What occurs to me is that I have been remiss in continuing to be present in the blogosphere. Not a good excuse, but I have finished the final preparation for publishing my first book. Hopefully not my last. I have to say that the more I write with a product in mind, the more fun it has become. My first book is a retrospective on the 20th Century and early 2000s, following the people and events through the life of a remarkable man, my Dad. Born before World War I, he lived through the Depression, was an Army officer during World War II, and was part of a generation of people who went on to build new lives and a new world, creating the most successful nation in the history of the world. His part was unique as those who knew him realized. But his part was not his alone. He was among a generation who saw the future and molded their lives to reach that future, to the benefit of those who would follow. I have told his story. You may have a story to tell also. Tell it. We no longer have the written personal histories which historians will be able to discover in old boxes. We have emails, delete.
Thanks for stopping by.
Wednesday, May 30, 2012
Job Creators
What occurs to me is that there is a lot of discussion about job creators which makes very little sense to me. In a former lifetime, I owned and ran a business, and at its peak, there were over 80 people who worked for me. I wasn't a job creator. The people I did business with, my customers, were the job creators. When I started, I had four employees. As business increased, I hired more people, and we became more diversified. We had established a reputation for both service and quality, and word spread, and as our volume increased, in order to maintain that reputation, we brought on more people. It isn't wealthy people making investments that create jobs, it's people spending money on goods and services which they want and need. If helping the job creators is a reasonable goal of the government, then putting policies in place to put Americans back to work is the only real way to support job creators. The more people who have more to spend, the more jobs will be created. According to an association of engineers, civil engineers I think, America has 2.2 trillion dollars worth of infrastructure creation, repair and maintenance that needs to be done. Even if its spread over 10 years, $220 billion dollars will put a lot of people back to work doing things which need to be done. It will also help bring back the support services for the businesses, reduce the government outlay for unemployment (the amount of which is never discussed and financial statistics are not readily available), open doors for the youth who will be the source of future development, and will help reduce our national debt. The rich aren't job creators, and its time we all get that message.
I have listened to "job creators" for a decade, and wonder where are the jobs? The wealthy have had the vast benefit of all the tax reductions and the rhetoric. Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?
Thanks for stopping by.
I have listened to "job creators" for a decade, and wonder where are the jobs? The wealthy have had the vast benefit of all the tax reductions and the rhetoric. Mr. Boehner, where are the jobs?
Thanks for stopping by.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Paying taxes
What occurs to me is that like most people, I hate paying taxes. Yet, I can't help but wonder how we would all have any services provided if we didn't pay taxes. So let's talk about it. I pay property taxes which pays for schools, garbage pickup, street repair, lighted streets, police patrolling, street cleaning, recycling, tree maintenance and public park maintenance. None of these things could I do for myself. I pay an assessment for local sewer, which I certainly can't and wouldn't want to take care of myself. There are probably other things my local taxes are used for, but I can't think of them right now.
I pay taxes to the state, which goes for many things, similar in content to what the Federal government uses my taxes for. I also pay a sales tax, a separate cigarette tax (yeah, I still smoke), a liquor tax (occasionally), car registration fees, and other fees which don't come to mind right now.
I pay income tax to the Federal government, as well as all the other add-ons which show up in products and services I purchase, like the Federal gas tax, Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, disability and again, other fees and taxes some of which none of us really knows or even thinks about.
I am no different from most people when it comes to taxes. But what may be different is that I don't think taxes are such a bad thing. Don't get me wrong. I'd rather have the money, but I also look at how the money is being used, and by and large, my money pays for things which I think benefit all of us. Now, there's an argument to be made here, I know. So let's have it.
Right now, the Federal government brings in less than it spends. In the past decade or so, the Federal government gave two major tax cuts, financed two wars, and created a new Medicare program to pay for drugs for the elderly. The Federal government bailed out our financial system and the automobile industry. No wonder we have a budget deficit and national debt. Prior to this massive outpouring of generosity, the budget was balanced and the national debt was being reduced. That's important to remember.
