Moral and political absolutism is the trap

If any message couldn't be clearer it is that no one of us is perfect. We all have thoughts and beliefs that require cleaning up.  Today so many pretend to have moral and political absolutism, to have been that way all our lives and I think it first originated with the right and now is encroaching and taking over the left political spectrum. Or maybe I'm wrong and it's vice versa. But that especially is true for all the commentators and supporters of particular causes. You do or say what you think is the right thing at the time but end up finding out later that it was just plain wrong.  And especially in the case of politicians can it be excused as opportunism? As if there hasn't ever been an opportunistic politician.  Unless that mistake led to something that could not be undone, death, devastating physical harm, incarceration, banishment maybe it can't be forgiven.  But for all barely non consequential matters how is it that we undo what was clearly wrong at the time? Do we think that it is better to cover up that wrong as so many do? Or to claim that it was a sin of our youth?  How is it that we can be forgiven so that we can all move on to a better outcome for all?  I don't have an answer, but I believe that it is better to remember that we are all complex beings and hardly ever completely rational. Best to look inside yourself and ask the question and listen to your conscience.

Acting shamefully and needing to confess

I don't know why I did this. It has been bothering me ever since, not obsessively I might add, but on occasion when I remind myself of it. Perhaps it's a form of self-flagellation, the need to feel punished by feeling shame. Shame is an ugly feeling, not one we really need for survival even if Catholic doctrine, the one I was raised with, insists that we feel shame for nearly anything that we do that both Jesus and even Hell's fallen angels, Satan and his cohort of devils, would deem shameful and worthy of punishment. Unless of course I confessed. Yet at best this that I did was no worse than a venal sin. It broke no commandments.

So how best to describe and expiate this feeling of shame? It is through the actual indoctrination of confession drummed into me as a small child. Now I've not been to confession nor received any communion much less darkened the door of a church since I was around 13 or 14 except to attend the funerals of my parents who died within three years of each other which would not have looked kindly upon me had I not attended.There would have been an instance of shame which would have required even more expiation. Now not attending mass, confession or communion that has been going on these past 60 years. And I must admit there is a bone in me that feels the occasional twinge while most of me shrugs. We are brainwashed at an early age and it's hard to clear one's brain completely.

To the event. I was in the supermarket, a large supermarket quite popular but at the time I was there sparsely attended by shoppers. I had placed in my basket a few items, I hadn't bothered to count but they seemed so few I passed by the cashier that was finishing up and headed for the 10 or less express line. I placed everything on the conveyor belt and I still wasn't cognizant of how many items I had. I waited while the cashier finished up with the clearly confused woman who wanted to write out a check. She was elderly maybe a bit older than I but clearly she had cognition problems that might border on dementia. She had her son with her (he kept calling her Mom so. . .) who kept trying to urge her along to the customer service counter that the cashier told her she should go to fill out the check and pay for her purchases.

Clearly she had at least three bags of groceries packed already by her son and placed in the shopping basket. And she clearly had way more than 10 items. Still I didn't think of that at all. I didn't want to show my impatience so I looked around. Finally she started to leave and the cashier turned to me when suddenly I hear a voice behind me, "That looks like you have more than 10 items." First I am horrified as I look and sure enough it looks more like 15 items. I feel mortified. I've broken a rule. I have committed an unpardonable crime, the kind of crime i would hold others responsible for though I never have even though I have thought it many times, many many times when I see shoppers in the express line with way more items than they should have in the 10 or less shopping line. I thought it in the past but that is the difference. I have never ever said anything.

I glance over in the direction of the voice and it's a man 10 or 15 years younger than I am who compounds this bit of humiliation by repeating his accusation. The cashier begins ringing up my items. I look at the man, suddenly I am no longer mortified and also I am not angry. So what do I do? I mock him. In a voice that I have no idea suddenly came from my mouth and sounding exactly like the 12 year old Carmelo, my one time step son, (who today is 36 years old and as far as I know behaves like a typical adult) I say:"Oh oh really, I've got more than 10 items well good for you, you noticed." And if that wasn't enough I repeated myself. The man suddenly bolted away from the line and took his things to another line, checked out before I did and disappeared.

And so there we are and this is how I expiate.

History and the Individual

History does not crush individuals. History is separate from individual lives. History is largely irrelevant to individuals and individuals often deem history is irrelevant to them.  Yet it is history that affects the mass of people. How lucky or unlucky we are to avoid or to participate in history is a choice on the part of the individual. The choice that an individual makes is unique to an individual. It's the same kind of uniqueness one might see in the way a tree grows, a snowflake is formed or when comparing individual fingerprints.

