people run for office they say mean things about each other and then have to learn to work together.   I love it that none of our candidates today said anything about anyone.  Here are the slips with the assignment.  Everyone pick up one from me as you are leaving.
 
Have a good week.
 
Ring!  Ring!  Ring!
 
Written November 2, 2016

​School Bells – Current Affairs – Grade 8 – week 12
Electing a president in the United States
 
I am again excited to be meeting with the eighth grade students for a current affairs discussion.   Prior to last week several of the students had mentioned to me their concern about the high cost of many medications.  I suggested that the students and their families discuss this issue prior to our meeting today.  It will be interesting to see the result of their discussions.  
 
I hear the class coming now.
 
Me:  Good morning class.
 
Class:  Good morning Mr. Jim.
 
Me:  Do any of you have special concerns or should we proceed with the assigned topic.
 
Class:  Cookies!
 
Me:  Good try. We had cookies last week. If you want, we can have cookies next week to celebrate the end of the presidential election.
 
Class: Yea!
 
Will:  What if no one wins enough votes.
 
Me:  As you probably know it is not just the popular votes but the electoral votes which count.
 
Paul:  That is confusing Uncle Jim.
 
Me: Yes, it is.   Does everyone know that electors in each state vote for a presidential candidate?
 
Tom:  How many electors are there?
 
Me:  Each state is different because the number of electors is based on number of Senators (2) and number of representatives.
That means that West Virginia has 5 electoral votes and California has 55.  Florida has 29.
 
Abdul:  Who are the people who are voting?
 
Me:  In each state the political party or group elects potential electors.  Except for two states, the list of those nominated by the winning popular party vote gets to choose the electors.  In Maine and Nebraska, they allocate their electors based on the winner of each district and the overall winner of the state.  In some states those elected must vote for the winning candidate of the state.   In states such as West Virginia the electors are not bound by this rule.  Occasionally in the history of the United states the person winning the popular vote did win the electoral vote.
 
Susie:  What if there is no clear winner or there is a tie?
 
Me:  Then the Senate of the United States selects the Vice President and the House of Representatives selects the President. This is known as contingent election.
 
Amena:  How do we know who the electors are Mr. Jim?
 
Me:  I am not sure.  I did not have time to call any of the elected representatives or the heads of the political parties.  I am sure that they would know or could find out.  I did spend about an hour looking for the names in our state for 2016 and I could not find such a list.
 
Ann:  Why was the electoral college created?
 
Me:  Great question. There has been a lot of debate about whether to retain the system or to have the voters decide if they want to change that system.   Marc Schulman in an article entitled “Why the Electoral College” published on historycentral.com states:
“The Electoral College was created for two reasons. The first purpose was to create a buffer between population and the selection of a President. The second as part of the structure of the government that gave extra power to the smaller states.
The first reason that the founders created the Electoral College is hard to understand today. The founding fathers were afraid of direct election to the Presidency. They feared a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power.”
 
John:  So everyone’s vote may not count.
 
Me:  It may seem that way and certainly when the popular vote is different than the vote of the electoral college it must feel that way to some of the voters.   The system probably will not change before all of you are voting.  Now is a good time to be thinking about why you might try to change it or work to keep it the same. Just remember most of the time the popular votes determine how most of the electoral college members will vote.
 
Tom:  Some us are on the debate team. This would be a good issue to debate.
 
Me:  Yes it would and it would be fun to volunteer to debate in favor of the opposite of what you think is the best solution.
 
Tom:  I like doing that but it is a lot of work.
 
Me: Yes, it is sometimes tough to step outside of ourselves and try to understand the thinking of one’s opponents.
 
Goodness, the time has gone very quickly.   It will be interesting to keep discussing this issue as well and the issue about the expense of medication between now and the next time we meet which will actually be on Monday next week, the day before the election.
 
Great job everyone
 
Have a good week.
 
Ring!  Ring!  Ring!  
 
