Enough with the fear.
Enough with the hate.
Enough with the anxiety.
Enough with the name calling.
Enough with the illogical rhetoric.
Enough with the false prophets.
Enough with idols and emptiness.
The curve of a bare winter hill is enough.
The morning sun on a glossy black raven is enough.
The skeletal trees pinking with buds is enough.
The quiet of a church is enough.
The purr of a cat is enough.
The wiggly greeting of a dog is enough.
A kiss from your love is enough.
A hug from your kids is enough.
Enough is a word we don't use often enough.
Enough is Enough.
Thursday, March 3, 2016
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Lessons to Be Learned and Schadenfreude
Disclaimer: This is still not me defending Donald J. Trump.
Welcome to Schadenfreude Wednesday. The day after Super Tuesday. The Trump train is still cruising down the track, and the pundits are starting to "do the math," that tells them that it's going to be hard for Rubio to catch him. Trump continues to defy logic and now has both liberals and conservatives soiling their trousers. Let's be honest though, this is much more embarrassing for conservatives. If Hilary manages to avoid indictment for the next few months, Dems who have been feeling the Bern are just going to sigh and vote blue, with maybe a bit of a sad backward glance at an chance we almost had at "political revolution." But it will be much, much worse for Republicans if they have to face the choice between Hilary and the Donald (or Ted Cruz, more on that in a minute).
I'm no political expert, but Rubio seems like the last hope for the GOP. But he's got problems with the way the game is played these days. I disagree with Rubio's general ideology, but I will give him a nod as seeming at least a bit sincere in his desire to actually be in the political game. I also find him, well, a little bit annoying. If Trump is that arrogant blowhard that's always talking about his Camaro and how much ass he kicks, Rubio is... well... Brainy Smurf, you know the one who always reminds the other Smurfs what "Papa Smurf always says..."
Rubio is also not much older than me, and in the political game that's still wet behind the ears. He lacks gravitas, I could seriously see Donald Trump and Chris Christie shoving him into a locker and giving him a wedgie (the way this campaign is going that is probably not outside the realm of possibility). Trump has drug this campaign into a pro wrasslin mindset (see previous post), and that is not a world where sincere little mama's boys play really well except as fodder for a butt kicking.
I can't really root for Rubio, because I fundamentally disagree with the heartlessness of many of his conservative doctrinal positions. If I needed a reminder of the fact that the Republican race is basically a competition between two different types of repugnance, I need look no further than the, "Hey I won my home state" victory speech of Raphael Edward Cruz. Cruz launched into a diatribe of Tea Party talking points that makes me absolutely cringe, particularly because they concern our involvement and misadventures in the Middle East.
First was Israel, which I'm aware is a major can of worms. Cruz is of the opinion that the only truly American position vis-a-vis the modern nation state of Israel is unconditional support. Never mind that the settlements are against international law, never mind all the humanitarian problems. Never mind that our unthinking and unyielding support for what has been happening is actually the fuel of so many terrorist groups that... okay, let's just say there are problems. (Disclaimer: I am not saying Israel has no right to exist, they do, but things need to change, and for better or worse, we're probably the only nation on earth that has the influence to make those changes happen, but "unconditional support" precludes that option.) And furthermore, I happen to know that Tedward's rabid support of such things is due to a peculiar brand of apocalyptic Christianity that has influenced the politics of this issue for decades. Cruz worries me because he is a true believer, a zealot if you will. I'm not ever sure what Trump believes in, except for the power of hair spray. I know what Ted Cruz believes and it's freaking cray cray.
Cruz's follow up to his "Screw the Palestinians and all this wimpy neutrality" plank, was his promise to "Tear up this Iranian nuclear deal on day one." Now I get really serious really fast whenever I hear the words Iran and nuclear in the same sentence. I am also of a mind that I really would prefer not having another war in the Middle East. I have two young men that I am fairly fond of who are in the Marines at the moment, and I don't want them getting in harm's way.
I am of the opinion that brokering any kind of deal with Iran on the subject of their nuclear capability was practically an act of diplomatic sorcery, and I give my long-faced, boring friend John Kerry big ups for getting that done. Is the deal perfect? No, no diplomatically negotiated treaty ever is, but it makes us all a lot safer for quite a while, and thaws out one of our last truly frozen international relationships. It also leads to fewer Iranians suffering privation, which, I believe, eventually leads to fewer terrorists and less violence.
But the Cruz missile thinks it's a bad deal. Why? Well, Obama for starters, oh and money. I can't do anything with the first part because haters gonna hate, but the second part is easy. First of all, even if I buy the $150 billion dollar price tag that Cruzites have slapped on this (which is difficult to substantiate and involves mainly what Iran will gain as a result of lifted sanctions and the restoration of frozen assets not some check that we are going to write them). By contrast, the war in Iraq cost us from $1.7 TRILLION to over $2 TRILLION. A TRILLION is a thousand billions. And that, by the way, was financed by the American taxpayer. I'm no math whiz, but that seems like a pretty thin pretense for calling a diplomatic agreement a disaster.
The thing is that many people in the GOP are so afraid of Trump that they're forgetting that Cruz is the second place guy right now. It would be trading an arrogant narcissist for a certifiable sociopath.
Now look, if you've got yourself one nutjob that's pretty normal. If he's the front-runner you can make lots of excuses, but when you, as a political party with a long history of being the rational voice of conservatism are faced with this sort of situation in which both options are really bad, maybe you have done something wrong. Maybe your flirtations with people's fear and prejudice have actually blown up in your face. Maybe in your rush to have God bless America you have let in some of the most cracked and cynical forms of Christian dogmatism. Maybe the stench of your constant obstruction of our duly elected chief executive finally wafted into the noses of your own constituency and maybe they're supporting Trump, not because they're uneducated rubes, but because they're simply tired of you sitting on your hands while they wrestle with real problems. Maybe they realize that something is better than nothing. Maybe they're so fed up that they're just going with the man who entertains them the best. Any way you slice it, put down the fiddle Nero, Rome is burning.