Yet, the Republican Congress and recalcitrant Senate Republicans have stepped aside from their responsibility to govern, and have made regaining the White House their singular agenda. The problem of having financially solvent governments at all levels is having enough money to operate on, and enough restraint to remember its not their money being spent. The solution is not more taxes or less spending, its both.
If you don't think you're paying for this depression, you're wrong. There are 30 million people who would like to be working more than they are. That's a lot of tax revenue. Many of those people have collected unemployment, which came from state revenue, then Federal revenue, for those who went past 26 weeks. The governments may have helped with medical bills, food, child care for them also, as well as others. While the unemployment rate remains up, no improvement in our housing values is likely to happen. My house is way down. How about yours?
What needs to happen is a tax increase, not just on the rich. Folks, we're in this together. We also need to get rid of the free ride corporations have, and other tax breaks for special interests. I mean all of them. Look at it this way--when you're bleeding to death, bandaids don't work, and a transfusion is a waste. What we need is to stop the bleeding, first. We need to restructure what we are paying for, then ease into cuts if they are necessary. We need to use all resources, including tax money, to put people back to work. That includes training of chronically un- and underemployed. When the programs have been set up and offered, then we can say if you don't want to work, it's on you.
There will always be those who miss the bus, who will never get on it. There are those who for reasons beyond their control will always need help. And that's when the governments must step in. I don't have a problem with the government getting tougher, but not on an ideological basis. This is a society supposedly based on Judeo-Christian ethics. To me, that's do unto others, love thy neighbor. Maybe it's time to remember that. It's not a sound bite, but a way of life. And the way we need to live. We're in this boat together, and either a rising tide lifts us all, or we're all sunk.
If you don't agree, take a shot. I can take it.
Thanks for stopping by.
I pay taxes to the state, which goes for many things, similar in content to what the Federal government uses my taxes for. I also pay a sales tax, a separate cigarette tax (yeah, I still smoke), a liquor tax (occasionally), car registration fees, and other fees which don't come to mind right now.
I pay income tax to the Federal government, as well as all the other add-ons which show up in products and services I purchase, like the Federal gas tax, Social Security, Medicare, unemployment, disability and again, other fees and taxes some of which none of us really knows or even thinks about.
I am no different from most people when it comes to taxes. But what may be different is that I don't think taxes are such a bad thing. Don't get me wrong. I'd rather have the money, but I also look at how the money is being used, and by and large, my money pays for things which I think benefit all of us. Now, there's an argument to be made here, I know. So let's have it.
Right now, the Federal government brings in less than it spends. In the past decade or so, the Federal government gave two major tax cuts, financed two wars, and created a new Medicare program to pay for drugs for the elderly. The Federal government bailed out our financial system and the automobile industry. No wonder we have a budget deficit and national debt. Prior to this massive outpouring of generosity, the budget was balanced and the national debt was being reduced. That's important to remember.
Yet, the Republican Congress and recalcitrant Senate Republicans have stepped aside from their responsibility to govern, and have made regaining the White House their singular agenda. The problem of having financially solvent governments at all levels is having enough money to operate on, and enough restraint to remember its not their money being spent. The solution is not more taxes or less spending, its both.
If you don't think you're paying for this depression, you're wrong. There are 30 million people who would like to be working more than they are. That's a lot of tax revenue. Many of those people have collected unemployment, which came from state revenue, then Federal revenue, for those who went past 26 weeks. The governments may have helped with medical bills, food, child care for them also, as well as others. While the unemployment rate remains up, no improvement in our housing values is likely to happen. My house is way down. How about yours?