Written November 1, 2016

​ 
Logos versus Mythos – The World versus my world
 
Devdutt Pattanaik in a Ted talk posted November, 2009 entitled “East vs. West – the myths that mystify discusses the differences between my world and the world.   He suggests that:  “If you understand the difference between 'the world' and 'my world,' you understand the difference between logos and mythos. 'The ‘world' is objective, logical, universal, factual, scientific. 'My world' is subjective. It's emotional. It's personal. It's perceptions, thoughts, feelings, dreams. It is the belief system that we carry. It's the myth that we live in.”  Although in this day of more sophisticated methods for determining scientific truth, we may be discovering that what we thought was a truth or a complete truth was in fact not “the truth” or only part of a truth. Most of us would agree that the more we open our eyes and the broaden our experience of the world the closer we come to a larger truth.  Sadly, many of us will continue to confuse the “facts” of our very limited personal world of emotions, perceptions, thoughts, feelings, dreams and the limited view of the framework of our religious and/or spiritual beliefs with eternal truths or rules by which one judges people or behavior.  Cultures such as the largely Hindu culture of India which embrace more diverse views of behavior and even the nature of God can be very confusing to those of us who are accustomed to very precise commandments and huge lists of ethical rules which will determine the rightness or wrongness of particular behaviors.  At times, many of us even use these commandments or rules to judge the worth of individuals.  Allowing for rituals such as the “Hindu ritual of Darshan,” Hindus don't have the concept of commandments. So, there is nothing right or wrong in what you do in life. So, you're not really sure how you stand in front of God. So, when you go to the temple, all you seek is an audience with God. You want to see God. And you want God to see you, and hence the gods have very large eyes, large unblinking eyes, sometimes made of silver, so they look at you. Because you don't know whether you're right or wrong, and so all you seek is divine empathy. "Just know where I came from, why I did the Jugaad." (Laughter) "Why did I do the setting, why I don't care for the processes. Just understand me, please."
 
If this is a foreign way of thinking for you the reader as it is for many of us, you might have to read this several times before beginning to grasp the essence of the concept.  One might even need to look up the term Jugaard but even then one may have  think outside one’s box.  Wikipedia explains that the term Jugaard moves from a literal meaning of machinery to that of “a mechanical solution to a problem, work around to skip or solve a problem.” (not to be confused with the same term which may be used to “objectify women or their body parts” or “to have sex”).
 
On the other hand, my understanding of the words and behavior attributed to Jesus are, at times, more consistent with this goal of attaining the empathy of God.   Whether He was talking to the prostitute, to Judas or the others one notes that aside from a momentary lapse into the very human angry response, his primary response is one of empathy.  He is quite aware of the “fact” humans are not Gods. We are very fallible and often very short-term oriented problem solvers. We may in fact steal, tell a lie, or take some other short cut to achieving a goal.  Interesting if one studies the teachings of Buddha one might be invited to explore letting go of the use of dualities when viewing behaviors – right, wrong, good or bad.  Often one is guided to explore opening one’s eyes to “see” the behavior and just notice it.  One can then decide if one want to repeat that behavior or let go of it.   
 
The irony or even paradox is that the more accepting we are of the logos view of each other and the world the more we are able to come to an acceptance of and even identification with each other which then allows for the orthodox or unorthodox approach to problem solving.   Mr. Pattanaik then goes on to talk about leadership.  He described a ritual for leaders:  “we created a ritual for leaders. After a leader completes his training and is about to take over the store, we blindfold him, we surround him with the stakeholders, the customer, his family, his team, his boss. You read out his KRA, his KPI, you give him the keys, and then you remove the blindfold. And invariably, you see a tear, because the penny has dropped. He realizes that to succeed, he does not have to be a "professional," he does not have to cut out his emotions, he has to include all these people in his world to succeed, to make them happy, to make the boss happy, to make everyone happy. The customer is happy, because the customer is God.”   (KRA – Key result area; KPI – Key performance indicators.)
 
We have now circled back to a KPI of the Christian tradition.  Is the behavior pleasing to God? Perhaps the notion of God has to be examined.  Is He/She/It operating in the world or my world?  Have we envisioned or conceptualized a God which is limited by our very tiny, personal beliefs, thoughts, feeling, perceptions, and dreams?
 
On this 31st of October, 2016 in a world which is dominated by violent conflicts over the world versus my world, perhaps we could ponder this question.  Or not!
 
Written October 31, 2016

​ 
More jails?
 