As much as I enjoy watching you squirm through this, I'm also a little worried about where this is going to go from here, so you know, maybe learn from this? Just a little? Pretty please?
Welcome to Schadenfreude Wednesday. The day after Super Tuesday. The Trump train is still cruising down the track, and the pundits are starting to "do the math," that tells them that it's going to be hard for Rubio to catch him. Trump continues to defy logic and now has both liberals and conservatives soiling their trousers. Let's be honest though, this is much more embarrassing for conservatives. If Hilary manages to avoid indictment for the next few months, Dems who have been feeling the Bern are just going to sigh and vote blue, with maybe a bit of a sad backward glance at an chance we almost had at "political revolution." But it will be much, much worse for Republicans if they have to face the choice between Hilary and the Donald (or Ted Cruz, more on that in a minute).
I'm no political expert, but Rubio seems like the last hope for the GOP. But he's got problems with the way the game is played these days. I disagree with Rubio's general ideology, but I will give him a nod as seeming at least a bit sincere in his desire to actually be in the political game. I also find him, well, a little bit annoying. If Trump is that arrogant blowhard that's always talking about his Camaro and how much ass he kicks, Rubio is... well... Brainy Smurf, you know the one who always reminds the other Smurfs what "Papa Smurf always says..."
Rubio is also not much older than me, and in the political game that's still wet behind the ears. He lacks gravitas, I could seriously see Donald Trump and Chris Christie shoving him into a locker and giving him a wedgie (the way this campaign is going that is probably not outside the realm of possibility). Trump has drug this campaign into a pro wrasslin mindset (see previous post), and that is not a world where sincere little mama's boys play really well except as fodder for a butt kicking.
I can't really root for Rubio, because I fundamentally disagree with the heartlessness of many of his conservative doctrinal positions. If I needed a reminder of the fact that the Republican race is basically a competition between two different types of repugnance, I need look no further than the, "Hey I won my home state" victory speech of Raphael Edward Cruz. Cruz launched into a diatribe of Tea Party talking points that makes me absolutely cringe, particularly because they concern our involvement and misadventures in the Middle East.
First was Israel, which I'm aware is a major can of worms. Cruz is of the opinion that the only truly American position vis-a-vis the modern nation state of Israel is unconditional support. Never mind that the settlements are against international law, never mind all the humanitarian problems. Never mind that our unthinking and unyielding support for what has been happening is actually the fuel of so many terrorist groups that... okay, let's just say there are problems. (Disclaimer: I am not saying Israel has no right to exist, they do, but things need to change, and for better or worse, we're probably the only nation on earth that has the influence to make those changes happen, but "unconditional support" precludes that option.) And furthermore, I happen to know that Tedward's rabid support of such things is due to a peculiar brand of apocalyptic Christianity that has influenced the politics of this issue for decades. Cruz worries me because he is a true believer, a zealot if you will. I'm not ever sure what Trump believes in, except for the power of hair spray. I know what Ted Cruz believes and it's freaking cray cray.
Cruz's follow up to his "Screw the Palestinians and all this wimpy neutrality" plank, was his promise to "Tear up this Iranian nuclear deal on day one." Now I get really serious really fast whenever I hear the words Iran and nuclear in the same sentence. I am also of a mind that I really would prefer not having another war in the Middle East. I have two young men that I am fairly fond of who are in the Marines at the moment, and I don't want them getting in harm's way.
I am of the opinion that brokering any kind of deal with Iran on the subject of their nuclear capability was practically an act of diplomatic sorcery, and I give my long-faced, boring friend John Kerry big ups for getting that done. Is the deal perfect? No, no diplomatically negotiated treaty ever is, but it makes us all a lot safer for quite a while, and thaws out one of our last truly frozen international relationships. It also leads to fewer Iranians suffering privation, which, I believe, eventually leads to fewer terrorists and less violence.
But the Cruz missile thinks it's a bad deal. Why? Well, Obama for starters, oh and money. I can't do anything with the first part because haters gonna hate, but the second part is easy. First of all, even if I buy the $150 billion dollar price tag that Cruzites have slapped on this (which is difficult to substantiate and involves mainly what Iran will gain as a result of lifted sanctions and the restoration of frozen assets not some check that we are going to write them). By contrast, the war in Iraq cost us from $1.7 TRILLION to over $2 TRILLION. A TRILLION is a thousand billions. And that, by the way, was financed by the American taxpayer. I'm no math whiz, but that seems like a pretty thin pretense for calling a diplomatic agreement a disaster.
The thing is that many people in the GOP are so afraid of Trump that they're forgetting that Cruz is the second place guy right now. It would be trading an arrogant narcissist for a certifiable sociopath.
Now look, if you've got yourself one nutjob that's pretty normal. If he's the front-runner you can make lots of excuses, but when you, as a political party with a long history of being the rational voice of conservatism are faced with this sort of situation in which both options are really bad, maybe you have done something wrong. Maybe your flirtations with people's fear and prejudice have actually blown up in your face. Maybe in your rush to have God bless America you have let in some of the most cracked and cynical forms of Christian dogmatism. Maybe the stench of your constant obstruction of our duly elected chief executive finally wafted into the noses of your own constituency and maybe they're supporting Trump, not because they're uneducated rubes, but because they're simply tired of you sitting on your hands while they wrestle with real problems. Maybe they realize that something is better than nothing. Maybe they're so fed up that they're just going with the man who entertains them the best. Any way you slice it, put down the fiddle Nero, Rome is burning.
As much as I enjoy watching you squirm through this, I'm also a little worried about where this is going to go from here, so you know, maybe learn from this? Just a little? Pretty please?
