Jim Putnam - Thinking Through My Fingers

Continuing To Learn

Over the past few years, a friend has been saying that the means we solve disputes is called government.  I've countered that government is, sometimes, the problem.  This evening I read on Matthew Yglesias' blog that the way we solve problems is called politics.  His entry is primarily concerning climate change.  Interesting.  It's certainly something to think about and learn from.

The Yglesias blog says:

... Drained of senseless rhetoric this seems to reduce to the view that "everyone ought to agree with my favored policies." And, of course, I think everyone really should agree with my favored policies. But, in practice, they don't. And so: Politics.

This is the world, and anyone who aspires to radically alter America's energy use patterns needs to learn to live with it. Achieving the goals requires lots of political change

Meanwhile, both whatever degree of climate change can't be prevented and whatever prevention measures we adopt will all have different kinds of costs and benefits. Different policies will allocate these costs to different people. The mechanism by which we decide what to do is called "politics" and it exists so that individuals and organizations with somewhat divergent interests and ideas can make collective decisions about how to tackle common problems. The rhetoric of anti-politics isn't just an analytic mistake, it's part of the problem. A public that doesn't believe divergent interests can be reconciled and common solutions devised for common problems -- a public that doesn't believe in politics -- is going to be a public that doesn't believe there's anything that can or should be done to prevent catastrophic climate change.

Honestly, I had not thought of politics in this way.  And having done so for a few minutes, I can see some truth in it.  I'm not convinced that it's the whole truth, yet.  My view of the same process defines politics as gaining advantage through whatever means is necessary.

Yglesias' definition is correct in a much more civil state within the legislative bodies.  Mine, I believe, says much more about the current civil state.  That's not to say he is wrong.  It's certainly an ideal.  But, it just isn't reality today.

I believe that we may have already reached the state in which " ...a public that doesn't believe there's anything that can or should be done to prevent ..." almost anything.  Those with power, Democrat or Republican, will use that power.  They will drape their actions in flags, business, the Bible, whatever works to gain advantage.  As much as it troubles me to say it, I'm one of that public who " ...doesn't believe divergent interests can be reconciled and common solutions devised for common problems".

Let me support my claim by linking to another blog, Real Live Preacher.  If you read that post it's obvious that the health care system is broken.  Almost two months ago, October 9th, after a trip to New York, I wrote a blog post about the movie "Sicko" and a panet discussion held in Potsdam, NY.  In it, I said:

The answer, especially from the hospital administrator, was that it would require a revolution; a revolution of action by the people, forcing the government and politicians to enact changes that favor people rather than insurance companies.  They think it will take a full scale change in how the people react to the government and become active rather than passive consumers and citizens.

Personally, I think it will require a revolution at the point of guns before the government will control insurance company lobbyists.

A revolution, regardless of whether it is merely a full scale change in how people react to the government, or guns, is not politics.  In fact, using the Yglesias definition, it's the end of politics.  I hope we can use politics as he says, but I am skeptical.

Just Thinking, Again

Thinking about a news story I read in the New York Times today.  Usually, I try to think the best about people, believing that there are no "evil" people.  This story shakes that belief considerably.  If the facts of this story are correct, something is definitely wrong somewhere. Megan Meier, a 13 year old girl, committed suicide after a neighbor used the internet to gain her confidence and then turned nasty.  Read the article.

I was first referred to the story by Megan McArdle, who has since changed her lead-in.  This morning it linked to the New York Times article.  By the way, some blogs are laying the blame on Megan, writing an entire blog that she had it coming. That requires an inordinate amount of callousness.  No person, weakened for whatever reason, "has it coming".  And another thing, I do not believe the story is a hoax.  I hope that I'm proven wrong.  I've seen it on other blogs since, along with the accusation that the entire story is a hoax.  As Megan says, I'm not sure whether that's more or less disturbing.

I wonder about the statement by Ms. Drew that "she felt the hoax “contributed to Megan’s suicide, but she did not feel ‘as guilty’ because at the funeral she found out Megan had tried to commit suicide before.”  Isn't that an interesting justification for actions that did cause a 13 year old girl to commit suicide?  I think it's sickening, but that's me.

Someone once told me, or I read, that many of the world's problems began when the definition of "neighbor" included only those who were immediate persons whom you saw and lived with every day.  Previously, it had meant all of humanity, and there was no distinction for distance.  In this case, neighbor acquires a different meaning altogether.  I doubt that is accurate, but it points out how differently people who are different from us are regarded today.

