Archives
Links
It appears that Colorado Springs, Colorado, is applying market capitalism in pure form[link]. If you support government funding for any of these areas that are being cut, then you are a pinko communist. (Yes, you read it in an American newspaper!]
What's new?
TRUE CAPITALISM
Logical Extension of Anti-Socialism
By Dwight Swanson
It appears that Colorado Springs, Colorado, is applying market capitalism in pure form[link]. If you support government funding for any of these areas that are being cut, then you are a pinko communist. (Yes, you read it in an American newspaper!]
It appears that Colorado Springs, Colorado, is applying market capitalism in pure form[link]. If you support government funding for any of these areas that are being cut, then you are a pinko communist. (Yes, you read it in an American newspaper!]
§ ¶ 
default - 
No comments - 31 01 10
Remembering
A Remembrance Day Homily
By Dwight Swanson
On 11 November, 1918, the guns fell silent on what had been the bloodiest war in human history. From November 1919 until today the moment that the guns stopped, on the 11th hour, has been the moment for everyone to stop and remember the cost in human lives, and to vow, ‘Never again!’ The horrors experienced led those who had experienced it to hope that by remembering the cost, it would have been ‘a war to end all wars’.
Some 16 million people died, and another 21 million were wounded, in that war—37 million people. In the destruction, nearly 7 million civilians were killed. (Information on casualties for WWI and WWII is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org)
The remembering did not have its desired effect then, as perhaps even now. Only thirty years later the Second World War began. No one knows just how many died—estimates vary between 50 and 78 million, perhaps up to 52 million of them civilians.
How can we gain perspective on how many real people died? Imagine the entire population of the UK being wiped out over the period of six years. (more)
On 11 November, 1918, the guns fell silent on what had been the bloodiest war in human history. From November 1919 until today the moment that the guns stopped, on the 11th hour, has been the moment for everyone to stop and remember the cost in human lives, and to vow, ‘Never again!’ The horrors experienced led those who had experienced it to hope that by remembering the cost, it would have been ‘a war to end all wars’.
Some 16 million people died, and another 21 million were wounded, in that war—37 million people. In the destruction, nearly 7 million civilians were killed. (Information on casualties for WWI and WWII is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org)
The remembering did not have its desired effect then, as perhaps even now. Only thirty years later the Second World War began. No one knows just how many died—estimates vary between 50 and 78 million, perhaps up to 52 million of them civilians.
[How can we fathom such numbers of dead? We have become numbed to the deaths of others. An American study recently reported that ‘the average child will watch 8,000 murders on TV before finishing elementary school. By age eighteen, the average American has seen 200,000 acts of violence on TV, including 40,000 murders.’ British viewing figures may be lower, but Britain is the gaming capital of the world, and games such as Grand Theft Auto and Modern Warfare probably make the American number of simulated deaths witnessed pale into insignificance beside the more exciting prospect of killing virtual people in true Rambo fashion.]
How can we gain perspective on how many real people died? Imagine the entire population of the UK being wiped out over the period of six years. (more)
§ ¶ default - No comments - 08 11 09
Moral Values
War on Terror, War on Drugs
By Dwight Swanson
The War on Terror is nearing its ninth year, with neither indication that an end to this war is possible, nor any way of knowing whether the expenditure in bombs and lives has had any effect whatsoever on the intentions of those who use the methods of ‘terror’.
The news this week of the US ‘crackdown’ on the Mexican drug cartel, La Familia, offers a fitting comparison to the nebulous war declared by George W Bush. It was another Republican president, Richard Nixon, who declared a ‘War on Drugs’ in 1969 (this date from that impeccable source, Wikipedia, fits with the Editor’s memory). This ‘war’ is still being fought forty years later.
It is being fought in Mexico, Columbia, and Afghanistan, to name but a few places. Immense resources are dedicated to the battles by Western nations to try to stop the flow of the drugs that reach our streets and decimate succeeding generations of youth. This does not include the cost in lives of innocent people at every stage of production and consumption—the producing countries enduring drip-feed wars between drug-lords, militias, and governments, each seeking leverage for more power, all terrorising the local populations; the consuming countries enduring the crime perpetrated by the addicts, and the gang violence that goes with selling of the drugs, which still does not compare to the loss of lives, break-up of families, rehab and medical costs, and, not least, the lost potential of thousands of people’s lives.
One phrase of the news report of the US crackdown, which took place across 19 states, and cities from Seattle to Boston, stood out. According to this report, 80% of the drugs produces or trafficked through Mexico go to the US, ‘to feed the insatiable appetite for illegal drugs’.
One more battle in the War on Drugs. Who is winning? Who is winning the War on Terror?
Meanwhile the Church worries about creeping socialism, homosexual marriages, and woman bishops, while bored young people stand on the street corners of cities and towns across the country with nothing better to do than sink into chemical induced forgetfulness, and over-bonused financial wizards and over-paid celebrity ‘heroes’ snort cocaine.
Neither war can be won. Terror and drug-use, alike, are symptoms of the ills of our society. Until we address the causes, we will make no progress against the symptoms.
The causes of each are not wholly unrelated. Each might be seen as expressions from those marginalised by societies which value personal comfort without thought to the cost of that comfort—cost to the societies from whom the wealth is taken; cost to the societies who live in comfort, but are empty at the centre.
The War on Terror is nearing its ninth year, with neither indication that an end to this war is possible, nor any way of knowing whether the expenditure in bombs and lives has had any effect whatsoever on the intentions of those who use the methods of ‘terror’.
The news this week of the US ‘crackdown’ on the Mexican drug cartel, La Familia, offers a fitting comparison to the nebulous war declared by George W Bush. It was another Republican president, Richard Nixon, who declared a ‘War on Drugs’ in 1969 (this date from that impeccable source, Wikipedia, fits with the Editor’s memory). This ‘war’ is still being fought forty years later.
