Thursday, January 13, 2011

Political Language


Follow your leader;
there will be a test, later:

will to power
            spin
                        fear
            subsidy
low intensity conflict
            moral sensibility
                        for us or against us
            cluster bombs
bringing democracy
            full spectrum dominance
                        troll
            compassionate society
collateral damage
            objective failure
                        conformity
            defense of the indefensible
ideology
            disclosure
                        hypocrisy
            family values
doublethink
            disinformation
                        laissez-faire
            capitalism
transparency
            unequivocal
                        outing
            reign of terror
solidarity
            public opinion
                        mendacity
            dying metaphors
 evasions
            absolutism
                        bipartisan
            blowback
oligopoly
            polarization
                        revenue enhancement
            unilateral
talking-head.

What’s this nonsense all about?
The freedom to be controlled.

© 2011 by Elisabeth T. Eliassen

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

The Gift So Worn


Weariness,
weariness walks on my soul.

The doing that can never be done
tolls in my mind, a dissonant bell,
for there is no rest.

The sun rises,
yet there is no rising,
though the shining sun
blesses
even the most feeble flower.

That blessing,
birthing hope
over the multiscapes of being
—that light caresses the soft flower petal.

Would that I were the flower!

© 2011 by Elisabeth T. Eliassen

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Faith

Existence:
a balancing act
between vulnerability and strength.

Our minds can only fathom
leaping from strength to strength,
from onward to upward,
like children
leaping from boulder to boulder;
We’re never quite prepared
for falls, setbacks,
system failures
or for loss.

We have forgotten about the light.

There is imperceptible light
in every atom and cell.
Every being, and
everything that has form,
breathes this light,
and carries it.
The ground,
which accepts our clumsy footfalls,
glows of this light
day and night,
upholding and keeping
the countless ebbs and flows of life,
welcoming all that rises,
cherishing also all that falls,
and witnessing all the rest.

Brilliant as this light is,
we cannot see it—
we must take on faith
that it is in all of us,
is indeed all in all,
glowing and vibrant.

Knowing  and remembering
 will have to do.

© 2011 by Elisabeth T. Eliassen

Monday, January 10, 2011

Our Culture of Violence


The following letter to the Editor appeared in the editorial page of the San Francisco Chronicle on April 10, 2010:
Dangerous hardware abroad in the land
The current discussions around the Second Amendment are disturbing and crude. Think about a natural human response to frustration: anger. Natural, but also irrational.
Next, think about road rage, the most common daily occurrence of a natural but irrational response. Is it logical to suppose that gun-toting road-ragers will have enough self-control to not draw their weapons? Such a scenario is not far-fetched and in fact happens now with frightening regularity among people who are illegally armed. The United States is not a wild frontier society but a modern, urban, civil society.
Giving every citizen the opportunity to own and carry a loaded gun is an invitation to divest society of civility, reducing it to something more brutish, base and irrationally deadly. People who want to carry guns must also want to intimidate and have power over others; why else feel the need?
We should be very worried about people like that. They say it is for self-protection; I say they and their hardware are a danger to us all.
Elisabeth Eliassen
I wrote that letter in response to the local news accounts reporting that NRA members and other pro-gun activists were showing up at local coffee dispensaries wearing holstered (and unloaded) hand-guns, in support of open-carry legislation.

Times have not changed much since April of 2010. Certain kinds of people want to be wed to fire arms. Is this about mystique? (Are guns the latest fashion accessory? Has it become as hip to sport a gun as it is to wear a Bluetooth or MP3 player earbuds?) Or is this purely about displaying power and intimidation? It cannot be about personal protection; if we look at the statistics regarding accidental deaths due to the unintentional discharging of firearms, I wonder how people can feel safe with even an unloaded gun in the home.

There are many people who have a professional reason to use or own handguns. Most of these people work in the service of our communities, as security, law enforcement or military officers. Woe to us that we need to have such security, but I am grateful for the service of these individuals.

I bet that most of the rest of us should not ever need a handgun to do what we do in our day-to-day lives. Who needs a gun to work in industry, to shop, cook, nurture children, do laundry, tend the garden, take out the garbage or even have a cup of coffee at the local café?

Guns should be an anachronism in civil society. Instead, guns seem to have become part of, along with notions of might, power and violence, an inescapable rhetoric.

There are so many films, television programs, electronic games and books that portray violence in a glorified manner that it would be impossible to list them all. Think about it: the only way the comic book good guy superheroes can vanquish the bad guys is by means of violence.

Even philosophy is not free of violence: Nietzsche posited that humanity could only bring about change in the world by means of violent revolution, and that the remaining human beings would be called superman, overman, or perhaps man, the next generation. (Would this be a positive evolution of humankind? I think not. I think it would be a movement to the next kind of oppression. But that is for another discussion.)

Overcoming is frequently described as violent change, not as a calm resolution by means of a conversation over coffee, much less courtroom advocacy or philosophical dialogue.