Blogging, to change the subject, for many bloggers is little more than an internet diary.  There are some very well known blogs with thousands of readers, and with considerable, proven influence.  Most of us, or at least I, want the blog to be more than a place to record our day's activities.  I use the blog to write about stuff that interests me, or that I am thinking about.  When I can't put a blog entry together with those, I turn to writing about the things I learn through reading other blogs, sometimes adding my own perspective, sometimes not.

Yesterday was an example of entries completely drawn from other blogs, with entries drawn from Time Magazine's blog and from Crooked Timber. This entry is another example.  I'm not sure that it's completely ethical to use other blogs as fodder for my own, and I hope that giving them credit and links I am being properly ethical.  If not, someone please straighten me out.

Awesome is the right word

I read a post on Crooked Timber today that, rightfully, labeled as awesome the secret repair of the Pantheon clock in Paris.  The article Crooked Timber linked to is from the Guardian, entitled "Undercover restorers fix Paris landmark's clock."

The story has been a bright spot in an otherwise dull news day.  I appreciate both Crooked Timber and The Guardian for it.

It does raise some interesting ideas doesn't it?  How many national landmarks could have the sort of secluded rooms in which this is possible?  I suspect many.  All it requires is for someone to discover that there is a place of hiding in which work, such as repairing a clock, carrying in lumber to use, etc.  So long as the intentions are benign, there is no reason to be concerned.  If, however, intentions are not so benign as clock repair, then it becomes a bit more sinister and worrisome.

The problem is, though, that we don't really know.  I'm sure that there are people who know of hidden nooks in the Washington, D.C. Metrorail underground system that could be used.  That's not a national landmark of course, but its destruction could wreak all kinds of hell on the nation.

Oh well, maybe I should be happy that the French were the first to have their nooks publicized.  I'm sure it was a bit bitter that a British newspaper publicized it, though from the Guardian article it seems clear that it made the French media also.

Question: Is this a good idea?

Time magazine's blog has an interesting article about a Boston program to remove guns from "impoverished, high-crime neighborhoods".  The first time I read it, I thought, "What a good idea."  As it sank through the immediate response to a more considered level, I had to ask myself the question of the title.  My later position is that it may be, but it certainly needs some tweaking to make it so.

Although the American Civil Liberties Union protests, the program certainly seems legal to me.  As described in the article:

Three plainclothes officers and a clergyperson or community activist will show up at the youth's home. The officers will ask parents to sign a form allowing the search of the home, including the child's room. Weapons found in the child's possession will be seized, and no charges will be filed unless the weapon is linked to a violent crime.

The parents allow the searches.  A warrant is not, therefore, required.  But what happens if the parents do not sign to allow the search.  Are they putting themselves under increased scrutiny by the police?  And, as the article says, many of these homes are "a mix of African-Americans, Haitians, Dominicans and Cape Verdeans."  Do they understand the process enough to give informed consent? 

I also wonder whether guns found in the house that are owned by the parents will be seized.  I'm certainly not familiar with Massachusetts' laws regarding owning guns, but the authorities need to be sensitive to parents ownership. 

From the article, it sounds as if this is a popular program.

"... Davis rallied support for the program among several community leaders. Some of Davis' staunchest supporters have been black leaders, particularly ministers, who are desperate for anything that will quell youth violence.

Popular doesn't automatically convert to right or good.  As another community leader said:

"... says he supports the experiment with mixed feelings. Much of its success, he says, "relies on the integrity of individual police officers and their leaders, and so far, they've proven themselves to be trustworthy in the eyes of the community."

Key words, "so far."  It's not a good idea to rely on their trustworthiness.  There must be, in my opinion, a way to assure that they are.  Perhaps the suggestion that:

" ,,, asked the police department to require a defense attorney to be present at all searches and tell residents that such searches are voluntary."

It may be a good idea to have another person, perhaps the community activist or clergyperson, carry a digital video recorder to assure that improper pressure is not applied to get the signature, or in the search. 

Another potential legal problem would arise if during the search evidence of other illegal activity, parental drugs for instance, is found.  The form allowing a search for a gun does not in my mind cover discovery of other materials.  Of course, the police could leave, immediately get a search warrant, and return.  But to this non-legal mind, that second search would be not be legal or evidence discovered allowed in trial.

