Friday, December 15, 2017
Faith
December 15, 2017
This morning as I was walking to school, I was scrolling through my phone, looking for some entertainment to pass the time. I saw someone's essay on Goodreads, on a review about Bertrand Russell's Why I'm Not a Christian, which I read years ago, and put in the vault along with all my other thoughts about philosophy, God, religion and the great existential questions.
Not to mention, all the great literature I've read throughout my life, from all over the world, that reinforces and elaborates on these ideas.
Since I taught a British lit class that I felt needed a walk through Western culture, its philosophies and evolution of cultural ideas, I often got this question from students, usually after we had long left the comforts of Medieval and Renaissance Christianity and were delving into Scientific Rationalism and Existentialism--so, what do you believe?
Short answer, I would say, if I didn't want to get into it, or read the room as a bit aggressive:
"It's Complicated". Or, "Well, I was raised Catholic..."
I think some of my students read my very intimate and extensive knowledge of Catholic ritual and history as belief. My faith, so to speak. They would be right on a very surface level. Catholicism is a piece of my soul I cannot remove or deny, just like I can't avoid being Italian, Irish, British, and some other Eastern European bloodline. I can't erase 17 years of my life or even my family's continued pressure. They are definitely Catholic, most of them. Others kinda see-saw.
There is something about the richness and awe in the ceremonies and churches of Catholicism. It just sort of amazes me that fairly primitive human beings came up with such a concept, to civilize and pacify humanity's violent tendencies. And, in some cases, it worked--Kings were not rebeled against, men reeled in some of their baser animalistic natures, particularly for sex. Women were revered (in theory--when they weren't being abused) on some level and protected. Of course, there were all those Church fueled wars. However, there was also a facade of politeness that was reinforced by the church structure.
In these days of incivility I can respect that.
And Jesus. I like Jesus, but not in the same way these redneck Southern baptists do. I don't emblazon him on my truck and drive like a madman disregarding others' safety. As a general principle I have much greater respect for the older, more traditional religious practices: Catholicism, but also Eastern and Greek Orthodox, Judaism. See, these are solid, steadfast, and not mutating all over the place. Although I don't agree with the Pope on things like birth control and such, but he always maintains the same baseline. Who's the biggest peacenik in the world? The Pope, through Vietnam, Middle Eastern messes, nuclear war, terrorism, North Korean threats, he always reinforces Jesus' message of peace, in defiance of the politics of the times. That's cool. And poverty--he's the only world figure going to bat for the poor these days.
I have less and less respect for the myriad forms of Southern Christianity in America. In fact, I would like to state that I can see, in the very public forms, very little that exhibits Christian morality in their ideas and practices--as they mutate into a thousand political forms. All that bullshit about being blessed and superior as an excuse for being rich and cheating people--God wanted them to do it-He sanctioned it! Cart before the horse thinking.
And those dip shits marrying and blessing their guns!!WTF!!
First, here's the baseline I was taught, and still believe in:
---Pride
---Envy
---Anger
---Greed
---Gluttony
---Sloth
---Lechery, Lust
And, every reinforcing piece of literature, from medieval times on, that illustrates how these can enter human life. Pride, of course, being the devil's own sin, and #1 one of what not to do in order to be a good person. I admit struggling constantly with my pride; of my knowledge, schooling, pov, skills and abilities. I do try! One problem about this in the modern world is humility--the opposite of pride--is seen as weakness. I suspect it has so much to do with why powerful men have decided it's their birthright to control the "weaker" women in their lives. ( And people of other races, backgrounds). But see how medieval thinking (maybe not actions--these were ideals, of course) used to undercut those grandiose ideas? Even the simple idea of courtesy, of the big, bad knight dedicating his service, platonically, to a lady? That whole unrequited love trope.