Tuesday, March 1, 2016
Just Desserts
Disclaimer: This is not me defending Donald Trump. I have been observing the catastrophe that has overtaken our democracy of late, and have seen this coming for a while. There is still a part of me that thinks Trump is deliberately trying to sabotage the process and show it for the sham that it has become. There is still a little voice inside my head that suspects that he can't possibly be this crass and clueless. Part of me remembers the Donald Trump of the feud with Vince McMahon in the world of professional wrasslin'. It is a sad, sad commentary that the world of foreign objects, blatant cheating and impotent referees is more or less analogous to our national electoral process.
But wrasslin' does teach you some important things about human nature. One of those things is that Heels (bad guys) are mostly more fun to watch than Baby Faces (good guys, called faces for short). Growing up the best heels were Rowdy Roddy Piper (may he rest in peace), Ric Flair, Terry Funk and of course the master of slimy conniving: Bobby the Brain Heenan (manager). Wrasslin' has always had a flair (pun intended) for giving us villains, and also making sure that eventually they were brought to justice. I was a wrasslin' fan in the 1990's when a paradigm shift happened courtesy of one Dwayne Johnson (aka The Rock) and one Stone Cold Steve Austin. Up until these two, almost any wrassler of consequence had to fit into a mold of Heel or Face, they could very easily switch back and forth, because wrasslin fans have an amazing talent for suspension of disbelief, more so than even Sci-Fi fans. Predicting a Heel turn or a moment of redemption for a Heel was really the most interesting part of being a fan who was no longer a little kid. Little kids grow up rooting for the faces, getting emotionally involved with the farcical drama and really hating those lying, cheating heels.
But let me tell you, there is a moment of swelling glory when someone does something noble and right in order to fulfill honor. The classic example is a Heel, having just lost the inevitable finale to a long feud, where he had won all earlier contests by dubious means, finally extending his hand for a congratulatory handshake. Sometimes the handshake is "real," a sign of hard won respect, and basically a truce, maybe even the beginning of a mixed and redemptive partnership. Other times the handshake is just a ruse so that the vanquished heel can get in a couple of cheap shots before running away to more dubious shenanigans.
This is how professional wrasslin' works, everybody but small children and the exceedingly stupid know it, but it doesn't matter because that's the way we are entertained, often by feeling morally and intellectually superior to the actors. Nobody said it was highbrow entertainment, but it was entertainment. When the Stone Cold/ Rock paradigm shift happened, things got confusing, characters no longer had to fit the molds of heel and face, they could be dishonorable cheaters one minute and gallant heroes the next. They could flaunt authority, drink beer, insult the audience and still draw plenty of cheers. It was reflecting a postmodern perspective before almost anything else the world of entertainment that had mass appeal. I know that sounds weird, but I believe it bears weight. TV shows started reflecting the same ambiguity: NYPD Blue and Law and Order, showed us that the good guys weren't always good and that maybe the bad guys story was a little more complicated than it was in Magnum PI.
Donald Trump is a creature of this reality. Literally, he was actually involved with wrasslin' during this era. He played the part exceedingly well, and no, he wasn't a wrassler, he was a character, he was basically himself, but he was also playing a part in a drama, where he demonstrated his ability to out power-broker Vince McMahon, which he did, with Vince's full cooperation. One could tell that they were birds of a feather. Men who would do anything, make people love them or make people hate them, if it served the story they were telling and made them money in the process.
I have been watching Trump staging a real life episode of Piper's Pit for almost a year now, and I'll tell you, I have often been suckered in to the act, despite the fact that I know better. But now the danger is growing real, it's like this time where Brian Pillman seemingly lost it on an episode of Raw and went to someone's house (I believe it was Steve Austin) and Pillman seemed to not be acting all of the sudden. Now it was obviously not a total shoot (as they say in the business about a scene that gets out of control and goes off script), but it did seem kind of disturbing and real. .
Trump has turned the Republican Primary into a shoot, and now the people who thought they were in control of the script are in a panic mode. The problem right now is that all they've got is a couple of stooges to ride to the rescue. Cruz is every bit as unnerving as Trump, but not as likeable and Rubio is the definition of an untested rookie baby face. Neither one of them knows anything about the game that Trump is actually playing here, which is not nice politics.
Even if my theory is true, and Trump really is trolling the system, the disturbing truth has been revealed: large numbers of people are willing to support and vote for a man who embodies our most shameful and base instincts: fear, anger, hatred, the will to power, (I can almost hear Yoda saying, "The path to the darkside are they). Several people have observed that Trump is essentially the candidate we deserve for all of our sins as a nation. Others have said that they (optimistically) suspect that Trump will moderate once he runs the gauntlet of the primary which now has even the Republican establishment sharpening their knives against him. I used to sort of trust that second one, but I also know that sometimes the role you play runs away with you.
As far as the first charge: that Trump is the candidate the Republican Party and we as a nation really deserve, if that is at all true than we need to learn some very hard lessons. Has our fear run away with us? Have we sold out too many of our ideals? Are we really a nation that is that much about surface and bluster? Are we really that disingenuous?
I'm asking myself these questions, even though there was never really a chance that I would ever vote for Trump (or Cruz, or Rubio for that matter) because even if I'm rooting for the other side, heel turns can happen at any time, and even stranger things than that (if Rocky Maivea can become The Rock, and Stunning Steve Austin can become Stone Cold, anything can happen). I just hope we're not all headed for some sweet chin music from the Heartbreak Kid.