There may be a means for all my misgivings to be soothed.  But now, with the limited knowledge from this article, I conclude that the answer to the title's question is "No".

A Code of Silence

I've just re-read a sermon given by the Associate Pastor of University Presbyterian Church, Chapel Hill.  Her name is Anna Pinckney Straight, and the sermon was given November 18.  The sermon, here, is titled "You Will Be Hated."  The sermon was a beginning place for my last post, "Thoughts On God." 

As I said, "I don't believe there is a God.  At least I don't believe there is a separate, all powerful, all knowing entity that humans call God."  I am, however, convinced that the Christian religion, especially as told in the New Testament, provides through the words of Jesus a strong set of principles, as does Muhammed, Buddha, Confucious, and Martin Luther King, Jr.  As such, I suppose that's why I call myself Christian, even not believing in God.

In Anna's sermon she said:

In her book entitled, "Gods Troublemakers: How Women of Faith are changing the world, Katherine Rhodes Henderson suggests this reason:

"For the most part, however, contemporary religion in America has been preoccupied internally wit institutional survival and relevance.  While the Religious Right has become more vocal and strident, the progressive middle have grown silent, and for many, faith has become privatized. something best kept to oneself and on the periphery of public life.  Religious moderates and liberals have appropriated this code of silence in order to operate more fully in a secular context, and to avoid being dismissed as religious fanatics."

A code of silence.  It is this code that I want to break.  Silence has been interpreted as weakness,   Due to my unbelief though, I go about it differently.   Let's assume that Jesus is not God incarnate; assume that the New Testament is largely a series of teachings, not history; assume that Christ is truly no more than a man who had a set of beliefs and lived them to the fullest.  What would such assumptions mean to the way we view religion, especially Christianity?  More importantly, what is its implication in what we profess to be?

I believe that the words are more important than the myth.  I believe we could come together over the words more easily without the myth.  In the sermon of the previous weeks guest preacher, Rev. Dr. Brian K. Blount emphasized that Jesus was angry at the conditions of his day, and asked us "Don’t you think it’s about time we got angry too?"

The answer is resoundingly "Yes!"  It's time we got over the code of silence and scream about conditions that our silence have allowed to become accepted as Christian.  It's time that we begin to live as the man who was Jesus did, angry.  We must let the cries of the "Religious Right and progressive middle and left" to calm our anger.  Even as non-beleivers, we can attempt to live the actions and words of that man we call Jesus.

Thoughts on God

Currently, there are two books on my reading table, completely opposite in viewpoint.  One is "Jesus For the Non-Religious" [John Shelby Spong, Harper-Collins, 2007]  and the other is "The Jesus I Never Knew" [Philip Yancey, Zondervan. 1995}.  These two present widely different perspectives on Jesus. 

Philip Yancey writes as a person who accepts every word of the New Testament, and wonders how he would accept the words of Jesus if he were in the crowds surrounding him at the time.  Spong's perspective is that much of the New Testament does not show a historical Jesus, but rather that the writers are using metaphorical terms to describe him.  Early in his book he  writes:

... Certainly a crucified man, executed and buried on Friday, cannot walk out of his tomb resuscitated and alive on Sunday, not can a body defy gravity in order to ascend into the sky as the way to return to the God who was once believed to dwell above the clouds. [ page 12]

It is not my intent to compare and contrast these two books.  Each has its strong points.  So far, Spong's writing more closely resembles my own thoughts, questions, and beliefs.  It is very interesting to read the different beliefs of the authors.

For much of my adult life I've been trying to define and understand what having a God means, partly in the personal sense, but also in the wider, human sense.  Naturally, I haven't settled on an answer.  Once in a while I believe I'm learning, but knowledge is illusory, and I always return to questioning.

I thoroughly enjoy attending church services.  The music, ritual, and fellowship all appeal to me.  I've also discovered that I can enjoy these without having to assign the underlying message to lessons passed down through centuries from Jesus, or even further, from Jewish traditions.

Most good sermons use as scriptures as a beginning point.  But essentially, a good sermon provides a perspective on an aspect of behavior, culture, idea of making life more meaningful.  For me, it's possible to separate the clearly religious aspects and take the message about life away.  A good sermon makes me think, to consider its levels of meaning, and application to me.  That's essential.

I don't believe there is a God.  At least I don't believe there is a separate, all powerful, all knowing entity that humans call God.  There is too much that we do not understand to state that God does not exist, at least for me.  I don't believe Jesus was born of a virgin, or that he arose from the tomb.  But I enjoy the trappings that have arisen around both, especially the music, disregard the religious labels, and allow myself to not confront others with my unbelief.