Greed is the interesting one for the day. And echoing that New Testament adage: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven." It doesn't say it's impossible (how big a needle, how big a camel?) But you can see the tipping point--greed. All these folks who believe they are using their hard-earned money for the greater good: are they? I can see someone convincing themselves they are contributing to the greater good by, say, contributing to a political party, but are they really just lying to themselves about fattening their own cushy lives? Or using a tax break--which substantially takes away from others--claiming they are going to be "job-creators". I think it's awfully hard for a businessman who feels he's worked very hard for his bread, deserves his cushion, fears a fall and is providing for his children--so many ways to play the compassion game--and I do think fear is an intense motivator, the forgotten underlying motive, that fuels an unconscious need to keep acquiring more and more. I do understand the pressure to get your child properly educated and prepared for adulthood, but it seems there is a better way than merely giving them things; you should also give a little hardship, motivate and teach, possibly even with a little deprivation. The endgame is self-reliance, no? which does not come in a box.
I have students with 4 I-phones, all active.
Seems there's just an awful lot of unnecessary crap that comes in a box.
Labels are so easy to take on. Generalizing and judging.
-Worship no other gods but the Almighty-no false gods
-Do not take the Lord's name in Vain
-Keep holy the Sabbath
-Honor your father and mother
-Do not kill
-Don't commit adultery
-Do not steal
-Do not lie
-Do not covet your neighbor's goods
-Do not covet your neighbor's wife
Of course, in all of these, the devil is in the details. What is adultery, killing, lying, stealing? Keeping holy the Sabbath? Thousands of years of traditions for differing religions have been built out of the different answers to these questions. Many of us think Roy Moore has broken several of these, but he doesn't think so. Maybe he wanted that big monument up to remind himself. But why did it have to be on Government property?
Can I make an argument that the GOP taking away their neighbor's healthcare is covetous and stealing?
I don't think too many clear headed people would argue with the spirit of these ideas, even if they might argue the letter of some churches' interpretations. Atheists might argue against the false gods, Sabbath, and Lord's name commandments, but I think if you consider the spirit in them, even an atheist should see the sense as pertains to the rhythms of a good, thoughtful life: have a day of rest and contemplation. Swearing is usually done as insult--don't do it. Don't be taken in by Messianic bullshit, including churches who worship--eh, L. Ron Hubbard or their false creation of business "Jesus".
I'm big on taking this to a sensible level to a plane of mutual understanding, not some church's devilish details, including the Catholics'.
So am I really Catholic? It's complicated.
Do I believe in Scientific Facts? Most certainly, the ones that have been proved and seem logical.
Am I an Atheist? I don't think the atheist, scientists have evidence there is no God, as they should if they want to take that route. Can't prove a negative in logic, right? DT needs to learn that.
Am I agnostic? Possibly. But I like the feel of believing something better is possible even if it's almost impossible.
I also feel truth in Buddhism, although that's harder to break down into moral behavior, except also to sacrifice yourself and understand your relationship to the other in life.
I still think these rules stated above are good ones, until we come up with something better.
I do believe, in spite of the news and appearances of the world, that good will out over evil, or bad, or negativity, whatever you want to call it. I think most people have an instinct for it. I think people can change, even if you shouldn't help them reinforce their most negative qualities, perhaps by helping them too much. Let them have their own responsibilities to ruin or redeem their lives. I believe in love, as I have stated elsewhere, and although it's terribly hard to define--eros? agape? Fraternal or motherly?? I'm certain it exists, is not a figment of romantic imaginations. I have faith that the majority of folks are on an upward trajectory of reaching towards the light.
Dec 19: The Young Pope shall send this thread in a strange direction. More after digestion.
I do want to get to the place where religion goes wrong, where it becomes rigid and inflexible, when it fails at complexity, that is looking at life's complexities. Then, there is fanaticism. A word that has been watered down to fan. Fan of--um, Kiss, or Miley Cyrus, or Depeche Mode.
A fanatic is much worse. Akin to a terrorist. In its sense of extremism. Its tendency towards the black and white, love and hate.
Hate to resort to this sort of thing, but here's a dictionary definition for fanatic:
a person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.
This morning as I was walking to school, I was scrolling through my phone, looking for some entertainment to pass the time. I saw someone's essay on Goodreads, on a review about Bertrand Russell's Why I'm Not a Christian, which I read years ago, and put in the vault along with all my other thoughts about philosophy, God, religion and the great existential questions.