But wrasslin' does teach you some important things about human nature. One of those things is that Heels (bad guys) are mostly more fun to watch than Baby Faces (good guys, called faces for short). Growing up the best heels were Rowdy Roddy Piper (may he rest in peace), Ric Flair, Terry Funk and of course the master of slimy conniving: Bobby the Brain Heenan (manager). Wrasslin' has always had a flair (pun intended) for giving us villains, and also making sure that eventually they were brought to justice. I was a wrasslin' fan in the 1990's when a paradigm shift happened courtesy of one Dwayne Johnson (aka The Rock) and one Stone Cold Steve Austin. Up until these two, almost any wrassler of consequence had to fit into a mold of Heel or Face, they could very easily switch back and forth, because wrasslin fans have an amazing talent for suspension of disbelief, more so than even Sci-Fi fans. Predicting a Heel turn or a moment of redemption for a Heel was really the most interesting part of being a fan who was no longer a little kid. Little kids grow up rooting for the faces, getting emotionally involved with the farcical drama and really hating those lying, cheating heels.
But let me tell you, there is a moment of swelling glory when someone does something noble and right in order to fulfill honor. The classic example is a Heel, having just lost the inevitable finale to a long feud, where he had won all earlier contests by dubious means, finally extending his hand for a congratulatory handshake. Sometimes the handshake is "real," a sign of hard won respect, and basically a truce, maybe even the beginning of a mixed and redemptive partnership. Other times the handshake is just a ruse so that the vanquished heel can get in a couple of cheap shots before running away to more dubious shenanigans.
This is how professional wrasslin' works, everybody but small children and the exceedingly stupid know it, but it doesn't matter because that's the way we are entertained, often by feeling morally and intellectually superior to the actors. Nobody said it was highbrow entertainment, but it was entertainment. When the Stone Cold/ Rock paradigm shift happened, things got confusing, characters no longer had to fit the molds of heel and face, they could be dishonorable cheaters one minute and gallant heroes the next. They could flaunt authority, drink beer, insult the audience and still draw plenty of cheers. It was reflecting a postmodern perspective before almost anything else the world of entertainment that had mass appeal. I know that sounds weird, but I believe it bears weight. TV shows started reflecting the same ambiguity: NYPD Blue and Law and Order, showed us that the good guys weren't always good and that maybe the bad guys story was a little more complicated than it was in Magnum PI.
Donald Trump is a creature of this reality. Literally, he was actually involved with wrasslin' during this era. He played the part exceedingly well, and no, he wasn't a wrassler, he was a character, he was basically himself, but he was also playing a part in a drama, where he demonstrated his ability to out power-broker Vince McMahon, which he did, with Vince's full cooperation. One could tell that they were birds of a feather. Men who would do anything, make people love them or make people hate them, if it served the story they were telling and made them money in the process.
I have been watching Trump staging a real life episode of Piper's Pit for almost a year now, and I'll tell you, I have often been suckered in to the act, despite the fact that I know better. But now the danger is growing real, it's like this time where Brian Pillman seemingly lost it on an episode of Raw and went to someone's house (I believe it was Steve Austin) and Pillman seemed to not be acting all of the sudden. Now it was obviously not a total shoot (as they say in the business about a scene that gets out of control and goes off script), but it did seem kind of disturbing and real. .
Trump has turned the Republican Primary into a shoot, and now the people who thought they were in control of the script are in a panic mode. The problem right now is that all they've got is a couple of stooges to ride to the rescue. Cruz is every bit as unnerving as Trump, but not as likeable and Rubio is the definition of an untested rookie baby face. Neither one of them knows anything about the game that Trump is actually playing here, which is not nice politics.
Even if my theory is true, and Trump really is trolling the system, the disturbing truth has been revealed: large numbers of people are willing to support and vote for a man who embodies our most shameful and base instincts: fear, anger, hatred, the will to power, (I can almost hear Yoda saying, "The path to the darkside are they). Several people have observed that Trump is essentially the candidate we deserve for all of our sins as a nation. Others have said that they (optimistically) suspect that Trump will moderate once he runs the gauntlet of the primary which now has even the Republican establishment sharpening their knives against him. I used to sort of trust that second one, but I also know that sometimes the role you play runs away with you.
As far as the first charge: that Trump is the candidate the Republican Party and we as a nation really deserve, if that is at all true than we need to learn some very hard lessons. Has our fear run away with us? Have we sold out too many of our ideals? Are we really a nation that is that much about surface and bluster? Are we really that disingenuous?
I'm asking myself these questions, even though there was never really a chance that I would ever vote for Trump (or Cruz, or Rubio for that matter) because even if I'm rooting for the other side, heel turns can happen at any time, and even stranger things than that (if Rocky Maivea can become The Rock, and Stunning Steve Austin can become Stone Cold, anything can happen). I just hope we're not all headed for some sweet chin music from the Heartbreak Kid.
Monday, February 29, 2016
Work, Work, Work
One of the things you sign up for when you enter the ranks of professional clergy is that you are forever and permanently going to be a part of the working/middle class. That's if you're lucky. Joel Osteen and Creflo Dollar to the side, pastoral ministry is not the path to fame and fortune, in fact I think defining what Mega-church pastors do as pastoral ministry is like referring to Walmart as "a family owned retail chain," it may be (sort of) accurate, but it also mocks the truth.
Pastoral ministry in a medium sized church (200-400 members) will put you in a position to own a home, a couple of modest vehicles and live with all or most of the modern amenities. It is by no means a life of privation, but you probably aren't going to get the vacation homes, or the grown up "toys," you most likely are going to always have one or two "big" ideas (big meaning a cost of >$2000) that aren't going to get done right away (right now that is getting our fireplace fixed), and you're probably also going to have some sort of debt which must be managed. You will read articles upon articles by savvy financial types who give you all sorts of clever advice about "wealth management" and sort of sadly shake your head, knowing that you're probably not doing what you should in the long term, but you're doing the best you can.