The of the stories and rules of the Old Testament and metaphors and parables of the New, are good guides for living a full, satisfying life.  They are also a call to be contrary to society, to advocate for the poor and destitute, and to respect all persons.  I don't feel a need to believe that Jesus was a deity to feel that these lessons attributed to him are solid and positive.

We are approaching the season in which people go through paroxysms of materialistic attainment, claiming that it's in celebration of the Gift of the Christ child.   I'm certainly as guilty as most.  The gift we should be celebrating is an awareness that we are able to do so, and then to use that awareness to change the world.  A Christian reason is not necessary.  We don't have to believe in order to feel.

Thanksgiving '07

The following is taken from a comic strip.  The strip is "Curtis", written by Billingsley, and this strip is dated 11/22.

From the News and Observer:

Curtis:
Thanksgiving - A Day Reserved for Giving Thanks

Not just for the meals we consume, but for the people we are fortunate enough to have occupy that special place with us

Look to those in your midst, and think of those who are not, and be thankful for the time allowed

For those who share our lives are precious, and the best reason to be thankful

Enjoy

There are those who may think it's strange that I use a comic strip to mark this day.  Wisdom is found in the simplest of places, and Billingsley's words strike me as being especially appropriate.

Blogging Blahs

Around our house so much has been happening that I've not found time to write.  Truthfully, there has been time; I just haven't used it to write.  This evening I'm again not mentally aligned with writing either.  It's a struggle to find words.

In "Mere Musings, the prior entry to the blog, I wrote:

I've let my curiosity about every moment on the planet go to sleep.  I don't notice, and when I do, I don't develop the subject....

I am most satisfied when I write about questions to which there is no answer, or about some small event in my day, like quilting  The political situation in the US can set me off occasionally, actually often, but I'm not primarily a political writer, or person.  Honestly, this blog is not intended to be political.  I want it to be centered on thought generating for myself and readers.  If those thoughts are political, I want the freedom to write about them.

Recently, however, as the quote from yesterday says, I have allowed myself to be - unaware is the best word I can think of.  Unaware of the things happening around me that give me pleasure, or that I believe need to be different, or just interest me. I sit at the keyboard and struggle to find something I believe will be interesting to readers.  This post is not likely to be one of them, but I'm truly thinking through my fingers here.

This evening Marrianna and I ate at a small, family pizza restaurant.  As we talked, I mentioned that I must be more of a grouch that I realized.  She assured me that since retiring I am much more mellow.  She said that I used to be a curmudgeon, but am less so now.  But, I don't believe I am.  Lots of things piss me off these days, more than when I was working even.  And, as a sort of corollary to that, I don't see the small, beautiful things around me, or think strange, different thoughts and write about them.

I've been considering giving up the blog.   I can write stuff like this in a daily journal.  But, when I think of the warm feeling I get when someone tells me he or she reads my blog, I know that's something a journal wouldn't give me.  When I began blogging, I swore that it would not be a journal, or a diary, and I recognize when I write stuff like this, it has become one.  My apologies.

I still do not want it to be either.  I'd like to be able to notice a part of living, an event, person, sunset  - something outside of me, that I can express myself about, rather than focusing on me.  I shall try my best to do that.  Thanks for listening (reading).

Mere Musings

Writing is similar to quilting, especially when the quilt is queen size and the quilter is working by hand.  I catch myself not quilting about as often as I do not writing.  Recently, that has been depressingly regular.  Not much gets accomplished if there is no effort.

If you don't read "The Sun Magazine", you probably should.  I received my December (Issue 384) issue today, and have read most of it already.  I admit that I very seldom read their interviews, and this one so far is not an exception.  But their short stories, poetry, and essays are excellent.  Two examples in this issue are: "The Wizard In the Closet" by Heather Sellers (pages 17 - 19)  It's an account of a woman learning from a mentor, the Wizard in the Closet, about her writing and teaching.

As I read it, I first thought of several good teachers I've had in my life, followed by some teachers I know today.  It was easy to connect the former with Sellers message.  And it seemed a good idea to send a copy of the article to the latter.  I wont, but hope that they see this and if they're interested enough will track down a copy of The Sun, and read it for themselves.