It is being fought in Mexico, Columbia, and Afghanistan, to name but a few places. Immense resources are dedicated to the battles by Western nations to try to stop the flow of the drugs that reach our streets and decimate succeeding generations of youth. This does not include the cost in lives of innocent people at every stage of production and consumption—the producing countries enduring drip-feed wars between drug-lords, militias, and governments, each seeking leverage for more power, all terrorising the local populations; the consuming countries enduring the crime perpetrated by the addicts, and the gang violence that goes with selling of the drugs, which still does not compare to the loss of lives, break-up of families, rehab and medical costs, and, not least, the lost potential of thousands of people’s lives.
One phrase of the news report of the US crackdown, which took place across 19 states, and cities from Seattle to Boston, stood out. According to this report, 80% of the drugs produces or trafficked through Mexico go to the US, ‘to feed the insatiable appetite for illegal drugs’.
One more battle in the War on Drugs. Who is winning? Who is winning the War on Terror?
Meanwhile the Church worries about creeping socialism, homosexual marriages, and woman bishops, while bored young people stand on the street corners of cities and towns across the country with nothing better to do than sink into chemical induced forgetfulness, and over-bonused financial wizards and over-paid celebrity ‘heroes’ snort cocaine.
Neither war can be won. Terror and drug-use, alike, are symptoms of the ills of our society. Until we address the causes, we will make no progress against the symptoms.
The causes of each are not wholly unrelated. Each might be seen as expressions from those marginalised by societies which value personal comfort without thought to the cost of that comfort—cost to the societies from whom the wealth is taken; cost to the societies who live in comfort, but are empty at the centre.
§ ¶ default - No comments - 25 10 09
A Very Philippine Response to the Typhoon
By Dwight Swanson
Over the past week the Asian Pacific has born the brunt of disasters of nature. The tsunami in Samoa and the earthquake in Indonesia followed hard on the devastating typhoon that hit Manila. The nature of 24-hour news coverage—endless repetition of the non-news until major events occur, then saturation coverage until the next event—with its short attention span, means the Manila disaster was quickly forgotten. Tsanumis are fascinating; earthquakes give opportunity for Western rescue teams to rush off to save lives. Flooding offers neither.
Having lived for some time in Manila, and having experienced one ‘super typhoon’, this story is not only more personal, it offers opportunity to offer a local perspective on the clean-up. These countries cannot handle such over-whelming disasters alone, but they do not simply stand around waiting for salvation.
The seminary campus where I taught for two years sits on two hills divided by a normally lazy and languid stream, above the city of Manila in the suburb of Taytay. The Guardian published pictures from the neighbourhood:
The swollen creek inundated the seminary chapel:
The squatter community next door was less fortunate, lying lower to the water. Two children perished. The campus became a refuge for nearly 300 people, as the students and faculty opened all buildings for people house them, cooked meals, and donated dry clothing. One student with medical training treated minor injuries for 150 people. Each family was given a ‘Crisis Care Kit’.
When the water retreated, the students set to clearing the knee-deep mud from the chapel, and then worshipped together.
After three days, the government was able to relocate the refugees to temporary housing. How long that lasts, is to early to know. But it is certain the students will be involved in helping the displaced to rebuild when they are able to return. Hopefully, the squatters will be able to build on safer ground, with more substantial housing. That is the next stage of the story—and another matter in its own right.
Over the past week the Asian Pacific has born the brunt of disasters of nature. The tsunami in Samoa and the earthquake in Indonesia followed hard on the devastating typhoon that hit Manila. The nature of 24-hour news coverage—endless repetition of the non-news until major events occur, then saturation coverage until the next event—with its short attention span, means the Manila disaster was quickly forgotten. Tsanumis are fascinating; earthquakes give opportunity for Western rescue teams to rush off to save lives. Flooding offers neither.
Having lived for some time in Manila, and having experienced one ‘super typhoon’, this story is not only more personal, it offers opportunity to offer a local perspective on the clean-up. These countries cannot handle such over-whelming disasters alone, but they do not simply stand around waiting for salvation.
The seminary campus where I taught for two years sits on two hills divided by a normally lazy and languid stream, above the city of Manila in the suburb of Taytay. The Guardian published pictures from the neighbourhood:
The swollen creek inundated the seminary chapel:
The squatter community next door was less fortunate, lying lower to the water. Two children perished. The campus became a refuge for nearly 300 people, as the students and faculty opened all buildings for people house them, cooked meals, and donated dry clothing. One student with medical training treated minor injuries for 150 people. Each family was given a ‘Crisis Care Kit’.
When the water retreated, the students set to clearing the knee-deep mud from the chapel, and then worshipped together.
After three days, the government was able to relocate the refugees to temporary housing. How long that lasts, is to early to know. But it is certain the students will be involved in helping the displaced to rebuild when they are able to return. Hopefully, the squatters will be able to build on safer ground, with more substantial housing. That is the next stage of the story—and another matter in its own right.
§ ¶ default - No comments - 04 10 09
Measuring the Good in the Big Bad City
It's not in the numbers
By Dwight Swanson
Our church is in a part of town instantly recognised by people who know Manchester in terms like ‘deprived’, or ‘drugs and gangs’, or ‘bad’. The mental image will be of feral ‘yoof’.
Young people here are not your typical middle-class sort of adolescents.
Chances are their parents found themselves unemployed and unemployable during the Recession of the 1980s, when unemployment here reached 50% at one point, and didn’t fall below 25% for a decade. Chances are they have never seen their parents work.
Chances are the idea of having a job is not part of their mental framework, or ‘world view’, if you will. One of the lads at the church’s Youth Club mentioned once that he aspired to working a particular job, and was laughed down by his mates.