Rather than bumming out about this, I understand that it is a place of solidarity with the vast majority of my fellow Americans. I'm not going to get into talking about specific politicians today, but rather about an idea that I have heard put forth by far too many of them, Red and Blue alike. That idea is that hard work leads to inevitable success, and by success they mean wealth, and in the scheme of the American dream getting rich is akin to the promised land. When I hear a politician laud this dream to his or her adoring supporters, it makes me want to smash whatever is nearest to me. It makes me increasingly angry because it is a false dream, it is an empty hope, and many of the false prophets of prosperity have a hand in rigging the system to keep it that way.
I have done a few different sorts of work in my day. I have worked in retail, I have worked in production as a machine operator, I have worked in a skilled trade, I have been a Salsa Cowboy (creative marketing), I have worked in a scientific and regulatory consulting company, I have worked in a mail room and a library, as a painter and as a cleaner, and I have been a pastor of churches of varied sizes and cultural locations. All of those jobs had their own challenges, and their own rewards, and the key to each one of them, if you do them well, is hard work.
You might notice a common thread among those jobs (most of which were part time/summer type employment), is that they are jobs that don't lead to getting rich, no matter how hard you work or how good you are at them.
I am in a boat (but more like a rowboat than a yacht) with school teachers and public servants, with carpenters, electricians, plumbers. I am educated (Master's degree), and I work at doing my job to the best of my ability, and I'm never going to get rich. I understand this, and I have chosen to pursue a vocation that, by nature is not about just making money. And of course there is always the truth that life is not fair, I get it, but please don't try to sell me the mythology that millionaires and billionaires deserve what they have. They do not. Nobody "deserves" that much of the pie, no matter what they do. A CEO in an office may work hard, but I'll bet you dollars to donuts that they don't work any harder in a day than a stone mason or a welder. A TV news anchor may get up at 2:00 AM and go to work in the dark, but so do bakers and delivery drivers. Oh and certainly let's not forget the fact that we pay people hundreds of millions of dollars to hit things with sticks and act out the silliest of melodramas.
Most of the world works hard, but not everyone gets rich. As Bill Maher said, "If hard work equaled success, this country would be run by Mexicans with leaf blowers." One of the interesting observations that you can make by watching Downton Abbey is to see the way that class differences used to function in England at the end of the Victorian Era. The servants did all the work and the nobles made all the decisions. In that era both classes seemed to accept that it was the way of things, and it was only the advance of "modern" thinking that started people questioning whether or not it was right.
And certainly, management is a necessary function as well. Knowledge and expertise are skills to be put to work, as is being able to manage and lead people, putting together a plan and a team. Yes, these things are valuable and people should be able to make a living doing those things too. My question is, do they deserve to make three times what the person who teaches their children to read makes for managing a classroom of first graders and teaching them the ABC's? I think not. Should doctors get paid well for their knowledge and their healing skills? Certainly but why do they get to drive a Mercedes Benz to work when the nurses who execute their orders and clean up all the blood and mess can barely afford a second hand Toyota?
These are the faces of income inequality in this country. Don't believe that poor people are poor because they're lazy, it's a vicious lie. Don't believe that rich people are virtuous, it's a dangerous assumption. And both lies you will run into rather frequently in the so called "discourse" that is taking place in our nation right now.
I believe in vocation. I believe in finding a place where your ability meets the needs of your community, and I believe the best of all possible worlds is a world where everyone is free to follow that model, rather than following the money. It's an ideal to be sure, but as such it seems a much better benchmark to follow than "greed is good," or "show me the money."
Pastoral ministry in a medium sized church (200-400 members) will put you in a position to own a home, a couple of modest vehicles and live with all or most of the modern amenities. It is by no means a life of privation, but you probably aren't going to get the vacation homes, or the grown up "toys," you most likely are going to always have one or two "big" ideas (big meaning a cost of >$2000) that aren't going to get done right away (right now that is getting our fireplace fixed), and you're probably also going to have some sort of debt which must be managed. You will read articles upon articles by savvy financial types who give you all sorts of clever advice about "wealth management" and sort of sadly shake your head, knowing that you're probably not doing what you should in the long term, but you're doing the best you can.
Rather than bumming out about this, I understand that it is a place of solidarity with the vast majority of my fellow Americans. I'm not going to get into talking about specific politicians today, but rather about an idea that I have heard put forth by far too many of them, Red and Blue alike. That idea is that hard work leads to inevitable success, and by success they mean wealth, and in the scheme of the American dream getting rich is akin to the promised land. When I hear a politician laud this dream to his or her adoring supporters, it makes me want to smash whatever is nearest to me. It makes me increasingly angry because it is a false dream, it is an empty hope, and many of the false prophets of prosperity have a hand in rigging the system to keep it that way.
I have done a few different sorts of work in my day. I have worked in retail, I have worked in production as a machine operator, I have worked in a skilled trade, I have been a Salsa Cowboy (creative marketing), I have worked in a scientific and regulatory consulting company, I have worked in a mail room and a library, as a painter and as a cleaner, and I have been a pastor of churches of varied sizes and cultural locations. All of those jobs had their own challenges, and their own rewards, and the key to each one of them, if you do them well, is hard work.
You might notice a common thread among those jobs (most of which were part time/summer type employment), is that they are jobs that don't lead to getting rich, no matter how hard you work or how good you are at them.
I am in a boat (but more like a rowboat than a yacht) with school teachers and public servants, with carpenters, electricians, plumbers. I am educated (Master's degree), and I work at doing my job to the best of my ability, and I'm never going to get rich. I understand this, and I have chosen to pursue a vocation that, by nature is not about just making money. And of course there is always the truth that life is not fair, I get it, but please don't try to sell me the mythology that millionaires and billionaires deserve what they have. They do not. Nobody "deserves" that much of the pie, no matter what they do. A CEO in an office may work hard, but I'll bet you dollars to donuts that they don't work any harder in a day than a stone mason or a welder. A TV news anchor may get up at 2:00 AM and go to work in the dark, but so do bakers and delivery drivers. Oh and certainly let's not forget the fact that we pay people hundreds of millions of dollars to hit things with sticks and act out the silliest of melodramas.