However, if the decision is to actively participate in history or to actively avoid history that is a choice. But not the choice that history itself had made for the individual. Sometimes it seems there isn't a choice. And maybe even sometimes there isn't one. The individual gets swept along. How that individual reacts to history is the outcome for the individual even when the outcome can only be in one direction.

Now this last may seem contradictory given the history that we know of wars past, movements past where many participate and many die as a result but even the non participant dies as well, not having made that choice. Ultimately the individual is completely forgotten unless that individual is an extraordinary participant or non-participant.

What is history? History are the events that are recorded but also recorded rarely if ever without the bias of the historian doing the recording. Ignored or forgotten are the individuals unless the individuals are numerous in a particular event where a mass of them are slaughtered or has accomplished something noteworthy. Yet it's only the event that is known where a large group participated. Even at the time of an event if a particular individual is extraordinary may be forgotten or ignored in time by history. But for the non-extraordinary person it's as if that person did not exist.

For example when we think of the Civil Rights movement that lasted at least in the public's eye well over a decade and accomplished much though not enough, a couple of names stand out: M.L. King, Jr. and Rosa Parks. There were certainly many more extraordinary individuals than those two. Today there is a continuance of civil rights but who can name another extraordinary individual? I'm sure there are some who can but generally there are quite a few. Yet the mass of individuals who made up that movement are unknown.  Another example is when a man stepped on the moon for the first time. Generally we remember Neil Armstrong, maybe Buzz Aldrin (the second man to walk on the moon). But Michael Collins who was in charge of the command module? Largely ignored. What about those thousands who got them all to the moon and then brought them back?   

Ultimately the great majority of individuals are irrelevant to the historical process. Consider us as an ant colony. Each ant has its prescribed role through evolution but not one could possibly grasp the whole.  This is who we are. We are incapable of grasping the whole. 

Does that make history irrelevant in the extreme? Absolutely not. History can't be forgotten. It's how we at this moment have gotten where we are. "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." --George Santayana. Simple in its dictum. But it's not just large historical events but on an individual level it's an individual's history. What choices were made? What choices were ignored? It is easy to blame history for our failures or to applaud history for our successes. What we need to do is to make the leap from history into humanity. How that ever may happen is beyond my understanding.   

An arc towards justice or is it an oscillating towards the right?

Donald Trump at his worst is cruder, truly less informed than the other Republican presidents that have been pushing this country to the right since Richard Nixon. Getting rid of him, though desirable, won't change directions, does not restore some nostalgic normality, except maybe with a friendlier face and more towards "civility" which will help corral the fence sitters and independents. But if a Democrat wins the White House in 2020 what would it mean to return to "normality"? A return to neoliberal politics? To cold war thinking? To the belief in American Exceptionalism? That we are good but must fight against all evil in the world? We've had all that since the end of WWII.

I question the quote by M.L. King Jr. -- “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”-- it's a quote that President Obama liked to remind us of. (But an arc rises and falls, it's a section of a circumference where the first and second points of the arc land at the same level). So as metaphor I find that maybe it's not that useful? Lincoln arguably was our greatest President but no President after Lincoln pushed for changes in the country until FDR did to help move the country during the depression and after towards social justice sadly not for all though for many. No other President sought to improve the lot of poor and middle class Americans until he did.

Yes there have been positive social changes though at a snail's pace and the "ancien regime" of racial and sexual abuse and violence continues in hopes that any positive changes can be rolled back to some idyllic age of white male dominance and the myth of self-reliance, guns included. So instead of an arc since FDR our country's changes have been oscillations at best, oscillating toward the right, towards corporate control, towards religious purity, and fulfilling the dreams of Empire.

The Beginning of Story telling

Consider prehistoric beings. Somewhere on the side of a plain the grasses tall, verdant, along where an untrammeled brook ran, these uncivilized but highly gentle creatures lying on their backs, some cavorting, others sniffing the air, others engaged in coitus swatting away their playful offspring, somewhere there in the well-spring of our current collective conscious, they exist. Suspend all disbelief and come with me then, your imagination and mine, and let us explore at least one of the possible kernels of our own age.

A prehistoric being rises then from his activity. It is a he. There are probably many things to do. Fire is in existence and able to be controlled, sometimes. An organization of these beginning human beings had already managed to plan the next hunt. They are gentle creatures, yes, but they have begun to enjoy the meat of other animals, though not yet on a grand scale. They know they are different. They've begun to anticipate certain realities. They know the pain in their stomachs, known to us as hunger, can be regulated.

Out on the hunt, all the beings carry stones, some carry heavy sticks. As they move through the heavy leafed forest, they spread to the right and to the left. Those on the flanks move silently and swiftly ahead of the central movement. In the center, one being threshes at the grasses and underbrush, small lizards and birds are flushed, sometimes a rodent. Suddenly a bird is hit by a stone from the left. It falls, a colorful screech into the underbrush. As the central figure continues threshing away, the bird is gathered and bound; its neck snapped.