Over the past 25 years we have offered a ‘Youth Club’ at the church off and on. Sometimes more off than on. Most of the time the youth workers have been typical young people enthusiastic to do something for God, but from very different backgrounds than those of the youth who would come into the building. In recent years the leadership is properly qualified in youth work, and able to lead the volunteers wisely. But, the youth are still much the same.
When the youth club is ‘off’, it tends to be because much of the membership is in jail. The club takes a break, then starts again later, sometimes with a new generation.
In earlier times we attempted to make place for them in our church services. If the lights were on in our building in the evening (we use the same space for both worship and weekly activities), the lads would flock to them like moths. They were hilariously disruptive; once they placed pictures of nude women in all the Bibles. Eventually we had to exclude them from services, and placed bouncers at the door (it was helpful to have some large college students in the church). One had his jacket sliced with a knife. While wearing the jacket.
These stories may tend to reinforce the stereotype of the community, but are not intended to. They express reality. But they are not the whole story.
Our pastor related the story today of a conversation with a couple of the lads this week. They sat still for a while, and became reflective, in a young person sort of way. And expressed what they hoped for their own futures. She noticed new tattoos peaking out from the sleeves of their T-shirts, and asked to see them. They were awkward about revealing them. They turned out to be henna tattoos; but they were the sign of the dominant local gang.
Young boys with the desire for a future life like other boys; yet, if those tattoos become permanent, heading for a too familiar future. Which future it will be is not set. But the ‘cards’ are stacked heavily against the hopeful outcome.
This is but one facet of life in this part of the city. More work with young people takes place outside of church buildings. The term used these days is ‘Detached Work’. Instead of creating a programme and trying to get young people to come, the youth workers go where the young people are. On their ground and on their terms. It seldom registers on the sort of records either churches or governments keep. But from time to time it reveals another facet of life, as this past week, with photos. People like Gideon have been quietly spending time with young people, below the public radar, for years. They simply get alongside, and offer space and opportunity for hope to take expression. Read about it here (link).
Another facet is caught by the light. Just one of many.
Our church is in a part of town instantly recognised by people who know Manchester in terms like ‘deprived’, or ‘drugs and gangs’, or ‘bad’. The mental image will be of feral ‘yoof’.
Young people here are not your typical middle-class sort of adolescents.
Chances are their parents found themselves unemployed and unemployable during the Recession of the 1980s, when unemployment here reached 50% at one point, and didn’t fall below 25% for a decade. Chances are they have never seen their parents work.
Chances are the idea of having a job is not part of their mental framework, or ‘world view’, if you will. One of the lads at the church’s Youth Club mentioned once that he aspired to working a particular job, and was laughed down by his mates.
Over the past 25 years we have offered a ‘Youth Club’ at the church off and on. Sometimes more off than on. Most of the time the youth workers have been typical young people enthusiastic to do something for God, but from very different backgrounds than those of the youth who would come into the building. In recent years the leadership is properly qualified in youth work, and able to lead the volunteers wisely. But, the youth are still much the same.
When the youth club is ‘off’, it tends to be because much of the membership is in jail. The club takes a break, then starts again later, sometimes with a new generation.
In earlier times we attempted to make place for them in our church services. If the lights were on in our building in the evening (we use the same space for both worship and weekly activities), the lads would flock to them like moths. They were hilariously disruptive; once they placed pictures of nude women in all the Bibles. Eventually we had to exclude them from services, and placed bouncers at the door (it was helpful to have some large college students in the church). One had his jacket sliced with a knife. While wearing the jacket.
These stories may tend to reinforce the stereotype of the community, but are not intended to. They express reality. But they are not the whole story.
Our pastor related the story today of a conversation with a couple of the lads this week. They sat still for a while, and became reflective, in a young person sort of way. And expressed what they hoped for their own futures. She noticed new tattoos peaking out from the sleeves of their T-shirts, and asked to see them. They were awkward about revealing them. They turned out to be henna tattoos; but they were the sign of the dominant local gang.
Young boys with the desire for a future life like other boys; yet, if those tattoos become permanent, heading for a too familiar future. Which future it will be is not set. But the ‘cards’ are stacked heavily against the hopeful outcome.
This is but one facet of life in this part of the city. More work with young people takes place outside of church buildings. The term used these days is ‘Detached Work’. Instead of creating a programme and trying to get young people to come, the youth workers go where the young people are. On their ground and on their terms. It seldom registers on the sort of records either churches or governments keep. But from time to time it reveals another facet of life, as this past week, with photos. People like Gideon have been quietly spending time with young people, below the public radar, for years. They simply get alongside, and offer space and opportunity for hope to take expression. Read about it here (link).
Another facet is caught by the light. Just one of many.
§ ¶ default - one comment - 27 09 09
US Arms Sales Rocket
No recession for death-dealers
By Dwight Swanson
While the American public is distracted by fears that the President was going to try to indoctrinate their children into Socialism, just like Hitler did with his Hitler Youth (with no apparent sense of irony in pairing these contradictory ideologies in one sentence) with one speech, no one seems to have noticed the publication of figures for the trade in weapons of mass destruction for 2008. The sums are breathtaking (link):
Note the date—2008, last year of the presidency of George W Bush. Republicans are good for big business. And, it seems, the business of war is booming. Bush’s tax cuts for big business really worked.
Does anyone wonder where the guns come from that keep the world’s poorest people in perpetual agony? The figures above make very clear where 68.4% of them come from.
So, America, let me get this straight: one president takes the country into two wars at the cost of trillions of dollars, and places American business at the centre of provision of arms for wars all over the world, and is good because that is capitalism; another president seeks to provide health care for the children of his own country, and is bad because that is socialism.