I caught just a brief part of an interview on NPR as I  was driving a short distance in the car.  The person being interviewed sounded like a law enforcement person in Chicago who was  understandably concerned about the number of gun related deaths in Chicago. He was clear that:
 
·      Something must be done to reduce the number of deaths.
·      It is too easy for young men and women such as 17-year-olds to get a gun.
·      If a 17-year-old does illegally get a gun and hurt someone then that person needs to go to prison for up to 3 years.
·      The threat of prison should  be a deterrent.
·      If you break the law you need to be punished.
 
It is difficult to find current, accurate statistics on the number of juveniles who are incarcerated  in the United States on any given day or the total number in jails, prisons, juvenile facilities, or on parole/probation.   An article in the Washington Post, “Wonkbook: 11 facts about America’s prison population dated August 13, 2013 by Ezra Klein and Evan Soltas states:
 
- The U.S. prison population is more than 2.4 million.
- That's more than quadrupled since 1980.
- That means more than one out of every 100 American adults is behind bars.
- About 14 percent of the prison population is in federal prison -- that's the group Holder is talking about.
- The single largest driver in the increase in the federal prison population since 1998 is longer sentences for drug offenders.
- The average inmate in minimum-security federal prison costs $21,000 each year. The average inmate in maximum-security federal prisons costs $33,000 each year.
 
The National Institute of Justice web site reports in the year 2015 that:
 
·      Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
·      Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
 
I could not any statistics for 17–year-olds, some of whom are in adult prisons and some of whom are in juvenile facilities. I also could not find any statistics for 17-year-olds convicted of gun-related crimes.  Since the person on the radio being interviewed was using a 17-year-old example I wanted to know if he knew something about incarcerating 17-year-olds as opposed to other ages which makes incarcerating more effective for that particular age group.  I also could not locate any information specific to 17- year-olds convicted of and incarcerated for gun-related offenses.
 
Obviously, there has been a belief in the United States for many years that punishment will serve as an effective deterrent.   Yet, there is no evidence that when the motive is punishment that the majority of humans are likely to make positive changes as a result of punishment.  Whether we are dealing gun violence, drug offenses, violent sexual acts or, as a nation, those we label as terrorists, punishment  is not very effective.  I am well aware of the argument which supports the use of the nuclear bombs to help end World War II. I am also well aware of the role that nuclear weapons, the threat of nuclear weapons and the fear of nuclear weapons has played in international relations since that time.  If we look long term I think a good argument could be made that the use of nuclear weapons was not effective although their use provided a relatively brief reduction of violence.
 
We have to ask why punishment does not act as a deterrent.  Actually any parent who is paying close attention will  testify that punishment is likely to bring the following results:
 
·      An incentive to not get caught next time – to learn to be better at hiding the activity next time.
·      A resolve to prove that no one can stop them from doing X  behavior.  Thus an increase in the undesirable behavior.
·      A cessation of behavior out of fear of getting caught and not because the person has internalized the belief that the behavior is wrong/immoral/unethical.   It might be argued  that fear of punishment might sometimes buy enough time for the young person to develop a code of ethics/moral rules which includes the prohibition of the original behavior.
·      A lifetime of shame which has a negative impact on overall health and a fear of pursuing many heathy behaviors. This may also be more likely to result in low self-esteem with a consequent goal of  escaping oneself through the use of numbing behavior or proving oneself by gaining money or other means of power.
 
When a parent, school, community or nation reacts to negative behavior with negative behavior the basic rules of mathematics do not apply.   Minus 1 plus minus 1 does not equal  a positive 2. It is a clear negative 2.   Yet, somehow we persist in pretending  as if this experiment will eventually have different results. Some have suggested that repeating the same behavior over and over again expecting different results is the classic definition of insanity.
 
Let us think this through. 
 
·      N person  commits  V behavior.
·      Y person reacts with V  behavior.
·      N person will learn that V behavior is undesirable.
 
One of the arguments which the person I overheard in the radio interview stated was that breaking the law is wrong. Why can’t humans agree that breaking the law is wrong?  What if the law being immoral?  Should we still obey it, only challenge it in court or? Some examples of immoral laws in this country have been:
 
·      In many states until fairly recently it was legal to beat one’s wife with a stick no bigger than one’s thumb.
·      In many states and still in some countries one can be jailed or even killed for having sex with a person of the same sex.
·      Using a bathroom of the gender which with one identifies has been illegal in many places.
·      Marrying someone of a different race has been illegal in the United States until fairly recently.
·      Using complicated business bankruptcy laws to avoid paying big debts is often legal.
·      Having child pornography on one’s computer even if one did not download it is illegal.
 