Most of the world works hard, but not everyone gets rich. As Bill Maher said, "If hard work equaled success, this country would be run by Mexicans with leaf blowers." One of the interesting observations that you can make by watching Downton Abbey is to see the way that class differences used to function in England at the end of the Victorian Era. The servants did all the work and the nobles made all the decisions. In that era both classes seemed to accept that it was the way of things, and it was only the advance of "modern" thinking that started people questioning whether or not it was right.
And certainly, management is a necessary function as well. Knowledge and expertise are skills to be put to work, as is being able to manage and lead people, putting together a plan and a team. Yes, these things are valuable and people should be able to make a living doing those things too. My question is, do they deserve to make three times what the person who teaches their children to read makes for managing a classroom of first graders and teaching them the ABC's? I think not. Should doctors get paid well for their knowledge and their healing skills? Certainly but why do they get to drive a Mercedes Benz to work when the nurses who execute their orders and clean up all the blood and mess can barely afford a second hand Toyota?
These are the faces of income inequality in this country. Don't believe that poor people are poor because they're lazy, it's a vicious lie. Don't believe that rich people are virtuous, it's a dangerous assumption. And both lies you will run into rather frequently in the so called "discourse" that is taking place in our nation right now.
I believe in vocation. I believe in finding a place where your ability meets the needs of your community, and I believe the best of all possible worlds is a world where everyone is free to follow that model, rather than following the money. It's an ideal to be sure, but as such it seems a much better benchmark to follow than "greed is good," or "show me the money."
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Check Yourself Before You Wreck Yourself
As usual, Richard Rohr has said some things I needed to hear. Negativity has been wearing me out. Seriously, I've gotten to the point where the NY Times op-ed page is like Valium. But I think I might be slightly addicted, because I can't look away from the Trump-Cruz-Rubio circus, or the Mitch, Turtleman, McConnell intentionally announcing that the GOP majority is going to deliberately and stubbornly refuse to do their job, or even, lest you think I'm picking on the Red side, the Hilary-Bernie contest slowly wringing the life out of a hopeful populist movement that for a minute actually had me really excited about politics for the first time since I read Hunter Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail about the 1972 George McGovern campaign. Yeah, that happened before I was born, so I just had to read about it and think, why can't we have someone like that now? Well, Bernie is now, but signs are pointing to the hard cold reality of challenging the establishment: mostly you lose. McGovern did too, to Richard M. Nixon, and I'm just really hoping that this is not history repeating itself, because let's face HRC very well could be Nixon in a skirt, and all of the Republican possibilities make Nixon look like a paragon of virtue (shady recording and petty burglary are probably low on the list of malfeasance for Trump and Cruz).
See? Less than a paragraph in and I'm in a freaking quagmire of negativity, and feeling like I have taken Barack Obama sorely for granted.
So here, I need to examine myself. What is it that bothers me so much about this? I know for a fact that the President is an office that is largely symbolic, with a very limited ability to force changes through an unwilling legislative branch or a gatekeeping judiciary. If my boy Bernie did get himself in, it would not mean that we instantly flashed back to the Roosevelt years. He would still have to deal with Turtleman and his flunkies, and let's face it, while I agree with Bernie's principals about wealth inequality and economics in general, I know there is no magic bullet that's going to slay the dragon of human greed, and one man, even the President, can fix this mess alone.
What really gets me upset though is that it all seems so hopeless, in other words I feel like it is utterly beyond my control. And I don't like that feeling. It's way too familiar. Growing up in the 1980's in America, as part of the low-ish middle class, I felt like I didn't have too many choices: go to school, go to college (hopefully without accumulating crushing debt), get a job that wasn't too terrible, and settle in to life. It wasn't very glamorous, but glamorous seemed more or less impossible, or at least too difficult. Now as an adult entering middle age, having been blessed to find an actual vocation, I maybe have picked up some delusions of grandeur: that maybe more than just shuffling along the mortal coil is a possibility.
But I need to check myself, and particularly I need to check myself against the only standard that I really can check myself: Jesus. Did he get upset about politics? No, not really, and let's face it, Herod and Pilate were pretty bad dudes. Maybe he didn't rail against secular authorities because he was, as Howard Thurman says, "a man with his back against the wall," and he knew how that confrontation was going to go (as it eventually did). But the more I read the Scriptures the more I'm convinced that it was more a matter of understanding that they didn't matter, even when they could kill the body. He chose, instead, to take on the religious authorities, who had played the system and tried to put God into service for their own ends and their own glory. That is idolatry, and that needs to be challenged wherever we find it: church, politics and in our own hearts. I increasingly mistrust candidates who use their faith as a political tool.
This is not an excuse for Christians to disengage from the political process, but it is an important corrective to our frantic and often decidedly negative political positions. We do have a voice. Democracy itself is a metahistorical trend. As Dr. King said, "the arc of history is long and bends towards justice." The fact that we haven't perfected it yet probably should not surprise anyone.
I am frustrated by the process because I want us to transcend self interest, fear and hatred, but I just don't know if we can do it. I am constantly challenged to try and follow Jesus through this mess, because I know he would not avoid it, but I am also aware that he would not try to take the reigns, because his kingdom is not of this world. That is my hope, and maybe the only thing that keeps me sane.
See? Less than a paragraph in and I'm in a freaking quagmire of negativity, and feeling like I have taken Barack Obama sorely for granted.
So here, I need to examine myself. What is it that bothers me so much about this? I know for a fact that the President is an office that is largely symbolic, with a very limited ability to force changes through an unwilling legislative branch or a gatekeeping judiciary. If my boy Bernie did get himself in, it would not mean that we instantly flashed back to the Roosevelt years. He would still have to deal with Turtleman and his flunkies, and let's face it, while I agree with Bernie's principals about wealth inequality and economics in general, I know there is no magic bullet that's going to slay the dragon of human greed, and one man, even the President, can fix this mess alone.
