The religious right in the US... (random thoughts)

Something that amazes me of the US (and it applies to many other countries) is the power of the religious right or the Evangelical movements. 

All this comes BTW from the current electoral environment in the US. It is very hard not to get emotional (and regardless of my beliefs, I grant I can also be irrational) around the issues discussed in the news and the political sphere. 

On the positive side, churches create a support network for its members, which in a society is always positive. On the other side, the fundamentalism of many of the evangelicals is beyond the borders of simple hysteria. {Ten points if you can find the reference to the "hysterical" masses; you will be surprised}

I think it comes from being a nation that tends to look inside itself and lives with a constant fear to anything outside its norms or control. On the movie "Bowling for Columbine" Michael Moore made an argument around this, although more centered on gun control issues.

I like a couple of comments from comedian Lewis Black: 

• He ponders on why he has never seen a Rabbi on Saturday night TV, interpreting the New Testament to his audience, and yet...
  
• What drives him crazy about creationists, is that they see the Flinstones as a documentary...
  

I also like the comment from Father George Coyne, the  retired head of the Vatican Observatory and former member of the Academy of Sciences: 

“There is no science in the Bible. Zero, none,” Coyne says. “The Bible was written in different times by different people. Some of the books are poetry, some of them are history, some are stories.”

Still, as I mentioned above I understand the "community" aspect churches provide, although as a rationalist humanist I wish that after 200, 000 years of evolution, we would be able to satisfy it just for being humans.

I need to add to my book list "The Assault on Reason" by Al Gore. Although I may not, I can get so passionate about reason (irony intended) that I will just add some stress I do not need and lose the humanism part I try to anchor in, and therefore becoming one more fundamentalist in the whole discussion. The danger of  fundamentalism can be simply summarized on the total lack of empathy for anything it is not like you. This is the definition of evil, no matter how rational or holy it presents itself.

Or as it has been said before:

“I told you once that I was searching for the nature of evil. I think I’ve come close to defining it: a lack of empathy. It’s the one characteristic that connects all the defendants: a genuine incapacity to feel with their fellow man. Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.”

Dr. Gustav M. Gilbert (1946), assigned by the U.S. Army to study the minds and motivations of the Nazi defendants at the Nuremberg tribunals. 

http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/4519/81

On Eco-regulation and other matters...

On a recent thread in a website, there was this person who, on a more Libertarian vein, talking about how he opposed any taxation or government regulation in support of curving global warming. It was his given right as an American to decide if he wanted to do something and how. Although he was on the "eco-friendly" side, his arguments sounded more founded on individual supremacy than common good. 

A few hours later I heard what is the best argument I have ever heard on why government needs to regulate and force industries and individuals to reduce their carbon footprint. 

It was from the administrator of a government facility in California (Ports Authority maybe), who had recently signed an order to change its entire car fleet for electric units and change some of its systems to produce less airborne particles, all with a high price tag. 

When he was asked, in part in order to showcase how irresponsible he was with tax payers money, on why he had done it, his answer was more or less: 

"Well, based on the amount of pollution (airborne particles in particular) we produced, the estimate is that we were cutting short the life (kill) of 1,200 people a year in the city."

The reporter did not asked more questions...

Funny thing about this is that regardless of what an individual does, it is subject to what someone else is doing. It is a forced "second-hand smoker" like issue at a massive scale. As long you share the atmosphere and resources within, you are affected by it. 

Welcome to the 3rd world...

Not long ago I attended a meeting where a motivational speaker made an effort to dispel the idea of a 3rd world country. Although I appreciate his efforts or goals, since then, I have been thinking on what that label means or defines, as compared to a 1st World one or a Failed State. 

I believe a 3rd World country is defined by the multiple factors which complement each other and have a big effect on the overall health of the country; they tend to feed on each other, so resolution tends to be very hard (although not impossible):