One can google legalzoom.com and look for a list of crazy laws still technically on the books.
 
An argument can also be made that everyone breaks some laws some of the time.  A counter argument might then be made that any reasonable person can distinguish between a just law and an old law which has yet to be technically removed.
 
The point is that society frequently rewards people for being brave enough to violate some laws which are later deemed to be wrong or unnecessary.
 
Then, of course, there are laws which condone violent behavior done in the service of a larger cause – protecting the interest of the society or nation even if that interest maybe disputed by other nations.  At the same time if representatives of other countries behave similarly toward the United States it may be condemned.
 
In short there are many reasons why punishment will not deter or stop violence or other negative behavior long term.
 
We then have to ask what behavior is more likely to deter, reduce or stop violent or other destructive behavior.   Clearly it is not enough to suggest that something does not work. We need to make positive proposals based on diagnosing the various issues which need addressing. These include:
 
·      Mental illness.
·      Substance abuse/addiction.
·      Addiction to power, money, or other things outside oneself.
·      Other mental issues such as sociopath or other conditions which prevent a person from considering the needs or rights of others (unable for a variety of reason to behave on a higher level the Maslow hierarchy).
·      The people who have not been taught the ability to formulate a set of values which take into consideration the long-term effects of their behavior.  (In one experiment which proved very successful a basic philosophy course was offered to a group of homeless people.)
 
Once an initial diagnosis has been made it can be used to further explore options for treatment/teaching.  Of course one must remember that there may be multiple diagnoses and/or that the primary diagnosis may be inaccurate.  One  always has to stay open to the fact that we are not able to teach or otherwise treat certain people who, left to their own devices, may be unable to live in society.  The key here is the term “unable.”   These individuals may need to be in a closed, monitored environment. The goal is not to punish but to protect both them and the individuals they might otherwise injure.
 
Further as a family, community, or nation we may want to consider leading by example – finding respectful, non-violent means of problems solving.
 
My experience is that once I take some action off the list of possible actions, one I decide that no matter what, X behavior is not an option, then I am going to have to come up with a different option.  That is precisely what we are hoping for and/or expecting from the millions of people we incarcerate.   We/society wants them to agree that no matter what:
 
·      Using an addictive drug is not an option.
·      Looking outside of myself to fill my internal void is not an option.
·      Putting my needs above that of another person is not an option.
·      Violent behavior is never an option or is only an option under B circumstances and is not limited to one group of people.
·      Teaching (instruction and by example) is the primary goal.
·      Punishment is never, ever an option.
 
Written October 29, 2016

 
Choosing the liturgy of 2016 post-election United States
 
It is Friday morning and I earlier downloaded this week’s  On Being Program with host Krista Tippett.  This week her guests  are Dr. Eboo Patel who is “founder and president of Interfaith Youth Care. His books include Sacred Ground: Pluralism, Prejudice, and the Promise of America and Interfaith Leadership: A Primer” and Dr. Natasha Trethewey who “was the 19th U. S. Poet Laureate. She is the Robert W. Woodruff Professor of English and Creative Writing at Emory University.  Her books include Domestic Work, the Pulitzer Prize-winning Native Guard, and Beyond Katrina:  A meditation on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.”
 
The title of the program is “How to Live Beyond the Election.”
 
Dr. Trethewey reminds the listener that the word liturgy in the original Greek “simply meant one’s public duty undertaken as a citizen in service to the state.”   Of course, despite all the current political rhetoric or perhaps because of it we may need to remind ourselves that the state is us – the body of citizens (and perhaps non-citizens) who are “called” to join together to create a society in which we can live out our lives together in a way which is both honors our individual beliefs and celebrates our diversity.
 
Also on this program Dr. Patel  reminds the listener  of something the renowned columnist William Raspberry said: “The smartest people I know secretly believe both sides of the issue.”
 