What really gets me upset though is that it all seems so hopeless, in other words I feel like it is utterly beyond my control. And I don't like that feeling. It's way too familiar. Growing up in the 1980's in America, as part of the low-ish middle class, I felt like I didn't have too many choices: go to school, go to college (hopefully without accumulating crushing debt), get a job that wasn't too terrible, and settle in to life. It wasn't very glamorous, but glamorous seemed more or less impossible, or at least too difficult. Now as an adult entering middle age, having been blessed to find an actual vocation, I maybe have picked up some delusions of grandeur: that maybe more than just shuffling along the mortal coil is a possibility.
But I need to check myself, and particularly I need to check myself against the only standard that I really can check myself: Jesus. Did he get upset about politics? No, not really, and let's face it, Herod and Pilate were pretty bad dudes. Maybe he didn't rail against secular authorities because he was, as Howard Thurman says, "a man with his back against the wall," and he knew how that confrontation was going to go (as it eventually did). But the more I read the Scriptures the more I'm convinced that it was more a matter of understanding that they didn't matter, even when they could kill the body. He chose, instead, to take on the religious authorities, who had played the system and tried to put God into service for their own ends and their own glory. That is idolatry, and that needs to be challenged wherever we find it: church, politics and in our own hearts. I increasingly mistrust candidates who use their faith as a political tool.
This is not an excuse for Christians to disengage from the political process, but it is an important corrective to our frantic and often decidedly negative political positions. We do have a voice. Democracy itself is a metahistorical trend. As Dr. King said, "the arc of history is long and bends towards justice." The fact that we haven't perfected it yet probably should not surprise anyone.
I am frustrated by the process because I want us to transcend self interest, fear and hatred, but I just don't know if we can do it. I am constantly challenged to try and follow Jesus through this mess, because I know he would not avoid it, but I am also aware that he would not try to take the reigns, because his kingdom is not of this world. That is my hope, and maybe the only thing that keeps me sane.
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
On Progress
I want to be careful here, but there's something that needs said, and I'm going to try and stay in my lane, check my privilege and all that sort of thing. When it comes to the issue of race in this country we have a problem. People all sort of disagree as to what the problem is, and maybe there is no single right answer that truly defines it. I'm going to talk mostly from my white perspective, because that's all I'm really qualified to do. But before I get to that I would like to put a quote from Chris Rock before you, because it feels pretty fresh to me, and hopeful maybe:
It does point out, rightly I think, that what improvement we have seen in this regard was largely due to the willingness of those with the power (white people) to let go of the power they once held unconditionally and inescapably over black people. Did we do this willingly? Did we do this gracefully? Did we do this completely? No, no and no, which means we are human beings and certainly a work in progress.
Chris Rock and Barack Obama exist in a world that would have been unimaginable to someone in 1950, white or black. It is my hope that Rock's kids, the Obama girls, my nieces and nephews, and my own kids will live in a world that is even better still. For that to happen, I think, a new frontier will need to be crossed, and it doesn't so much have to do with race as with class. See among the educated and the elite of the world, the dominant pathos is that equality has become normalized. If you have money, you are equal, regardless of your race. If you achieve at a high level you are equal. There would be no outcry about an interracial couple among lawyers and doctors and college professors. In the society of the polite and powerful, the struggle against racism is about knocking off a few remaining ugly warts, dealing with un-examined privilege, rooting out tacit stereotypes and prejudice. It's mostly genteel, intellectual stuff like engaging in constructive listening, open dialogue and working towards a more mutual understanding. At this level, most of the white participants can claim to be "colorblind," due to their friendly rapport with the black people that occupy this segment of society. In fairness, I think we can honestly say that there is good work being done here.
But out on the street I'm afraid it is not so rosy. Among the largely segregated populations of poor and lower middle class, animosity and fear still rule. Let's be honest here too, it is an equal opportunity oppressor. Black folk are afraid of the police (and they have some reason). Police are afraid of the restless and crime-riddled population of which they have only the most tenuous control. Poor whites are angry, resentful and hyper-sensitive about even discussing racism. It's all "politically correct" nonsense. Their experience of "interracial dialogue" is mostly being told what they're allowed to say and allowed to think. They can't keep track of whether it's okay to say black or whether they should be still saying African American, and they honestly don't understand why it's such a big deal. There is a vague feeling that white people are being marginalized, which is true, but it's more economic than racial.
In this sphere, people see riots, assaults on police and other white folk, even the Beyonce halftime show as an assault on the last little toehold they have on the glorious days of the old republic. Here the decision to ban the Rebel flag is taken personally, and they dislike the elite every bit as much as they dislike the "takers." We have indeed produced many "nicer white people," but fear and hatred still hold on tight in some quarters. And mostly their grip is strengthened by feelings of marginalization and persecution (whether real or imagined).
It very well might be the case that the only way to win the last battle for equality is to start seriously waging the fight against poverty and class inequity. I know that seems dangerous and difficult, but how else are we going to grow?
The advantage my children have is that they are encountering the nicest white people America has ever produced. Let's hope America keeps producing nicer white people.Now on the one hand, I'm aware that this is the optimistic opinion of a black man who has done very well for himself in the entertainment industry and thus now occupies a privileged place in society. But I would like to think that actually what he says is true, we are much better about the race issue than we were fifty years ago, and leaps and bounds better than we were 150 years ago. That doesn't mean we're done growing though, and it doesn't mean everything is okay.
It does point out, rightly I think, that what improvement we have seen in this regard was largely due to the willingness of those with the power (white people) to let go of the power they once held unconditionally and inescapably over black people. Did we do this willingly? Did we do this gracefully? Did we do this completely? No, no and no, which means we are human beings and certainly a work in progress.