Not to mention, all the great literature I've read throughout my life, from all over the world, that reinforces and elaborates on these ideas.
Short answer, I would say, if I didn't want to get into it, or read the room as a bit aggressive:
"It's Complicated". Or, "Well, I was raised Catholic..."
I think some of my students read my very intimate and extensive knowledge of Catholic ritual and history as belief. My faith, so to speak. They would be right on a very surface level. Catholicism is a piece of my soul I cannot remove or deny, just like I can't avoid being Italian, Irish, British, and some other Eastern European bloodline. I can't erase 17 years of my life or even my family's continued pressure. They are definitely Catholic, most of them. Others kinda see-saw.
There is something about the richness and awe in the ceremonies and churches of Catholicism. It just sort of amazes me that fairly primitive human beings came up with such a concept, to civilize and pacify humanity's violent tendencies. And, in some cases, it worked--Kings were not rebeled against, men reeled in some of their baser animalistic natures, particularly for sex. Women were revered (in theory--when they weren't being abused) on some level and protected. Of course, there were all those Church fueled wars. However, there was also a facade of politeness that was reinforced by the church structure.
In these days of incivility I can respect that.
And Jesus. I like Jesus, but not in the same way these redneck Southern baptists do. I don't emblazon him on my truck and drive like a madman disregarding others' safety. As a general principle I have much greater respect for the older, more traditional religious practices: Catholicism, but also Eastern and Greek Orthodox, Judaism. See, these are solid, steadfast, and not mutating all over the place. Although I don't agree with the Pope on things like birth control and such, but he always maintains the same baseline. Who's the biggest peacenik in the world? The Pope, through Vietnam, Middle Eastern messes, nuclear war, terrorism, North Korean threats, he always reinforces Jesus' message of peace, in defiance of the politics of the times. That's cool. And poverty--he's the only world figure going to bat for the poor these days.
I have less and less respect for the myriad forms of Southern Christianity in America. In fact, I would like to state that I can see, in the very public forms, very little that exhibits Christian morality in their ideas and practices--as they mutate into a thousand political forms. All that bullshit about being blessed and superior as an excuse for being rich and cheating people--God wanted them to do it-He sanctioned it! Cart before the horse thinking.
And those dip shits marrying and blessing their guns!!WTF!!
First, here's the baseline I was taught, and still believe in:
- #1--The Golden Rule: Do Unto Others as You Would Have Them Do Unto You.
It's like the Christian version of Karma.
Where has this idea disappeared to? I was taught this should be the center of morality--if you followed this faithfully, you were a decent, moral person. Of course, everyone has their lapses--that's what confession, prayer is for--moments of meditation, to really think about what you had done or said, especially if it bothers you in some way--possibly you did something wrong that needs working out. Notice that the Golden Rule is all about fostering compassion for others, walking in their shoes, being a thoughtful, considerate person--not a guard dog constantly on the attack. You are supposed to police your own soul, not others.
And this is where the Southern Christians (and many Republicans) go so far off the rails----
with a little help from their money-grubbing, political friends. To paraphrase Fiddler o n the Roof--"God Bless and keep the NRA, far, far away from me..." ( the original was the Цар).
I'm not saying all Southern Christians are like this, but it is the message that is publicly seen from them, and I don't see too many having the guts to stand up and contradict their rabid, and rich, leaders.
- #2- The Seven Deadly Sins:
---Pride
---Envy
---Anger
---Greed
---Gluttony
---Sloth
---Lechery, Lust
And, every reinforcing piece of literature, from medieval times on, that illustrates how these can enter human life. Pride, of course, being the devil's own sin, and #1 one of what not to do in order to be a good person. I admit struggling constantly with my pride; of my knowledge, schooling, pov, skills and abilities. I do try! One problem about this in the modern world is humility--the opposite of pride--is seen as weakness. I suspect it has so much to do with why powerful men have decided it's their birthright to control the "weaker" women in their lives. ( And people of other races, backgrounds). But see how medieval thinking (maybe not actions--these were ideals, of course) used to undercut those grandiose ideas? Even the simple idea of courtesy, of the big, bad knight dedicating his service, platonically, to a lady? That whole unrequited love trope.