While the American public is distracted by fears that the President was going to try to indoctrinate their children into Socialism, just like Hitler did with his Hitler Youth (with no apparent sense of irony in pairing these contradictory ideologies in one sentence) with one speech, no one seems to have noticed the publication of figures for the trade in weapons of mass destruction for 2008. The sums are breathtaking (link):
‘The United States signed weapons agreements valued at $37.8 billion in 2008, or 68.4 percent of all business in the global arms bazaar, up significantly from American sales of $25.4 billion the year before…Italy was a distant second, with $3.7 billion in worldwide weapons sales in 2008, while Russia was third with $3.5 billion in arms sales last year’
Note the date—2008, last year of the presidency of George W Bush. Republicans are good for big business. And, it seems, the business of war is booming. Bush’s tax cuts for big business really worked.
Does anyone wonder where the guns come from that keep the world’s poorest people in perpetual agony? The figures above make very clear where 68.4% of them come from.
So, America, let me get this straight: one president takes the country into two wars at the cost of trillions of dollars, and places American business at the centre of provision of arms for wars all over the world, and is good because that is capitalism; another president seeks to provide health care for the children of his own country, and is bad because that is socialism.
§ ¶ default - No comments - 08 09 09
What should a Christian do?
Can one be ‘conservative’?
By Dwight Swanson
The Editor has been critical of Christian opposition to universal health care in the US. Unsurprisingly, even those who have read the Gazelle have remained unmoved. The Gazelle has also commented before on the questionable dualism of Christian Fundamentalism—the division of the world between the Religious Right and everyone else along lines of good vs evil. The commonly repeated assertion that President Obama is evil, and therefore anything he proposes is evil, is the case in point raised by the health care debate.
On one hand this can be argued at a political level, if there was any hope of rational discussion. But, the shouting at town meetings across the country is ample evidence that this will never happen.
What is a Christian approach to such questions? How does a Christian interpret current issues in the light of Scripture? Or, to put this another way, how do Christians relate to their own societies and cultures? Do the categories of ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ apply?
One of the greatest problems the Gazelle finds with current American Religious Right reaction to the election of President Obama is its parochialism. That is, Bible Belt America thinks that the details of Armageddon are based on American politics, as though God’s plans are wholly based on the affairs of this late-comer to global history.
Christians need to think beyond their own national(ist) concerns. There is a lot of world outside the US.
The Editor will be on hiatus for the next three weeks. When the Gazelle returns, the focus will be on a biblical theology for Christians in these times of fear.
The Editor has been critical of Christian opposition to universal health care in the US. Unsurprisingly, even those who have read the Gazelle have remained unmoved. The Gazelle has also commented before on the questionable dualism of Christian Fundamentalism—the division of the world between the Religious Right and everyone else along lines of good vs evil. The commonly repeated assertion that President Obama is evil, and therefore anything he proposes is evil, is the case in point raised by the health care debate.
On one hand this can be argued at a political level, if there was any hope of rational discussion. But, the shouting at town meetings across the country is ample evidence that this will never happen.
What is a Christian approach to such questions? How does a Christian interpret current issues in the light of Scripture? Or, to put this another way, how do Christians relate to their own societies and cultures? Do the categories of ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ apply?
One of the greatest problems the Gazelle finds with current American Religious Right reaction to the election of President Obama is its parochialism. That is, Bible Belt America thinks that the details of Armageddon are based on American politics, as though God’s plans are wholly based on the affairs of this late-comer to global history.
Christians need to think beyond their own national(ist) concerns. There is a lot of world outside the US.
The Editor will be on hiatus for the next three weeks. When the Gazelle returns, the focus will be on a biblical theology for Christians in these times of fear.
§ ¶ default - No comments - 19 08 09
Off on a few tangents: from the Saturday morning paper
1. OK, Just a little more about the NHS
By Dwight Swanson
A cartoonist has a go at American hysteria about the NHS link
An American in Britain figures he’ll stay over here.link
Columnist Simon Hoggart speaks about his 91 year-old father’s hospitalisation in response to the claim that the elderly are denied health care under the NHS: ‘I was thinking of this during a visit to my 91-year-old dad who is still in an NHS hospital after three weeks, recovering from a broken hip. He has had fantastic care, including a new metal hip, blood transfusions, different antibiotics to match every aspect of his condition; all administered by nurses who remain cheerful even when asked to perform tasks on men – the lethal combination of pain and old age makes some in the ward exceedingly grumpy – that I would not want to do for £1,000 a time. If he was in an American hospital he'd be using up half his life savings to get that standard of care, and few ordinary Americans could afford the insurance that would provide it. (This is because health insurers spend a large part of their income on PR against the "socialised medicine" and on sending pro forma letters explaining why your policy doesn't cover actual illness.) All over the US there are people whose lives are being destroyed for lack of proper health care provision, and there is no sight more odious than the rich, powerful and arrogant trying to keep it that way.’
Think of the NHS as kind of like the Church. Or, vice versa.link
A cartoonist has a go at American hysteria about the NHS link
An American in Britain figures he’ll stay over here.link
Columnist Simon Hoggart speaks about his 91 year-old father’s hospitalisation in response to the claim that the elderly are denied health care under the NHS: ‘I was thinking of this during a visit to my 91-year-old dad who is still in an NHS hospital after three weeks, recovering from a broken hip. He has had fantastic care, including a new metal hip, blood transfusions, different antibiotics to match every aspect of his condition; all administered by nurses who remain cheerful even when asked to perform tasks on men – the lethal combination of pain and old age makes some in the ward exceedingly grumpy – that I would not want to do for £1,000 a time. If he was in an American hospital he'd be using up half his life savings to get that standard of care, and few ordinary Americans could afford the insurance that would provide it. (This is because health insurers spend a large part of their income on PR against the "socialised medicine" and on sending pro forma letters explaining why your policy doesn't cover actual illness.) All over the US there are people whose lives are being destroyed for lack of proper health care provision, and there is no sight more odious than the rich, powerful and arrogant trying to keep it that way.’