What really made me sit up and take notice was when I connected my own writing with the advice the Wizard gives, and finally Sellers learns; "Develop your subjects. ... Burrow into what's interesting - in you, and in everyone else.  Every moment on the planet has juice to yield.  Anything is interesting if you truly want to know about it.  Staying awake to that was the key to staying alive."

Probably the reason I've not written, or quilted, regularly recently is just, exactly that.  I've let my curiosity about every moment on the planet go to sleep.  I don't notice, and when I do, I don't develop the subject, learning for myself how things, people, and events fit together.

Another article in this issue that woke me is "My Marital Status" by James Kullander (pages 28 - 33).  This is, in my opinion, a piece of good, honest writing that is openly emotional, but also tells how Kullander  developed the subject, himself.  I actually read this before the "Wizard In The Closet", and the sequence seemed very appropriate as I read the Wizard.

In my last post, I included two poems by Mary Oliver.  Coincidentally the last three lines of this issue of "The Sun" are also by Mary Oliver.

When it's over, I want to say:  All my life
I was a bride married to amazement.
I was the bridegroom, taking the world into my arms.
(Taken from "The Sun, Sunbeams, page 48)

I think we can say she develops her subject.

Bits of 'most anything

Last evening my wife and I went to a benefit concert for Chatham Arts annually held at the Fearrington Village Barn, though last night was our first time attending.  We will not miss another one.  The band was "The Bluegrass Experience, and they are really, really good.  They had several guest folk on stage at one time or another.  Some were nationally, and even internationally, known, some are only locally known.  Their first set lasted almost 2 hours, then a 20 minute break, and finished with another hour and a half.  There were probably 500 people in the barn, and we were all entertained. 

Our master bath is carpeted.  Marrianna wants to replace the carpet with tile so today we went to the local flooring store.  They are very nice folk, and we brought three demonstration tiles home to lay on the floor to see what they would look like in our bathroom's lighting.  I have no idea which Marrianna will choose, but they all look good to me.

It's usually interesting to me how some sales people are friendly as well as being professional.  The two people in the flooring shop today are excellent examples.  By the time we left with the demonstration tiles, I felt as if they were both long time friends.  That, to me, is an ideal sales person.  We will choose one tile and have a new floor very soon.

I want to make an unsolicited testimonial for "Dr. C.'s" blog.  This is a thoughtful person, in a couple of venues.  He is adamantly anti-war, and many of his posts are of pictures of Iraqi children along with comments.  These will often be painful to see, but they're definitely what more people need to see.  Equally important, he recently wrote a series of posts about information.  This link is to the last of the three, "Information III",.which contains links to the first two.  They are long, serious discussions about the nature of information.  Use the links and begin with the first.  The good doctor always provokes thought.

I wonder how our "dear leader" in Washington are going to twist, spin, and deny the report of the Internation Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) to the UN that we are in, not approaching, in the early stages of global warming.  I recommend these articles about the report, here and here.  The US and China, the two highest producers of carbon gases, seem to me to be denying that there is a problem, even while such reports detail that there is.  The science is in, but I am sure the Bush administration will refuse to make the changes the report outlines as necessary while it is still not too late.

The quotes around "dear leader" are meant to link George W. Bush to dictators such as Kim Jung-il, North Korea's dictator.  It's deliberate.  I believe that he has acted as if the Presidency is his, and he is all powerful in the US.  He has engaged us in a war that has lasted as long as WW II, and is costing us trillions of our dollars, thousands of our military, and more thousands of Iraqi. 

Mary Oliver has four new poems printed in the Winter Issue of "Parabola."  There are two that touched me, and I think will you too.

Water

What is the vitality and necessity
     of clean water?
Ask the man who is ill, and who is lifting his lips to the cup.

Ask the forest.

Mary Oliver,  from Parabola, Winter 2007, page 24

Not This, Not That

Not anything,
not the eastern wind whose other name
    is rain,
nor the burning heats of the dunes
    at the crown of summer,
nor the ticks, that new, ferocious populace;

nor the President who loves blood
nor the governmental agencies that love money,

will alter

my love for you, my friends and my beloved,
or for you, oh ghosts of Emerson and Whitman,

or for you, oh blue sky of a summer morning,
that makes me roll in a barrel of gratitude
    down hills,

or for you, oldest of friends: hope;
or for you, newest of friends: faith

or for you, silliest and dearest of surprises, my
    own life.

Mary Oliver,  from Parabola, Winter 2007, page 25

With that, I close.