Greed is the interesting one for the day. And echoing that New Testament adage: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven." It doesn't say it's impossible (how big a needle, how big a camel?) But you can see the tipping point--greed. All these folks who believe they are using their hard-earned money for the greater good: are they? I can see someone convincing themselves they are contributing to the greater good by, say, contributing to a political party, but are they really just lying to themselves about fattening their own cushy lives? Or using a tax break--which substantially takes away from others--claiming they are going to be "job-creators". I think it's awfully hard for a businessman who feels he's worked very hard for his bread, deserves his cushion, fears a fall and is providing for his children--so many ways to play the compassion game--and I do think fear is an intense motivator, the forgotten underlying motive, that fuels an unconscious need to keep acquiring more and more. I do understand the pressure to get your child properly educated and prepared for adulthood, but it seems there is a better way than merely giving them things; you should also give a little hardship, motivate and teach, possibly even with a little deprivation. The endgame is self-reliance, no? which does not come in a box.
I have students with 4 I-phones, all active.
Seems there's just an awful lot of unnecessary crap that comes in a box.
Labels are so easy to take on. Generalizing and judging.
- #3 Judge not, lest ye be judged. That's the smartest idea of all. And one we all miss on regularly.
- #4 (Roy Moore's sin of Pride): The 10 Commandments
-Worship no other gods but the Almighty-no false gods
-Do not take the Lord's name in Vain
-Keep holy the Sabbath
-Honor your father and mother
-Do not kill
-Don't commit adultery
-Do not steal
-Do not lie
-Do not covet your neighbor's goods
-Do not covet your neighbor's wife
Of course, in all of these, the devil is in the details. What is adultery, killing, lying, stealing? Keeping holy the Sabbath? Thousands of years of traditions for differing religions have been built out of the different answers to these questions. Many of us think Roy Moore has broken several of these, but he doesn't think so. Maybe he wanted that big monument up to remind himself. But why did it have to be on Government property?
Can I make an argument that the GOP taking away their neighbor's healthcare is covetous and stealing?
I don't think too many clear headed people would argue with the spirit of these ideas, even if they might argue the letter of some churches' interpretations. Atheists might argue against the false gods, Sabbath, and Lord's name commandments, but I think if you consider the spirit in them, even an atheist should see the sense as pertains to the rhythms of a good, thoughtful life: have a day of rest and contemplation. Swearing is usually done as insult--don't do it. Don't be taken in by Messianic bullshit, including churches who worship--eh, L. Ron Hubbard or their false creation of business "Jesus".
I'm big on taking this to a sensible level to a plane of mutual understanding, not some church's devilish details, including the Catholics'.
So am I really Catholic? It's complicated.
Do I believe in Scientific Facts? Most certainly, the ones that have been proved and seem logical.
Am I an Atheist? I don't think the atheist, scientists have evidence there is no God, as they should if they want to take that route. Can't prove a negative in logic, right? DT needs to learn that.
Am I agnostic? Possibly. But I like the feel of believing something better is possible even if it's almost impossible.
I also feel truth in Buddhism, although that's harder to break down into moral behavior, except also to sacrifice yourself and understand your relationship to the other in life.
I still think these rules stated above are good ones, until we come up with something better.
I do believe, in spite of the news and appearances of the world, that good will out over evil, or bad, or negativity, whatever you want to call it. I think most people have an instinct for it. I think people can change, even if you shouldn't help them reinforce their most negative qualities, perhaps by helping them too much. Let them have their own responsibilities to ruin or redeem their lives. I believe in love, as I have stated elsewhere, and although it's terribly hard to define--eros? agape? Fraternal or motherly?? I'm certain it exists, is not a figment of romantic imaginations. I have faith that the majority of folks are on an upward trajectory of reaching towards the light.
Dec 19: The Young Pope shall send this thread in a strange direction. More after digestion.
I do want to get to the place where religion goes wrong, where it becomes rigid and inflexible, when it fails at complexity, that is looking at life's complexities. Then, there is fanaticism. A word that has been watered down to fan. Fan of--um, Kiss, or Miley Cyrus, or Depeche Mode.