1. On the economic you have a small middle class, continuously  moving up and down, a huge low income base and high concentration of production or financial means in the hands of a relatively small group. The typical ratio is 90% of the economy is owned by 10% of the population.  
2. Although there is a strong government, the "rule of law" is defined and dependent on the economics means of the individual. In other words corruption is common, if you have the means you may not gat away with crime, but you will be able to obtain or accelerate services from the different public offices. Therefore there is a cynical distrust of the civil institutions.
3. The family is the center of the society. Lacking a social contract and law umbrella, the only place where the individual can find a secure environment is within the family context; political or religious family ties (like god-parents) are equally valued.
4. This last point is related to the need to conform to the group. The idea of belonging and submitting your morality, behavior and needs to the group are far more important than the individual.  This is not true on the middle class in many cases, as I pointed out before they are not the "average" member of society by any means, and still they will most likely submit themselves to the family rule.
5. Due the lack of a real rule of law, the society as a whole has no moral issues with corruption, as long as I can pay the bribe it is seen as acceptable to pay it. The "everybody is doing it" approach, so only a fool will not take advantage of an opportunity offered by bending a law or process.
6. Since the economy is so concentrated, there is low value given in the low income classes to education as a way to move up in the social scale. As soon you can help your family and get working, the family expects you to do so. Within the middle class education is valued, but the small numbers of the group do not create a sufficient momentum to change society as a whole.
7. There is a generalized lack of hope or a cynical view of the future. You live and die where you are. This creates situations where people tend to live in the moment, there is no such thing as the "pursue of happiness", because by the time you reach your goal, either you are dead or the government will devalue the coin taking away all your efforts, therefore live on the present, "joy" is highly regarded. 

As I said before not a single factor by itself drives a country from one level to another, but corruption (the absence of laws) and the failure of the middle class seem to be common starting factors. So, when corruption and accelerated social economic inequality start growing.

When is a 3rd one falling into a "failed state"? 

• When there is no strong central authority with control over most of the territory. You may have a central government with control of an urban area, the return of the "city state", while the rest is divided by economic, political, and/or para-military clans. 
  
• When the family as a source for social order and secure is insufficient and functions no more. 
• In some African countries, the child soldiers armies are the result of the disbanding of the family unit and the lack of a central authority.

On the rule of law, one of my favorites comments is from Michael Mullane, on the "This I Believe" series. You can read it in here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5442573

The power of music...

Coming back from a recent trip, I was listening to the main theme of the "Hunt of the Red October" movie. It is one of those musical pieces that holds an interesting effect in my mind. 

I should start to point out that I do not speak Russian, therefore my understanding of the lyrics is none. Still every time I listen to it, specially if I am tired (like after a trip), I run through a nice range of emotions on a single instance.

On one side it is the pure joy of the music, the voices, they are beautiful and playful. Then there is a sense of power; just a torrent of adrenaline rushing through the brain (which explains why power is so addictive).

Then there is a huge sadness, derived from the thought of how dying in submarine can be (there is a serious tone in the lyrics), there is no such thing as a glorious dead; OK, maybe I am getting old in here, at my early teens or so my thoughts were different. Which brings me to a pure self analyzing stage, looking into the different threads in my life. 

At the end I am just happy, exhausted but happy, and ready to hit the "Play Again" button (did I mentioned this can be addictive?).

So, if you want to see how Dr. Jeckyll look on his way to Mr. Hyde and back, bring your MP3 or similar player...

Seattle's word...

On the book "Eat, Pray, Love" the author describes how she learns that every city has a single word that describes it. She later extends this concept to the individual. This word indicates what influences the majority of the individuals in that city.

In the book Rome is Sex, the Vatican is Power, New York is Achievement, while Los Angeles is Success. 

I have been thinking about what will be my word and what word you could add to Seattle, and even if this same word expands to the greater Seattle area (i.e. Kirkland).

On my side I think Learning will be the one, although as they point in the book, If I remember correctly, this may change later. 

What will Seattle be? Open? Not always. Questioning? There is a lot of debate all the time. Moving or Running? Change seems a constant in the social area, although it seems it is running in not a straight line. Confused? Hopeful? Wishful?

What do you think?

Eat, Pray, Love...

I recently finished reading a book called "Eat, Pray and Love" by Elizabeth Gilbert. It is a great book. It is the journal of a trip by the author between Italy, India and Indonesia (Bali) in search of balance and peace.

It is full of "Ah!" and "Doh!" moments, written in a funny and very personal way. One of my favorite conversations in the book is when she is talking to an old traditional healer in Bali. he is describing a transcendent experience to her, where he went through the 7 layers of happiness to reach heaven, which is love. Then he tells her there is other way, the 7 levels of misery, which takes you to hell. 

She asks him how is hell, and he simply replies that it is the same place on the other path. How you get there makes all the difference.