Think of the NHS as kind of like the Church. Or, vice versa.link
§ ¶ default - No comments - 16 08 09
Featured article
SHOCK: Provincial American Newspaper Calls for More Socialism!
By Dwight Swanson
A small-town newspaper in the state of Colorado has called for more socialism in its editorial column.
"Colorado needs a health care funding solution"
"The cost of public health care at any of the state’s hospitals should be affordable to patients, and the public health care they receive at a Colorado hospital should be top-notch.
If we believe both of those statements are true, Colorado must overhaul its budget process. Both quality and affordability in public health care require substantial investment, which is hindered by the state’s budget system during financially lean years.
Health care is one of the only areas of discretionary spending in the state budget. State sentencing laws require a certain amount of spending for prisons; a constitutional requirement protects funding for K-12 institutions; and federal requirements for Medicaid eat up another large portion of Colorado’s general fund. When those budget items must grow, but the state budget cannot, that squeezes public health care.
There are reassurances that health care funding isn’t on the chopping block for next year. Boulder Rep. Jack Pommer, who will head the Joint Budget Committee, said last week health care funding won’t face cuts in 2010 because the state must maintain a certain spending level to receive federal stimulus funding."
Is this the beginning of the end of American capitalism as we know it?
[NOTICE: Yes, the article is actually talking about higher education. The Editor has exchanged 'higher-education' for 'health care'. If one is socialist, so is the other.]
A small-town newspaper in the state of Colorado has called for more socialism in its editorial column.
"Colorado needs a health care funding solution"
"The cost of public health care at any of the state’s hospitals should be affordable to patients, and the public health care they receive at a Colorado hospital should be top-notch.
If we believe both of those statements are true, Colorado must overhaul its budget process. Both quality and affordability in public health care require substantial investment, which is hindered by the state’s budget system during financially lean years.
Health care is one of the only areas of discretionary spending in the state budget. State sentencing laws require a certain amount of spending for prisons; a constitutional requirement protects funding for K-12 institutions; and federal requirements for Medicaid eat up another large portion of Colorado’s general fund. When those budget items must grow, but the state budget cannot, that squeezes public health care.
There are reassurances that health care funding isn’t on the chopping block for next year. Boulder Rep. Jack Pommer, who will head the Joint Budget Committee, said last week health care funding won’t face cuts in 2010 because the state must maintain a certain spending level to receive federal stimulus funding."
Is this the beginning of the end of American capitalism as we know it?
[NOTICE: Yes, the article is actually talking about higher education. The Editor has exchanged 'higher-education' for 'health care'. If one is socialist, so is the other.]
§ ¶ linkdump - No comments - 31 10 09
The Religious ‘Right’ and Fox News Fiction
By Dwight Swanson
It has become a common-place to hear testimonials to the Fox News (aka Fiction) Network from Christians of the Religious Right. They will make clear that it is the only news they follow because, they will say, it is unbiased (meaning, it tells the news as they wish it to be), in distinction to all other news providers which are run by godless liberals.
This trust in Fox is bemusing. Clearly none of these family-values, high morality believers has asked themselves the question as to what interest Fox has in their support, and what Christians actually get in return.
Has anyone asked who Rupert Murdoch is? And what might be behind his control of major networks in every English-speaking country, and newspapers in every major city? And his efforts to reduce the competition? Or, how much his influence on heads of state, who woo him, matters for Christian concerns?
In the UK, his empire is currently attacking the BBC’s public funding support. Free-market ideologists in the US may have no trouble with this, but then, you have become used to 20 minutes of commercials in every hour. The BBC continues to show its lack of bias in reporting by virtue of the unhappiness with every government with its reporting. Murdoch’s newspaper has begun a campaign for the Conservatives already. As they say on Fox: 'Fair and balanced'.
Right wing Christians are deluded if they think the Fox Network cares ‘beans’ about them beyond their money, and readiness to vote the way they recommend.
As for support for Evangelical values? The Editor monitors a wide variety of news websites, including Fox. One UK paper (The Daily Mail) outdoes Fox in confusing entertainment with news. Here are the headlines from the last couple days of logging on to ‘Fox Breaking News’:
Simpsons' Playboy Pictorial: Marge is naked in Playboy, and FOX News.com has learned Hef may be courting even more cartoon cuties (link)
14 Baseball-Loving Ladies: Marilyn Monroe married Joe DiMaggio, and famous women haven't stopped since. Here are 13 more celebs who love their ballplayers... (link). (Don’t miss the cover photos.)
Pastor Benny Hinn: Charlatan or Man of God? (link) What? An exposè? No. But, great concluding soundbite! (No place for lofty theologians on Fox. Guess Rupert won't be phoning me.)
Praising Unnatural Beauty: Contestants show off breast implants, nose jobs and face lifts as Miss Plastic Hungary 2009 promotes benefits of all things fake (link) Most uplifting! (Any Christian TV hostesses included?)
Ah, yes. Fox is clearly targeting the Evangelicals!
[‘Test the spirits to see whether they are from God’, 1 John 4:1]
It has become a common-place to hear testimonials to the Fox News (aka Fiction) Network from Christians of the Religious Right. They will make clear that it is the only news they follow because, they will say, it is unbiased (meaning, it tells the news as they wish it to be), in distinction to all other news providers which are run by godless liberals.
This trust in Fox is bemusing. Clearly none of these family-values, high morality believers has asked themselves the question as to what interest Fox has in their support, and what Christians actually get in return.
Has anyone asked who Rupert Murdoch is? And what might be behind his control of major networks in every English-speaking country, and newspapers in every major city? And his efforts to reduce the competition? Or, how much his influence on heads of state, who woo him, matters for Christian concerns?