Hate to resort to this sort of thing, but here's a dictionary definition for fanatic:
a person filled with excessive and single-minded zeal, especially for an extreme religious or political cause.
Much of the world's problems are bred in fanatics. Monomaniacs with a narrow view.
Jan 10: However, I have a particular distaste for the points of view of the people I know who are atheists. In seems to become stronger in those who may have been forced into religion early in their life, by family or culture. It irritates me to death that some atheists, especially two I know too well, think this philosophy is bred from some superior intellect, some superior objectivity that is guiding their, um, non-soul. Prove it, say I. Prove there is no God. no spiritual force, unseen, working in the universe. What is it? Lessee, isn't there some maxim in logic theory that you cannot prove a negative? * So, therein lies the flaw in their logic--D.O.A. So, they usually resort to the ad hominem argument that religious people are fools, deceiving themselves. Not exactly an objective argument.
* see Bertrand Russell's argument about the teapot in outerspace for a rebuttal, but then there are plenty of rebuttals to his rebuttal...
I think perhaps just like you can have religious fanatics, you can have atheist fanatics. They are obsessed with the idea of proving spiritual ideas to be wrong, most commonly by using a lot of straw man arguments--pointing out the idiocy of snake-handlers and Pentacostals and violent Christians who don't turn the other cheek, the greed of the Medieval Church preaching that greed is the root of all evil and taking everyone's money--sure, they did that. All those things may be true, but it's only the far side of the spectrum--doesn't prove that spirituality, or any particular religion has no merit whatsoever. It's just another extreme view to me.
I showed my Drama class today several clips about MLKing, Robert Kennedy, JFK, to give them some context about the 60s, and the upcoming MLK holiday for which we are getting a day off--except for me who stupidly volunteered to get up early to go with the group taking the boarders to Cape Canaveral to the Kennedy Space station before I knew I coulda had the day off. Eh, I'm kinda glad I'm going--besides sleeping in, what would I have done with myself? I like my boarder kids this year. It made me feel nice when some sparked up to know I was going with them. ))
But back to MLK/JFK/RFK. I had pulled up the "I Had A Dream" speech b/c one of the Chinese kids had asked why we had Monday off and who was MLK anyway? So, since this class still has a lot of AWOL Holiday people, and this group sorta works independently, I figured I could show the video and they could watch it or not while they did their work. Honestly, if you are paying attention and have any humanity, any notion of the context, I don't know how any sentient being could not help being moved by that speech. Add to it the "I Been to The Mountaintop"speech, knowing he's gonna die that week...
Well, when my Drama kids walked in, who are 60% or more African American--some are mixed race--I purposely left the MLK speech up, wondering if they'd ask to see it--thinking they are making the teacher go off topic (beware the guile of teachers planning a teachable moment.) They asked, I started it up, and one had the temerity to ask--so, that was during the Reagan administration right? It was a very sincere question, and I explained it was the 80s when Reagan was Pres: this was the glorious and terrible 1960s.
So, recognizing the appalling lack of knowledge our school system had afforded this curious African-American young man, who regularly spouts pop culture references to Malcolm X and the Black Panthers, but doesn't seem to know why they existed, I launched into a mini-history lesson that featured my personal time in these historical moments. My first stop was RFK's announcement, during his jump into the 1968 Presidential Campaign as a last minute candidate, of the assassination. He made a quite stirring and emotional speech, that only he could have made, in his place in history, having the arduous task of telling a huge crowd of his supporters that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on that night in April, had been shot and killed (I added the detail for my audience that the horrid shooter was a man from my small home town in Illinois). To the questions about the racist nature of my town, I explained what I knew about the complicated racial history of my town, the white landowners who before the Civil War bought land and gave it to runaway slaves who came to our town through the Underground Railroad up the Mississippi. And actively made rumours of "Indian sightings" to keep nosy slave-catcher types away. About the white abolitionist who was murdered by other white men, the laws in Illinois that weren't exactly "slavery", but allowed one to keep another man or woman in indentured servitude with no pay for 99 years..