Winning is frequently described as beating, killing, crushing, smashing, destroying, eliminating or annihilating.

The truth is, we, as a society, have never been properly taught how to have civil discussion. What we have been taught (by television programs, electronic gaming and films that titillate by means of gratuitous violence, brutality and gore) is that we can say whatever we want, whenever we want, to whomever we want. You hear it in grocery stores, in coffee shops—it doesn’t matter where you are, you hear people speaking with anger and violence in their tone of voice.

Basically, our culture has taught us that venting rage is okay. But this is violence, too. Verbal abuse, it is called in some situations, can be as wounding as a gunshot. And people who suffer verbal abuse are frequently left with the gaping wounds of trauma and post-traumatic stress.

As a society, today we are no longer taught the value of silence. We are not learning to accept, to listen, to consider, or to discuss. We are not learning to manage our anger or find productive solutions to our problems. “The System” is blamed, but the darkness is within us. If we don’t get what we want now, we have a license to complain, at the least, or at the most, to yell. Discretion? What is that? I want, I, I, me, me… A culture of narcissism, solipsism and rage is what we are experiencing in the Twenty-First Century, and the universal symbol of the rage portion of that cultural program is a loaded gun.

Rage like this is irrational. Of course, it is more irrational to move from having a license to yell to taking license to shoot people with a handgun. People are not rationally moved to yell at someone, or beat someone, so how could it ever be that a person could rationally be moved to fire a gun at another person?

So the next question is this: why are average people, who don’t need these items professionally, allowed to purchase handguns, much less automatic rifles and other weapons?

The answer is simple:  we live in an insane society.

Let us pray that someone, somewhere, will wake up from this ragemare of insanity and remember that life is sacred, and spread that notion like an infection upon the lands. Let us all be infected with the love of life that wills cooperation. Let us learn to slow down and talk, without yelling. Let us think before we speak, lest our words be misdirected or misunderstood. Let the sayings from an old book echo throughout the world:
They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore. — Isaiah 2:4 & Micah 4:3
Until that day, what we have is a culture of violence, and it is raging a war of us upon us, and the death toll of the innocents continues to mount.

*

[image: Swords into Ploughshares, http://www.geni.org/]

Sunday, January 9, 2011

No Writing Peace

There is no writing peace;
peace is an unnatural word.

Peace should be
an element ubiquitous,
like water, light and air,
born into all cells and fibers,
an active ingredient in bread,
planted as a crop,
mixed into cement,
displaying ultimate flexibility
along with diamond hardness,
wearing like iron,
yet as soft as down,
yielding to every need.

Peace should be
all things to all people,
indeed, all Being.

Instead, the human world
is built on the shifting sands
of arguments called diplomacy,
and the groundwater
liberally laced
with discord,
tribal enmity,
provincial vision,
irrational governance,
top-down authority,
and condoned oppression.

This thinking erodes the earth
by a grasping of more than is required,
and profanes life by promoting death,
while claiming to make sense
of an insensible world.

There is no writing peace.

Peace may be a beautiful word,
but until the word can
write people
to right action,
and the kind of living
that comes as naturally
and habitually effortless
as water, light and air,
the sands and time,
then its beauty is meaningless
and has no real place
in the language of life.

© 2011 by Elisabeth T. Eliassen

Saturday, January 8, 2011

The Think System


Ideas float like motes of dust
through the sun charged ether,
of conscious and unconscious being,
waiting to be caught in a web
of substantial thought.

Fog lies thick
on the ground
of our doings,
sometimes hiding from view
what should be clear
and in the open,
measurable.

The world turns
on a scientific principal
that can neither be diverted
nor controlled,
but all other doings rely
on cooperative interaction
between two or more
ordered points
within a vector.

The magnitude
of the motion,
and whether it is
bound or free,
depends upon
what the carrier
is doing.

How shall you
carry the world forward?

Shall you force,
torque,
displace,
accelerate,
move
or abstain?

How shall your
motions be measured
from the initial point
to your terminus?

Shall you be
an angle,
a product,
an orientation,
a contravariant,
a semi-norm
a cross
or a null?

And when
it is all over,
and measured,
will any of it
have been worth
the exercise?

A web
of substantial thought
awaits all ordered points
that wish to engage in
consciously cooperative
interaction.  

© 2011 by Elisabeth T. Eliassen
image: http://www.vectorjungle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/vector-art-equations-graphs.jpg

Business As Usual: When Public Goes Private, Non-Profit Becomes For-Profit

We are living in a world that should be getting smaller in all the good ways (e.g., labor-saving devices that will allow people more free time, improvements in public health delivery, less pollution, organic food, longevity ensuring pharmaceuticals, access to all that is needed, work that is suitable and sustaining, the list is endless) as a result of something called progress. Things are supposed to be getting better for everyone.

[I hesitate to begin this next paragraph with the bubble-bursting word instead, but there it is, and there is nothing for it.]