In the UK, his empire is currently attacking the BBC’s public funding support. Free-market ideologists in the US may have no trouble with this, but then, you have become used to 20 minutes of commercials in every hour. The BBC continues to show its lack of bias in reporting by virtue of the unhappiness with every government with its reporting. Murdoch’s newspaper has begun a campaign for the Conservatives already. As they say on Fox: 'Fair and balanced'.
Right wing Christians are deluded if they think the Fox Network cares ‘beans’ about them beyond their money, and readiness to vote the way they recommend.
As for support for Evangelical values? The Editor monitors a wide variety of news websites, including Fox. One UK paper (The Daily Mail) outdoes Fox in confusing entertainment with news. Here are the headlines from the last couple days of logging on to ‘Fox Breaking News’:
Simpsons' Playboy Pictorial: Marge is naked in Playboy, and FOX News.com has learned Hef may be courting even more cartoon cuties (link)
14 Baseball-Loving Ladies: Marilyn Monroe married Joe DiMaggio, and famous women haven't stopped since. Here are 13 more celebs who love their ballplayers... (link). (Don’t miss the cover photos.)
Pastor Benny Hinn: Charlatan or Man of God? (link) What? An exposè? No. But, great concluding soundbite! (No place for lofty theologians on Fox. Guess Rupert won't be phoning me.)
Praising Unnatural Beauty: Contestants show off breast implants, nose jobs and face lifts as Miss Plastic Hungary 2009 promotes benefits of all things fake (link) Most uplifting! (Any Christian TV hostesses included?)
Ah, yes. Fox is clearly targeting the Evangelicals!
[‘Test the spirits to see whether they are from God’, 1 John 4:1]
§ ¶ linkdump - one comment - 11 10 09
When the Politics of Hate Goes Too Far
Condoning the Idea of Assassination
By Dwight Swanson
This observer has been disturbed by the level of hatred and vitriol directed at President Obama, which bears no relation to anything he has actually done, let alone proposed. And with the willing endorsement of those who call themselves Christian. And not just Christian, but true, born-again genuine-as-opposed-to-liberal-nominal-call-themselves-but-really-are-not Christians.
Thomas L Friedman, of the New York Times, has just written an editorial which expresses what has disturbed me (link). Sadly, I am aware that the above mentioned Christians will dismiss Friedman out of hand because he writes for the NY Times. Such people need to read this. And consider where their hatred is leading them. And consider what such hatred has to do with Jesus Christ.
This observer has been disturbed by the level of hatred and vitriol directed at President Obama, which bears no relation to anything he has actually done, let alone proposed. And with the willing endorsement of those who call themselves Christian. And not just Christian, but true, born-again genuine-as-opposed-to-liberal-nominal-call-themselves-but-really-are-not Christians.
Thomas L Friedman, of the New York Times, has just written an editorial which expresses what has disturbed me (link). Sadly, I am aware that the above mentioned Christians will dismiss Friedman out of hand because he writes for the NY Times. Such people need to read this. And consider where their hatred is leading them. And consider what such hatred has to do with Jesus Christ.
§ ¶ linkdump - No comments - 01 10 09
The War on Terror
and the Cycle of Revenge
By Dwight Swanson
News from Somalia, confirmed by US officialslink, reports the death of a leading Al Qaida figure by missiles fired from an American helicopter. The embattled government of Somalia is delighted. The insurgent group, unsurprisingly, vows revenge on America.
The cycle of violence continues:
Firstly (as far as we can say at this moment), certain Islamist groups, particularly Bin Laden’s al Qaida, take issue with the West, particularly the US, and the result is 9/11.
In response, the West, particularly the US, respond with decisive action in Afghanistan, ousting the Taliban and sending Bin Laden running for the hills.
In response, Saleh Ali Nabhan carries out the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, as well as a hotel in Mombasa.
In response, the US tracks Saleh down in the wastes of Somalia, and take him as he drives along in a car. They take his body with them.
In response, al-Shabab (Nabhan’s group) vow revenge.
And, in response…?
The endless cycle escalates, drawing more and more actors into the violence. Civilised Moderns find the biblical ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ to be a barbaric relic of a primitive past. But it was, and is, a restraining influence on an unlimited cycle of revenge. Who will hear?
What has been accomplished in these eight years? How many dead? How much closer to peace? How much more do the combatants understand each other now, beyond the refining of the techniques of killing?
In the aftermath of 9/11 the Editor suggested that a response to the atrocity might be to engage with poor Muslim countries to address their poverty rather than to bomb them (see The Daily Gazelle archives for September 2006). It was considered then, and no doubt will continue to be so considered, ‘airy-fairy’ thinking.
But, has the policy of bombs solved the problem? The present US administration may have dropped the name ‘War on Terror’, but the policy has not changed.
The cycle continues.
News from Somalia, confirmed by US officialslink, reports the death of a leading Al Qaida figure by missiles fired from an American helicopter. The embattled government of Somalia is delighted. The insurgent group, unsurprisingly, vows revenge on America.
The cycle of violence continues:
Firstly (as far as we can say at this moment), certain Islamist groups, particularly Bin Laden’s al Qaida, take issue with the West, particularly the US, and the result is 9/11.
In response, the West, particularly the US, respond with decisive action in Afghanistan, ousting the Taliban and sending Bin Laden running for the hills.
In response, Saleh Ali Nabhan carries out the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, as well as a hotel in Mombasa.
In response, the US tracks Saleh down in the wastes of Somalia, and take him as he drives along in a car. They take his body with them.
In response, al-Shabab (Nabhan’s group) vow revenge.
And, in response…?
The endless cycle escalates, drawing more and more actors into the violence. Civilised Moderns find the biblical ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’ to be a barbaric relic of a primitive past. But it was, and is, a restraining influence on an unlimited cycle of revenge. Who will hear?
What has been accomplished in these eight years? How many dead? How much closer to peace? How much more do the combatants understand each other now, beyond the refining of the techniques of killing?