I could see RFK's speech had had the desired effect, and explained that he himself was assassinated two months after. Then I showed the Zapruder film in all its blurriness, so they would understand why Robert had the moral authority to tell Blacks to use reason, not attack all white men, because he had experienced the same sort of violence at the hands of a white man--and everyone felt the weight of those words. I let it run a little into a short clip about the magic Bullet theory and why it was wrong, but explained how Americans were feeling, why there was so much skepticism to believe authority. Then we went back to "I Have a Dream", after I gave some local history of life in St. Pete for blacks pre-LBJ, who gave himself Vietnam nightmares so he could pass Civil Rights legislation.
Can you believe? I had a kid thank me for sharing all this with them, in the way I'd done it. I really felt like I'd accomplished something. I said, those were the kind of politicians America used to have.
The future--ten kids at a time.
This is why I believe in something beyond us--something made MLK, made Robert Kennedy the fulcrum of a powerful historical moment. They were not perfect men, but they stood for something. It may be forgotten, the world may throw shit on it. But, maybe not.
Jan 24: To Congress and the executive branch:
You, sir, are no John Kennedy. (Nor Robert, neither).
Jan 31, 2017:
So I was asked a deeply profound question: "Can I (or anyone) change?" In keeping with my , uh, faith, I have to almost instinctively say "Yes!" It's that old question the Determinists ask if people truly have free will. My philosophy is, they do. We may have to fight the science in our bodies, but we still have a choice. Maybe I only believe this because I think the other option is so very ugly.
But now I have to think about why that is right, and of course it also relates to my personal troubles--which I think I have already perhaps had success with by making some small, but significant changes. Like not letting other people control me so much. They can't control what doesn't comply, Да? Better for both. I take the time for my own consumption --what I'm going to put in me both physically and mentally. I'll have a big challenge in a week or two when the in-laws come. She ain't gonna push me about. Can that one change? Addendum--I think she's getting too broken to push.
But why can people change? Let's take something obvious, and science based, like an addiction. Drugs, porn, sex, alcohol, love, internet addictions. OCD addictions like flicking the light switch. A need: for speed. A manic's need for change, new sensory experiences. Obviously people have gotten themselves off these addictions. Cynics might say they just substitute another behavior, a better addiction. Religion for Booze, via the 12 steps. Lessee, did I do that when I quit smoking? I don't think so. What did I substitute?
Can't think of anything. Had another baby? Nah. Work? Possibly, but I already worked when I smoked. I think some people do swap out one thing for another, like strict exercise routines after a cocaine addiction.
But I think I mean more deeper, profound changes. For example, I think maybe I perhaps didn't like myself as much when I was, say, 20. Bucking the system, and getting negative feedback. I made superficial changes, for example, by being more punk/rebellious in a place where that was not quite acceptable. Maybe that sorta forced me to change, but further down the road, when I watered it back more.
Going through a real hardship, like possibly losing my daughter via the divorce--emotionally, was more a crucible for real change for me--knowing I could only count on myself to believe that she will understand where the truth of our terrible situation lies. It's one of those things that just comes with time, repetition, solidness of character. It was a mantra to me--just be yourself, the truth will show itself. And it did. And it did force me to choose exactly those things that were most important, most me.
I think that is really the answer to why I believe. Because I told myself it would happen, and it did.
Maybe I need to work again on what exactly it is that I want, especially from my creative self. I'm bored with playing by myself, and bored with the repetition band. But, see, here's the tricky part. Being bored is certainly not new for me--my whole life has been me searching for something outside of the boredom. I think I need to look less outside myself for the boredom busters.
It's in my head, right? The kingdom of heaven..
Feb 1: Threading the needle morally, so that you don't destroy others but make yourself happy, is really, really difficult. And takes subtlety. I don't mean subtle like the serpent man. But being open and looking at all the rabbit holes and time tunnels you might be making in your life--anticipating the consequences. Trying where you can.
And actually knowing what it is you want. There was a scene in the season 4 finale of Californication that maybe gets close--the family and friends just laughing, relaxed (a little high, granted) and feeling the love of each others' company. That's what I want, I think. And don't have.