Chris Rock and Barack Obama exist in a world that would have been unimaginable to someone in 1950, white or black. It is my hope that Rock's kids, the Obama girls, my nieces and nephews, and my own kids will live in a world that is even better still. For that to happen, I think, a new frontier will need to be crossed, and it doesn't so much have to do with race as with class. See among the educated and the elite of the world, the dominant pathos is that equality has become normalized. If you have money, you are equal, regardless of your race. If you achieve at a high level you are equal. There would be no outcry about an interracial couple among lawyers and doctors and college professors. In the society of the polite and powerful, the struggle against racism is about knocking off a few remaining ugly warts, dealing with un-examined privilege, rooting out tacit stereotypes and prejudice. It's mostly genteel, intellectual stuff like engaging in constructive listening, open dialogue and working towards a more mutual understanding. At this level, most of the white participants can claim to be "colorblind," due to their friendly rapport with the black people that occupy this segment of society. In fairness, I think we can honestly say that there is good work being done here.
But out on the street I'm afraid it is not so rosy. Among the largely segregated populations of poor and lower middle class, animosity and fear still rule. Let's be honest here too, it is an equal opportunity oppressor. Black folk are afraid of the police (and they have some reason). Police are afraid of the restless and crime-riddled population of which they have only the most tenuous control. Poor whites are angry, resentful and hyper-sensitive about even discussing racism. It's all "politically correct" nonsense. Their experience of "interracial dialogue" is mostly being told what they're allowed to say and allowed to think. They can't keep track of whether it's okay to say black or whether they should be still saying African American, and they honestly don't understand why it's such a big deal. There is a vague feeling that white people are being marginalized, which is true, but it's more economic than racial.
In this sphere, people see riots, assaults on police and other white folk, even the Beyonce halftime show as an assault on the last little toehold they have on the glorious days of the old republic. Here the decision to ban the Rebel flag is taken personally, and they dislike the elite every bit as much as they dislike the "takers." We have indeed produced many "nicer white people," but fear and hatred still hold on tight in some quarters. And mostly their grip is strengthened by feelings of marginalization and persecution (whether real or imagined).
It very well might be the case that the only way to win the last battle for equality is to start seriously waging the fight against poverty and class inequity. I know that seems dangerous and difficult, but how else are we going to grow?
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Revenge on the Nerds
Thanks to John Hughes kids who grew up in the 1980's have adopted a rather interesting piece of mythology: Nerd power. Read his filmography and you find numerous entries where the social caste system of American adolescents was raked over the coals. The messages of a lot of these movies was pretty clear: some day you and the popular kids will be on equal ground, and then your inherent intelligence and sensitivity will bloom like a flower. And to a certain extent that is true, the popularity contests really don't last much longer than high school, but never assume that human nature undergoes any sort of fundamental change.
There are still bullies. There are still many ways in you always sort of remain that kid you were in high school, for better and for worse. There are still moments as adults where you run into this:
There are still bullies. There are still many ways in you always sort of remain that kid you were in high school, for better and for worse. There are still moments as adults where you run into this:
That, for those of you who don't know is a character called Ogre, a member of the jock fraternity in the movie Revenge of the Nerds. The movie revolves around a bunch of stereotypical nerds, thick glasses, pocket protectors, obnoxious laughs, social awkwardness and above average intelligence. It is two hours of brain melting burlesque comedy, I don't recommend it, if you really want to experience the 1980s nerd phenomenon, Mr. Hughes is a much better way to go. The basic gist is that Nerds can rise up and challenge the popular and the powerful, they can use their wits and their inherent character to win the day. It's generally a nice fiction.
But fiction it is, because the reality is that popularity and winning are still highly valued in our society. Evidenced by the rise of the political fortunes of one Donald J. Trump. Politicians on the national level have been, for a long time, nerds. Not all of them, but enough of them to justify calling it a trend. And we the voters are like Molly Ringwald, torn between a really good-hearted nerd, and the dashing popular captain of the football team. In my lifetime, we have seen Nixon (nerd, albeit of the sinister sort), give way to Ford (football player at Michigan), give way to Carter (Nuclear engineer, down home Sunday School teacher), give way to Ronald Raygun (nuff said), give way to George H.W. Bush (not gone do it, no sir, don't like broccoli), give way to Bill (slick Willy) Clinton, give way to George W. Bush (baseball party guy, but still I think awkward enough to be a Nerd), now Barack Obama (who I think is a sort of cool-ish nerd). Obama definitely has the smarts to fit the bill, and he's got the tone of voice for sure, but he is the sort of suave, cool, confident fellow who can manage to court both Michelle Obama and the American people, despite those ears.
There has been a teeter totter of nerds and jocks going back a long way (even the famously macho Teddy Roosevelt, was a sickly kid who, until he took to taming badgers and riding moose, would certainly have been considered a nerd).
And this bolsters us with the idea that you can rise up and become great no matter what lunch table you sat at in High School. I've got bad news for you though nerds, the popular kids and the bullies are still around. No matter how well you think you're doing Bernie Sanders, Hilary is still the homecoming queen of the party and she's got all those superdelegates in her pocket. No matter how much people like you Marco, The Donald, and Chris Christie are still going to be able to shove you into a locker, and they don't give a hoot if you are the captain of the debate team. You're probably also going to have to deal with sociopathic people from your own set, like Ted Cruz (definitely on the Nixon side of the nerd continuum).
Unfortunately for all of us, politics remains largely a popularity contest. I don't actually want to know how true this is. I would love to think that, like in those movies, Molly Ringwald is going to see who the real hero is, but the more Trump hangs around, the more I'm afraid it's going to be this guy:
And let's face it we're in for a show down between that and this:
And that kind of makes me feel:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)