In the aftermath of 9/11 the Editor suggested that a response to the atrocity might be to engage with poor Muslim countries to address their poverty rather than to bomb them (see The Daily Gazelle archives for September 2006). It was considered then, and no doubt will continue to be so considered, ‘airy-fairy’ thinking.
But, has the policy of bombs solved the problem? The present US administration may have dropped the name ‘War on Terror’, but the policy has not changed.
The cycle continues.
§ ¶ linkdump - one comment - 17 09 09
The First Gardener
By Dwight Swanson
Gardening is a respected British occupation. It is not a pastime. England’s ‘green and pleasant land’, in fact, is a garden. Anyone who has flown over the countryside on a clear day has marvelled at the patchwork parcels of fields, the work of millennia of farmers working the land.
In 2000 we moved, for the first time in our lives, into our own house; and I became a gardener. At one time I thought I would log the hours I spent on the garden. But, before the three years of clearing out the jungle and rubble to reach ground zero were complete I lost track. In the fourth year the joy of creating something new out of nothing began with the planting of a lawn and the first bushes.
This Summer, following two drenched Summers, the back garden attained the level of maturity which has allowed me to sit and enjoy the form, colour, and chaos of my English garden.
One afternoon this week, just home from the day at the desk, as I sat taking in the view, with the late sun casting shadows through the leaves of the western bushes while setting the eastern blossoms afire; and, wondering at the transformation of this small patch of earth from nine years ago; I was struck by the recollection that God was the first gardener; the first to set apart a space of order in the midst of the chaos of creation.
Jews and Christians praise the God of creation, in wonder at the diversity and beauty of ‘nature’ formed by His Word. At the same time, that creation left alone is either jungle or desert. But, the Human in service of the earth has repeatedly wrestled the ground into form and patterns of beauty, too.
According to Genesis 2, God himself set the Humans in his garden as gardeners, to take part in his creative work. Even my paltry effort at an English garden is a partnership with the Creator in creation. In some way, his work is not complete without Human involvement.
Gardening is a respected British occupation. It is not a pastime. England’s ‘green and pleasant land’, in fact, is a garden. Anyone who has flown over the countryside on a clear day has marvelled at the patchwork parcels of fields, the work of millennia of farmers working the land.
In 2000 we moved, for the first time in our lives, into our own house; and I became a gardener. At one time I thought I would log the hours I spent on the garden. But, before the three years of clearing out the jungle and rubble to reach ground zero were complete I lost track. In the fourth year the joy of creating something new out of nothing began with the planting of a lawn and the first bushes.
This Summer, following two drenched Summers, the back garden attained the level of maturity which has allowed me to sit and enjoy the form, colour, and chaos of my English garden.
One afternoon this week, just home from the day at the desk, as I sat taking in the view, with the late sun casting shadows through the leaves of the western bushes while setting the eastern blossoms afire; and, wondering at the transformation of this small patch of earth from nine years ago; I was struck by the recollection that God was the first gardener; the first to set apart a space of order in the midst of the chaos of creation.
Jews and Christians praise the God of creation, in wonder at the diversity and beauty of ‘nature’ formed by His Word. At the same time, that creation left alone is either jungle or desert. But, the Human in service of the earth has repeatedly wrestled the ground into form and patterns of beauty, too.
According to Genesis 2, God himself set the Humans in his garden as gardeners, to take part in his creative work. Even my paltry effort at an English garden is a partnership with the Creator in creation. In some way, his work is not complete without Human involvement.
§ ¶ linkdump - No comments - 19 08 09
Off on a few tangents: from the Saturday morning paper
2. ‘We have met the enemy, and he is us’ (Pogo); Part One
By Dwight Swanson
An Iraqi correspondent meets with Taliban warriors in Afghanistan, and their sense of doing God’s will is prominent in their conversation.link
A Christian who seeks to understand and do God’s will for her/his life will be able to relate to a statement like this:
‘God told us to fight the occupation so the people are against the occupation.’
(Replace ‘the occupation’ with ‘abortion’, or ‘the Antichrist’, or ‘those socialists’, or …)
So, too, the affirmation of faith later spoken later on in the interview will ring familiarly. When a drone flies over and the journalist closes his eyes and ‘waited for the whoosh of a missile’. The commander laughs and says, ‘We believe in God, so don't be scared’. A warrior adds, ‘If you stand still in the dark and not move they can't see you. It's written in the Qu'ran’.
So, too, the concern for an education that is compatible with faith is not a world away from Christian academies and home schooling. When asked why they have closed schools, the reply was, ‘We have no problem with education, it's the curriculums that we have problems with. Under our [Taliban] government, when we taught the children the letter J it stood for jihad. Now it's jar [meaning neighbour]. So we closed the schools, but we have madrasas for the children’.
Yes, of course, they are just ignorant Afghanis, not sophisticated Western Christians. Their God is not really God. The Qu’ran is not truly God’s word; that is the Bible. They are just repeating what they have been taught by their religious leaders. We all know that J stands for Jesus.
An Iraqi correspondent meets with Taliban warriors in Afghanistan, and their sense of doing God’s will is prominent in their conversation.link
A Christian who seeks to understand and do God’s will for her/his life will be able to relate to a statement like this:
‘God told us to fight the occupation so the people are against the occupation.’
(Replace ‘the occupation’ with ‘abortion’, or ‘the Antichrist’, or ‘those socialists’, or …)
So, too, the affirmation of faith later spoken later on in the interview will ring familiarly. When a drone flies over and the journalist closes his eyes and ‘waited for the whoosh of a missile’. The commander laughs and says, ‘We believe in God, so don't be scared’. A warrior adds, ‘If you stand still in the dark and not move they can't see you. It's written in the Qu'ran’.