What needs to happen is a tax increase, not just on the rich. Folks, we're in this together. We also need to get rid of the free ride corporations have, and other tax breaks for special interests. I mean all of them. Look at it this way--when you're bleeding to death, bandaids don't work, and a transfusion is a waste. What we need is to stop the bleeding, first. We need to restructure what we are paying for, then ease into cuts if they are necessary. We need to use all resources, including tax money, to put people back to work. That includes training of chronically un- and underemployed. When the programs have been set up and offered, then we can say if you don't want to work, it's on you.
There will always be those who miss the bus, who will never get on it. There are those who for reasons beyond their control will always need help. And that's when the governments must step in. I don't have a problem with the government getting tougher, but not on an ideological basis. This is a society supposedly based on Judeo-Christian ethics. To me, that's do unto others, love thy neighbor. Maybe it's time to remember that. It's not a sound bite, but a way of life. And the way we need to live. We're in this boat together, and either a rising tide lifts us all, or we're all sunk.
If you don't agree, take a shot. I can take it.
Thanks for stopping by.
Monday, April 16, 2012
Guns and Tears, Part 4-The Guns
What occurs to me is that in the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin killing, and subsequent arrest (finally) of George Zimmerman the routinely unmentioned question of guns has been absent throughout the coverage. So let's talk about it. I'm not against guns, nor am I unfamiliar with them. Many people own them, most who are responsible people who respect the power that guns have. Unfortunately, especially for those responsible people, there are many who are not. Among those who are irresponsible I number Wayne Lapierre and the NRA. In a country where there are more guns than people, and where guns are included in so many deaths, it seems to me that there must be a middle ground where guns stop being mentioned in the death statistics we constantly hear.
Trayvon Martin was killed by a gun. The person who killed him probably should not have had one. In an op-ed piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer this past week, the writer told of 8 killings of young African American males and wounding of 35 others who were taken to Temple University Hospital, since the beginning of 2012. Over the weekend, there were 5 people killed in Oklahoma by two men who randomly selected people in a predominantly black community. Killed by guns, not by racism.
The NRA refuses to accept that the product of guns and irresponsibility is death. I'm not talking about hunters or collectors or recreational users. And I'm not talking about the Second Amendment right to own guns, which has been validated by the courts. I'm talking about the logical need for control of those who would purchase for the purpose of using on other people. Law enforcement knows this is happening, legislators know it is happening, and yet the middle ground solutions don't ever seem to be found.
I was confronted with an argument recently which is compelling. Let everyone carry, and then there would be a deterrent. Criminals would be more reluctant if they had to decide if the potential victim might be carrying. Let's look at Martin-Zimmerman. If Trayvon were carrying of and was confronted by the gun toting Zimmerman, would the outcome be different. What do you think the probability is that Trayvon would have been arrested on the spot, despite the Stand Your Ground law. What would have been accomplished was another gun death, nothing more.
I remember from not too long ago a saying that went "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." NRA at work. I don't remember however anyone ever suggesting that guns be outlawed. If we seek a more civilized society, a civil dialogue does need to occur. Guns of all kinds have fingerprints, identifiable ballistic fingerprints which can be traced to a particular firearm. If every gun were identifiable, then the geneology of a weapon could be followed. If that gun were then registered, it would have a family tree. If access was limited and transfer was recorded, then where the guns are would be readily available. "Lost" guns would have to be reported.
The argument here is between individual freedoms and the public welfare. Those who oppose gun registration of any kind fall back on their "rights", to the exclusion of the safety and well-being of the rest of us. The statistics are clear. The law enforcement community has already made its position clear. Hunters, you want to shoot animals with automatic weapons, fine. Seems a little unfair, and not very "sportsmanlike". Handgun owners, you need to have one to protect your family, fine. Just keep your 7 year old away from it.