Why don't I have it? Or, better, why do I feel like I don't have it? Maybe I do. Nah..I spend too much of my free time alone. But I do have my moments..
Jan 10: However, I have a particular distaste for the points of view of the people I know who are atheists. In seems to become stronger in those who may have been forced into religion early in their life, by family or culture. It irritates me to death that some atheists, especially two I know too well, think this philosophy is bred from some superior intellect, some superior objectivity that is guiding their, um, non-soul. Prove it, say I. Prove there is no God. no spiritual force, unseen, working in the universe. What is it? Lessee, isn't there some maxim in logic theory that you cannot prove a negative? * So, therein lies the flaw in their logic--D.O.A. So, they usually resort to the ad hominem argument that religious people are fools, deceiving themselves. Not exactly an objective argument.
* see Bertrand Russell's argument about the teapot in outerspace for a rebuttal, but then there are plenty of rebuttals to his rebuttal...
I think perhaps just like you can have religious fanatics, you can have atheist fanatics. They are obsessed with the idea of proving spiritual ideas to be wrong, most commonly by using a lot of straw man arguments--pointing out the idiocy of snake-handlers and Pentacostals and violent Christians who don't turn the other cheek, the greed of the Medieval Church preaching that greed is the root of all evil and taking everyone's money--sure, they did that. All those things may be true, but it's only the far side of the spectrum--doesn't prove that spirituality, or any particular religion has no merit whatsoever. It's just another extreme view to me.
I showed my Drama class today several clips about MLKing, Robert Kennedy, JFK, to give them some context about the 60s, and the upcoming MLK holiday for which we are getting a day off--except for me who stupidly volunteered to get up early to go with the group taking the boarders to Cape Canaveral to the Kennedy Space station before I knew I coulda had the day off. Eh, I'm kinda glad I'm going--besides sleeping in, what would I have done with myself? I like my boarder kids this year. It made me feel nice when some sparked up to know I was going with them. ))
But back to MLK/JFK/RFK. I had pulled up the "I Had A Dream" speech b/c one of the Chinese kids had asked why we had Monday off and who was MLK anyway? So, since this class still has a lot of AWOL Holiday people, and this group sorta works independently, I figured I could show the video and they could watch it or not while they did their work. Honestly, if you are paying attention and have any humanity, any notion of the context, I don't know how any sentient being could not help being moved by that speech. Add to it the "I Been to The Mountaintop"speech, knowing he's gonna die that week...
Well, when my Drama kids walked in, who are 60% or more African American--some are mixed race--I purposely left the MLK speech up, wondering if they'd ask to see it--thinking they are making the teacher go off topic (beware the guile of teachers planning a teachable moment.) They asked, I started it up, and one had the temerity to ask--so, that was during the Reagan administration right? It was a very sincere question, and I explained it was the 80s when Reagan was Pres: this was the glorious and terrible 1960s.
So, recognizing the appalling lack of knowledge our school system had afforded this curious African-American young man, who regularly spouts pop culture references to Malcolm X and the Black Panthers, but doesn't seem to know why they existed, I launched into a mini-history lesson that featured my personal time in these historical moments. My first stop was RFK's announcement, during his jump into the 1968 Presidential Campaign as a last minute candidate, of the assassination. He made a quite stirring and emotional speech, that only he could have made, in his place in history, having the arduous task of telling a huge crowd of his supporters that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., on that night in April, had been shot and killed (I added the detail for my audience that the horrid shooter was a man from my small home town in Illinois). To the questions about the racist nature of my town, I explained what I knew about the complicated racial history of my town, the white landowners who before the Civil War bought land and gave it to runaway slaves who came to our town through the Underground Railroad up the Mississippi. And actively made rumours of "Indian sightings" to keep nosy slave-catcher types away. About the white abolitionist who was murdered by other white men, the laws in Illinois that weren't exactly "slavery", but allowed one to keep another man or woman in indentured servitude with no pay for 99 years..