Ms. Tippett and her guests discuss the issues related to the pain of all those on all sides of the issues which seem to divide the people of this country more than ever. As the candidates and voters struggle with the divergent views of justice I am reminded of the academic struggle which was then lived out in the  day-to-day life of those of us who grappled with Dr. Walter Kaufman, professor, author and poet, in a seminar on the meaning of justice.  After many weeks of intellectual and emotional struggle we had to, once again, concede that many definitions or constructs of the concept was possible among thoughtful, spiritual thinkers.  In the setting of that seminar or the setting for the discussion between Ms. Tippett and her guests it is relatively easy to accept that we can love and respect each other while disagreeing. On the other hand, as they also point out, we have to consider such behaviors as war, murders including lynching, brutal domestic violence, dictatorships, and a host of others which leave, in their wake souls which will cry out for all of eternity.  What constitutes justice in the midst of such pain?
 
The candidates in this United States presidential election did not invent the dirty dozen but if awards for such behavior were being given all or most of them would surely vie for first prize.
 
Ms. Tippett and the rest of the staff of On Being designed this program because of their concern for how we are going to deal with the issues which faced this country before this election cycle began and which will still be present when the election results are counted and winners are announced.
 
Dr. Trethewey reminds us of a quote from the famous poet Jamaluddin Rumi, “The wound is the place where the light enters you.” 
Once the election results have been counted it will be easy to join the Biblical characters Reuben, the sons of Jacob or the high priest who tore their garments to express the depth of their sorrow. It will take much more courage to trust that out of the wounds of the many the light of self-respect and mutual respect can enter our beings; that healing can begin to take place. We can either focus on the fact that we have not, during this election cycle, often allowed light to emerge through the wounds and, in fact, seemingly taken great delight in pouring salt our own wounds and the wounds of each other or we began to trust that even among the most fearful of us empathy, humility and growth is possible.    We will, if lucky, struggle with what our own inner wise voice or the God of our understanding seems to be revealing to us about how to create a more just society and move to a more compassionate understanding of the concern of those with whom we may passionately disagree.  We can either practice a liturgy of service to the state (all of us together) or we can continue to pick at the scabs and open wounds until they are large enough to let light in.
 
I am again reminded of the brilliance and simplicity of the 12-step recovery program as designed by Dr. Bob and Bill W.   Out of the depth of the wounds of addiction (both those suffered and those afflicted) a new way of living is possible – a life which is productive and not destructive – a life which is based on loving and being there for each other one day at a time – and a life of the courage to face the ugliness  of which one is capable and trust that beyond that ugliness one can be part of the solution and not just part of a creating a problem.
 
The strongest challenge after the election results of November 8 in the United States are announced is going to be to put aside our self-righteouss cries of doom and gloom and to practice a liturgy of problem solving. 
 
I, for one, believe problem solving is possible.  Humans have often come out of darkness into the light. We may drift back into the darkness but the light still beckons us to dance a new and joyful dance. Today we can join individuals such as Dr. Patel, Dr. Trethewey, and Ms. Tippett among others in celebrating our diversity of opinions.
 
Written October 28, 2016
 

​Grandma says – “Learn to compromise.”
 
Often as children, my siblings and I wanted some particular book or object.   Although I am sure that my mother told us to share, fighting over something at grandmother’s house would elicit a lecture worthy of a professor of a graduate school class on the merits of compromise.   Naturally, being children, we were interested in having what we wanted when we wanted it.  If I was the one in current possession, then I would defend the fairness of my retaining it. I might claim that my sibling earlier refused to share X or had the object now in my possession earlier for a longer period of time than me.  I also might claim that I had found the object and deserved to keep it.  In the end, the dreaded c word would roll out of my grandmother’s lips.  That c word was compromise.  She wanted to be sure that whether it was a toy, money, time or some other commodity we learned the importance of compromising – each of us giving up a little of what we wanted and each of us getting a little of what we wanted.  While it was clear that one never compromised on moral or ethical core values, even those could be called into question when we fought over whose morally superior wisdom was worthy of consideration.      Grandmother was herself an enigma.    She was an independent – one might even accuse her of being an early feminist – matriarchal gatherer of the clan -  reader – Southern Baptist – and a person who was comfortable in Chicago or very rural Oklahoma.  She and some of her siblings seemed to have learned or decided early on that while the truth will set you free the walls which held that truth should be early versions of those designed to be movable. Thus wisdom was to be gained from many sources and stitched together in a pattern that was both as intricately laid out as one of the complicated quilts she created and as inclusive as the casserole or stew which incorporated all the varied leftovers and end pieces which has been patiently residing in the refrigerator.  While she believed strongly in hard physical, spiritual and intellectual work she could always make time for coffee and a conversation or just sitting and waiting for the angel of wisdom to arrive. 
 