Then the prize they've been after bolts, a warthog more than waist high attempts to attack the thresher. He fends him off with his stick, backing up as quickly as he can. Volleys of stones missle in from both sides. The warthog wheels toward his other attackers. This is what they want. It's a dangerous situation, but now the thresher is free. He is at his age, all of eighteen, their senior and the group's expert hunter. He has two large stones and takes up his position. He throws with his right hand. But before he throws, he plants his right foot, takes aim at the warthog's head as he anticipates its velocity and direction. His aim is exact to an imaginary point where he believes the warthog will be by the time the released stone arrives. He hauls back and he fires, a perfect strike which catches the animal in the back of its skull, causing its feet to give way. The animal is down and is struggling to its feet, as stones rain from all sides. The thresher plants his right foot again, aiming his second stone for the animal's head. The creature is confused, blood dripping from its snout, it turns and turns snuffling at the ground. It is trying to charge again, but though it is headed toward the thresher, clearly it is blinded by a warthog's inner rage, and is charging wildly. It aims itself toward a tree trunk, slamming into it, screeching like a scared pig. The thresher aims again and this time the stone crashes into the pained beast's eye. It collapses and shrieks unable to gain footing again. The job is completed by the rest of the group who beat it with their sticks and stones.

The warthog is a heavy creature, heavier than even the largest human being. It is bound with thick grasses to six of the hunting party. These are very young boys who struggle violently to drag the dead creature to their current home. Many a being has been lost as result of this activity since dead animals raise a smell that a larger creature may come and spirit all the boys and their kill away. The thresher meanwhile walks ahead listening carefully and sniffing the air while looking around and hushing the others as they struggle with their burden. He carries his stick and another well-rounded stone for protection. After a time they stop to rest by the brook that runs near their encampment but is still some miles off. As they rest, they chew on berries and nuts and drink from the running brook. Leaning up against their load, they begin to make up stories about the thresher and how he will be hunting in the greatest hunting place someday. They sing how easy it will be for him and how he will have the greatest catch of all, a warthog the size of a mountain. He will have endless stones to cast, and will be remembered as the greatest teacher of all the stone throwers and threshers. The thresher is pleased and smiles at the others, but reminds them of their work ahead and how low the sun falls.

Three

I had a dream of three flames. They were like candles. My first thought was a religious one. Candles seem to bring about religion in my mind as I was raised a Catholic. This dream of three flames that become candles could be representative of three persons in one God. Typically Catholic. But I put this religious thought out of mind and thought deeper. It seemed significant in that it was three. Only three, not two, not one, not four but three. To be one seemed alone, near death. Two had an element of comfort but in the end brought on discomfort as two people together over time will bring on discomfort. Four would seem like a box and something inescapable. But three is an equilateral triangle It is better than two because each one has two others. It is an odd number and odd numbers always overrule even numbers. Why? I couldn’t say because I am not a mathematician.

But three can also mean triangulation which is considered bad in the world of psychology. But that was not the dream. The dream meant balance. And it was an ineluctable give and take balance. Three would find this balance inescapable with no reason to avoid the balance. Two does imply dialectic. Dialectic has been the premise of modern philosophies since the 18^th century. The dialectic provides us with thesis and antithesis. Marxism believes this is the only way toward resolution of all things, the synthesis of reality. However, it can be envisioned as like the arms of a hurricane, like the drawing of ancient Greek Hero’s engine. Or if the image suffices the whirl of a galaxy like the Andromeda galaxy. Ultimately it is on it’s way to calamity.

Three forms a tension. It’s not going anywhere. It does resolve though synthesizes nothing. It remains in balance. Three is the right number for interaction because intimacy can not be private. Three is the right number for any agreement to be made. Three is also the past present and future. It is our continual existence.

Society is weary of itself

Every age/society grows tired and weary of itself. The great changes brought about by individuals that are credited with providing change really occur because society has become sick of itself. Mostly it doesn’t know that it is sick of itself but someone always feels the temperature, the pain in the gut, the inability to get up and walk, the dread in the night. Or maybe the agent of change could have innocently arrived at his or her mode of changing through invention or done unintentionally because the intention was of another matter. But change never arrives out of the blue, so to speak. Not even by those who do not suffer in the sick society and will the idea of change for change sake because they have learned their history. Their conscious belief dictates to them and their ego delivers. But this is pure selfishnness.

Societies throughout all the ages of human history are like living organisms and have a lifespan. Ultimately as the life is coming to an end they reflect back on themselves and destroy from within. The joy is gone. The belief in self is gone. The growth has ended. The offspring have left home and are on their own. There is nothing more to want or to get or to have. It is now sick and dying.