I could see RFK's speech had had the desired effect, and explained that he himself was assassinated two months after. Then I showed the Zapruder film in all its blurriness, so they would understand why Robert had the moral authority to tell Blacks to use reason, not attack all white men, because he had experienced the same sort of violence at the hands of a white man--and everyone felt the weight of those words. I let it run a little into a short clip about the magic Bullet theory and why it was wrong, but explained how Americans were feeling, why there was so much skepticism to believe authority. Then we went back to "I Have a Dream", after I gave some local history of life in St. Pete for blacks pre-LBJ, who gave himself Vietnam nightmares so he could pass Civil Rights legislation.
Can you believe? I had a kid thank me for sharing all this with them, in the way I'd done it. I really felt like I'd accomplished something. I said, those were the kind of politicians America used to have.
The future--ten kids at a time.
This is why I believe in something beyond us--something made MLK, made Robert Kennedy the fulcrum of a powerful historical moment. They were not perfect men, but they stood for something. It may be forgotten, the world may throw shit on it. But, maybe not.
Jan 24: To Congress and the executive branch:
You, sir, are no John Kennedy. (Nor Robert, neither).
Jan 31, 2017:
So I was asked a deeply profound question: "Can I (or anyone) change?" In keeping with my , uh, faith, I have to almost instinctively say "Yes!" It's that old question the Determinists ask if people truly have free will. My philosophy is, they do. We may have to fight the science in our bodies, but we still have a choice. Maybe I only believe this because I think the other option is so very ugly.
But now I have to think about why that is right, and of course it also relates to my personal troubles--which I think I have already perhaps had success with by making some small, but significant changes. Like not letting other people control me so much. They can't control what doesn't comply, Да? Better for both. I take the time for my own consumption --what I'm going to put in me both physically and mentally. I'll have a big challenge in a week or two when the in-laws come. She ain't gonna push me about. Can that one change? Addendum--I think she's getting too broken to push.
But why can people change? Let's take something obvious, and science based, like an addiction. Drugs, porn, sex, alcohol, love, internet addictions. OCD addictions like flicking the light switch. A need: for speed. A manic's need for change, new sensory experiences. Obviously people have gotten themselves off these addictions. Cynics might say they just substitute another behavior, a better addiction. Religion for Booze, via the 12 steps. Lessee, did I do that when I quit smoking? I don't think so. What did I substitute?
Can't think of anything. Had another baby? Nah. Work? Possibly, but I already worked when I smoked. I think some people do swap out one thing for another, like strict exercise routines after a cocaine addiction.
But I think I mean more deeper, profound changes. For example, I think maybe I perhaps didn't like myself as much when I was, say, 20. Bucking the system, and getting negative feedback. I made superficial changes, for example, by being more punk/rebellious in a place where that was not quite acceptable. Maybe that sorta forced me to change, but further down the road, when I watered it back more.
Going through a real hardship, like possibly losing my daughter via the divorce--emotionally, was more a crucible for real change for me--knowing I could only count on myself to believe that she will understand where the truth of our terrible situation lies. It's one of those things that just comes with time, repetition, solidness of character. It was a mantra to me--just be yourself, the truth will show itself. And it did. And it did force me to choose exactly those things that were most important, most me.
I think that is really the answer to why I believe. Because I told myself it would happen, and it did.
Maybe I need to work again on what exactly it is that I want, especially from my creative self. I'm bored with playing by myself, and bored with the repetition band. But, see, here's the tricky part. Being bored is certainly not new for me--my whole life has been me searching for something outside of the boredom. I think I need to look less outside myself for the boredom busters.
It's in my head, right? The kingdom of heaven..
Feb 1: Threading the needle morally, so that you don't destroy others but make yourself happy, is really, really difficult. And takes subtlety. I don't mean subtle like the serpent man. But being open and looking at all the rabbit holes and time tunnels you might be making in your life--anticipating the consequences. Trying where you can.
And actually knowing what it is you want. There was a scene in the season 4 finale of Californication that maybe gets close--the family and friends just laughing, relaxed (a little high, granted) and feeling the love of each others' company. That's what I want, I think. And don't have.
Why don't I have it? Or, better, why do I feel like I don't have it? Maybe I do. Nah..I spend too much of my free time alone. But I do have my moments..