So, too, the concern for an education that is compatible with faith is not a world away from Christian academies and home schooling. When asked why they have closed schools, the reply was, ‘We have no problem with education, it's the curriculums that we have problems with. Under our [Taliban] government, when we taught the children the letter J it stood for jihad. Now it's jar [meaning neighbour]. So we closed the schools, but we have madrasas for the children’.
Yes, of course, they are just ignorant Afghanis, not sophisticated Western Christians. Their God is not really God. The Qu’ran is not truly God’s word; that is the Bible. They are just repeating what they have been taught by their religious leaders. We all know that J stands for Jesus.
§ ¶ linkdump - No comments - 16 08 09
Off on a few tangents: from the Saturday morning paper
3. ‘We have met the enemy, and he is us’ (Pogo, 1953); Part Two
By Dwight Swanson
Mehdi Karroubi, one of the presidential candidates who lost out in the recent Iranian elections, likens the treatment of protestors in prison to the treatment of Iraqi prisoners by Americans in Abu Ghraib.link
In a statement he is reported to say that protestors who were arrested were ‘forced to go naked, crawl on their hands and knees like animals, with prison guards riding on their backs’, and forced to lie naked, on top of one another’.
He is a brave man, for the immediate response from a prominent religious leader was that this statement was ‘full of libel, a total slander against the Islamic system’ and a boost to Iran’s enemies. An aide to the ‘Supreme Leader’, Khameini, called for him to be prosecuted.
The chief of Iran’s police has admitted that torture took place, and the head of the prison has been dismissed (hopefully not removed). But allegations of rape of both male and female prisoners, and deaths, have been denied.
As I read this story, it seemed I was peering through a looking glass. This mirrors to a remarkable degree the response of the American administration when the Abu Ghraib story came out. The significant, and crucial, difference, of course, is that the open democratic society in the US did not allow trials for those who were responsible for revealing what was going on.
Mehdi Karroubi, one of the presidential candidates who lost out in the recent Iranian elections, likens the treatment of protestors in prison to the treatment of Iraqi prisoners by Americans in Abu Ghraib.link
In a statement he is reported to say that protestors who were arrested were ‘forced to go naked, crawl on their hands and knees like animals, with prison guards riding on their backs’, and forced to lie naked, on top of one another’.
He is a brave man, for the immediate response from a prominent religious leader was that this statement was ‘full of libel, a total slander against the Islamic system’ and a boost to Iran’s enemies. An aide to the ‘Supreme Leader’, Khameini, called for him to be prosecuted.
The chief of Iran’s police has admitted that torture took place, and the head of the prison has been dismissed (hopefully not removed). But allegations of rape of both male and female prisoners, and deaths, have been denied.
As I read this story, it seemed I was peering through a looking glass. This mirrors to a remarkable degree the response of the American administration when the Abu Ghraib story came out. The significant, and crucial, difference, of course, is that the open democratic society in the US did not allow trials for those who were responsible for revealing what was going on.
§ ¶ linkdump - No comments -
ASSISTED SUICIDE
A new name for mercy killing
By Dwight Swanson
On the topic of health…
The British public supports assisted suicide for terminally ill people. The Royal College of Nurses has moved from a position of opposition to ‘neutrality’ following a poll of its members which shows a nearly even division of opinion. The point of interest seems to be the avoidance of pain in the process of dying.
If you believe the report in Assisted suicide, there is a sophisticated awareness of the subtleties in the viewpoints. (One wonders how poll questions reveal sophistication.)
The ethical questions are, to be sure, complex. This is the nature of ethical matters in our time. The article refers to the ‘slippery slope’ argument in an off-handed manner. This is the concern that the approval of helping people in late stages of terminal illness now will lead to approval of assisted death in less clear cases later on.
This argument cannot casually be brushed aside. The question which has to be asked at every stage is, who decides? Who decides at what point the quality of life is no longer sustainable? Who decides when life is no longer worth living? Who decides who is not worth keeping alive?
Christian belief is criticised for its belief in the ‘exceptionalism’ of human life over other animal life. The idea that there is any ‘sanctity of life’ is dismissed out of hand. But it is. at the least, a voice against the diminution of human life to a utilitarian value which is determined by the people in power on a given day.
Suffering is an agonising human problem which begs for mercy. But not mercy killing. And those who value life have the responsibility to care for life in the midst of suffering.
But it is the nature of society that, when the value of life is diminished, more people are considered of less value. Consider Social Democracy in Germany under Hitler.
On the topic of health…
The British public supports assisted suicide for terminally ill people. The Royal College of Nurses has moved from a position of opposition to ‘neutrality’ following a poll of its members which shows a nearly even division of opinion. The point of interest seems to be the avoidance of pain in the process of dying.
If you believe the report in Assisted suicide, there is a sophisticated awareness of the subtleties in the viewpoints. (One wonders how poll questions reveal sophistication.)
The ethical questions are, to be sure, complex. This is the nature of ethical matters in our time. The article refers to the ‘slippery slope’ argument in an off-handed manner. This is the concern that the approval of helping people in late stages of terminal illness now will lead to approval of assisted death in less clear cases later on.
This argument cannot casually be brushed aside. The question which has to be asked at every stage is, who decides? Who decides at what point the quality of life is no longer sustainable? Who decides when life is no longer worth living? Who decides who is not worth keeping alive?
Christian belief is criticised for its belief in the ‘exceptionalism’ of human life over other animal life. The idea that there is any ‘sanctity of life’ is dismissed out of hand. But it is. at the least, a voice against the diminution of human life to a utilitarian value which is determined by the people in power on a given day.
Suffering is an agonising human problem which begs for mercy. But not mercy killing. And those who value life have the responsibility to care for life in the midst of suffering.
But it is the nature of society that, when the value of life is diminished, more people are considered of less value. Consider Social Democracy in Germany under Hitler.
§ ¶ linkdump - two comments - 26 07 09