Whether it was her marriage, where to live or how to allocate the often meager resources she was clear that it was important that everyone get some of what they wanted or needed even if no one got all of what they wanted or needed.
 
Earlier today I was listening to a Ted Talk by Jonathan Tepperman the noted “editor, writer and analyst working on international affairs.” (Wikipedia). The talk is entitled The risky politics of progress.    This talk focuses on some of what he learned after traveling the world talking to global leaders of such countries as Canada, Mexico, and Indonesia.   One of the common themes he heard from the leaders of these and other countries which are having some success in addressing economic, terrorist and immigration issues is the need to be able to listen to all sides and to be able to compromise insuring that the concerns of all those concerned about and affected by certain issues are addressed resulting in each side accepting some of what they wanted and accepting that the other side has to also get some of what they wanted or needed.  Although the picture of progress which he paints for each of the countries he visited is, according to comments made in response to his talk, overly positive and simplistic, there is no doubt in my mind that the basic lesson about compromise is one we here in the United States need to take to heart.  In order for compromise to be an option one first has to be willing to concede that  the concerns of each side are valid. 
 
The current, nearly over – thank God – presidential campaigns in the United States have attracted passionate and tepid supporters. Each of the candidates is attempting to address what they see as concerns of those supporters.   Living as I currently do in West Virginia one of those issues which sharply divides people is the issue of the jobs associated with coal industry which the environmentalists want to replace with cleaner energy production.  It seems that one is either for coal and coal mines 100% or one is against coal and coal mines 100%.   If that is the case, there is little room for compromise.  Yet, if we look more closely the base concerns include:
·      Well-paying jobs with benefits which permit the coal miners to retain their home and take care of their families decently without having to compete for jobs which require going back to school for a long time to earn professional degrees and licenses.
·      Insure that their children have a chance to have a decent life physically, financially and emotionally.
·      To be treated with respect and not as uneducated losers, throw-a-ways or disposables.
·      To insure that the land that they love is protected for living, hunting and pleasure use.
·      To have the promises made to them when they agreed to contracts honored.
 
Are the wants and needs of those opposing the continued reliance on fossil fuels that much different?  They also want:
 
·      Well-paying jobs with benefits which allow them to maintain a home and to take care of their families.
·      Insure that their children have a chance to have a decent life physically, financially, and emotionally.
·      Be treated with respect and not as effete snobs with no heart or connection to the land.
·      To insure that the land is there for their children playing its role in the cycle which produces much of what their children need to sustain life.
·      To have promises made to them honored.
 
In short they are not far apart although it may seem on the surface that they have little in common. Both want essentially the same thing and there is no reason why the often sophisticated skills of the coal miner cannot be used in making the buildings and the machinery needed to produce alternative fuels.  Many of the coal miners are already highly skilled with certifications and licenses.  They have done an incredible job learning those skills and insuring that we have had an ample supply of fossil fuels to meet our needs.
 
None of us want to be talked down to or be accused of not caring for the environment.  On the other hand, none of us want to be accused of caring more about the environment than we do people.
 
Are there some tough issues involved in the transition process?  Of course.  One only has  to look at alcohol and other drug use, health care delivery costs, pharmaceutical issues, how we define and “prove” success, immigration concerns, and challenges to who we are sexually, culturally, religiously, and economically. Certainly there are such challenges.  If we incorporate or re-invite that concept of compromise into our relationships alongside mutual respect can we together find more areas of agreement than disagreement?  I believe we can.    
 
As the president of Indonesia (I think that was the country) says:  No one gets everything they want but everyone gets some of what they want.
 
Well, Granny, time for another cross stitch wall hanging – Learn the art of compromise.
 
 
Written October 27, 2016