Instead, what is really happening, and this becomes clearer as the days go by, is that human mentality seems to get smaller and more isolationist and mean. To match that, the hubris of the entitled is becoming daily more brazen and daring in its agenda of owning as much of the world as possible before it all falls apart.

In the 1990s, there was a lot of talk in the United States about the Global Village and hope that there would be a renaissance of cultures that would make us all be friends. After September 11th 2001, however, we have heard very little about that, while much about the necessity of defense spending, about decentralization of government, lowering of taxes and the impossibility of maintaining any public programs, ostensibly because they are too expensive.

Let me unpackage some of this for us.

The “necessity” of defense spending means that most of our tax dollars are being spent on weapons of mass destruction, whose sole purpose is to intimidate, kill and destroy. The United States has had, for more than 50 years, a stockpile of weapons and artillery that could destroy the planet more than a hundred times over, and so it is hard to believe that anyone could need more of the stuff, much less the very latest in death and destruction technology. And yet, the generals want more, and so do the private defense contractors, who rake in billions of dollars by manufacturing death. The budget for upkeep of existing nuclear weapons in the U.S. arsenal alone has been reckoned enough to provide every person on the planet with food, safe drinking water and shelter, annually. Think about it.

Decentralization of government means that the bureaucracy is being transferred from the public to the private sector. This move is touted as a cost savings to government, but this cannot not possibly prove true in financial analysis. It may save the government money, but it doesn’t save you or me anything! The money still comes from our pockets. When we move from public to private, we move from a non-profit situation to a for-profit situation. Our rights then have a retail cost. If we cannot meet that for-profit cost in the marketplace, then we are out in the cold. Alarmist, you say? Well, if the Governor of the State of Arizona can take people off waitlists for organ transplants because their economic condition will not allow them to pay for the procedure, and if firefighters in Tennessee can standby and watch someone’s home burn to the ground because the member of the public that owns that dwelling allegedly did not pay some very small local fee, then what do we have, here? Think about it.

Voters are asked to vote for candidates based on candidates’ promises of “no new taxes”. This happens first, of course, at the federal level. Responsibility for the public welfare is then removed from the federal level to the state level, where voters are asked to vote for candidates based on the candidates’ promises of “no new taxes”. Responsibility for the public welfare is then removed from the state level to the local level, where voters are asked to vote for candidates based on the candidates’ promises of “no new taxes”. But, then, of course, local officials, once in office, say, “shucks, darn it! We have to raise taxes so that we can uphold the public welfare and basic infrastructure!” And the only way the local yokels have to do this is by having the community vote to mandate a parcel tax premium over the regular property tax. Moreover, the people and businesses with the most money do not contribute according to what they have. The burden falls on the average tax payer, trying to make it in a wavering economy. Think about it.

“Citizen’s Initiatives” are placed on local and state level ballots by big businesses and special interest groups funded by big business, not just your everyday citizen, to get voters to mandate what is good for big business: guaranteed jobs and tax payer money to pay for these jobs. The average person cannot manipulate the system in this way to get a job. What is an example of such a program? Well, the voters of the State of California mandated R&D for stem cell research. Instead of funding public schools (public education is mandated by the State, you know), the State of California is funding stem cell research with taxpayer dollars. To date, this program has sucked in billions in public funds, but has been a complete bust as a business enterprise—while, of course, a few people have been making a lot of money. Meanwhile, who does this publicly mandated program benefit? This public program does not benefit the average Californian as much as it benefits Big Business Pharma Industry. This public program has not created a whole lot of jobs, because it is a highly scientific specialty. Look up the articles on the internet. Think about it.

Such maneuvers have become commonplace, to the extent that I wonder how the average person can possibly be surprised by them. But we are.

I assert that we are being sold into a kind of slavery, and we don’t even realize it.

This is unthinkable, but I want you to think on it.

When your local police and fire departments become privatized, who will be in charge of them? Will your local government have oversight? If you have not paid your local taxes, will the firefighters park across the street from your burning house and watch you and your home go up in flames, while carefully monitoring that it does not spread next door, where they did pay the local tax? Think about it.

Since when did government have to turn a profit to be successful? What happened to By the People, for the People? Think about it.

Since when did big business know better how to run government agencies, hospitals, schools and prisons? Did you know that Dick Cheney owns prisons? Look up the articles on the internet. Think about it.

This is, Dear Reader, all food for thought. I do not have answers. Obviously, more examples could be brought into this discussion; space here is limited. But I can say this: if our government and business leaders had not been gambling and losing with public tax funds and your pension and everyone’s real estate, and if our government agencies hadn’t bonded us all into indebtedness on the basis of future tax earnings that would often (particularly in the case of redevelopment, but probably elsewhere, also) not be realized until 40 years into the future, the world would not be experiencing the dreadful financial collapse that now imperils the lives of so many.

This has not been progress, People. This has been, and continues to be, business as usual. Moreover, it has been and continues to be robbery. Think about it.