Folks, I don't care if you have a gun. But from a societal viewpoint, we all need to recognize that not everyone who has a gun is going to be a responsible citizen. Those guns really are loose cannons. And unless you want to return to those thrilling days of yesteryear, the Old West, guns need to be out of the reach of those who shouldn't have them. Every time a gun becomes a participant in a crime, a shooting, a killing, those who refuse to recognize my rights to not be shot, those individuals and organizations are at least partially to blame. Especially in cities, where people are crammed together, a more societal solution is required. All you anti-government folks need to get a grip, because nobody wants to take away your guns. All we want is for you not to be part of the problem by fighting what really needs to be done.
If people who shouldn't have guns didn't, only those who know how to be responsible members of our society will have guns. And all the Trayvon Martins will still be alive.
Thanks for stopping by.
Trayvon Martin was killed by a gun. The person who killed him probably should not have had one. In an op-ed piece in the Philadelphia Inquirer this past week, the writer told of 8 killings of young African American males and wounding of 35 others who were taken to Temple University Hospital, since the beginning of 2012. Over the weekend, there were 5 people killed in Oklahoma by two men who randomly selected people in a predominantly black community. Killed by guns, not by racism.
The NRA refuses to accept that the product of guns and irresponsibility is death. I'm not talking about hunters or collectors or recreational users. And I'm not talking about the Second Amendment right to own guns, which has been validated by the courts. I'm talking about the logical need for control of those who would purchase for the purpose of using on other people. Law enforcement knows this is happening, legislators know it is happening, and yet the middle ground solutions don't ever seem to be found.
I was confronted with an argument recently which is compelling. Let everyone carry, and then there would be a deterrent. Criminals would be more reluctant if they had to decide if the potential victim might be carrying. Let's look at Martin-Zimmerman. If Trayvon were carrying of and was confronted by the gun toting Zimmerman, would the outcome be different. What do you think the probability is that Trayvon would have been arrested on the spot, despite the Stand Your Ground law. What would have been accomplished was another gun death, nothing more.
I remember from not too long ago a saying that went "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." NRA at work. I don't remember however anyone ever suggesting that guns be outlawed. If we seek a more civilized society, a civil dialogue does need to occur. Guns of all kinds have fingerprints, identifiable ballistic fingerprints which can be traced to a particular firearm. If every gun were identifiable, then the geneology of a weapon could be followed. If that gun were then registered, it would have a family tree. If access was limited and transfer was recorded, then where the guns are would be readily available. "Lost" guns would have to be reported.
The argument here is between individual freedoms and the public welfare. Those who oppose gun registration of any kind fall back on their "rights", to the exclusion of the safety and well-being of the rest of us. The statistics are clear. The law enforcement community has already made its position clear. Hunters, you want to shoot animals with automatic weapons, fine. Seems a little unfair, and not very "sportsmanlike". Handgun owners, you need to have one to protect your family, fine. Just keep your 7 year old away from it.
Folks, I don't care if you have a gun. But from a societal viewpoint, we all need to recognize that not everyone who has a gun is going to be a responsible citizen. Those guns really are loose cannons. And unless you want to return to those thrilling days of yesteryear, the Old West, guns need to be out of the reach of those who shouldn't have them. Every time a gun becomes a participant in a crime, a shooting, a killing, those who refuse to recognize my rights to not be shot, those individuals and organizations are at least partially to blame. Especially in cities, where people are crammed together, a more societal solution is required. All you anti-government folks need to get a grip, because nobody wants to take away your guns. All we want is for you not to be part of the problem by fighting what really needs to be done.
If people who shouldn't have guns didn't, only those who know how to be responsible members of our society will have guns. And all the Trayvon Martins will still be alive.
Thanks for stopping by.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Guns and Tears, Part 3-Rush to Judgment
It occurs to me that there is a great deal of commentary regarding the Trayvon Martin case, much of which has been described as race baiting and a rush to judgment. In the month since this killing took place, there are numerous details, some contradictory, which have become part of the public discourse. "The facts" are never going to be fully known. There are some however that are clear. Trayvon Martin is dead, his crime being only that he was a black male, walking through an apartment complex wearing a "hoodie." His killer was George Zimmerman. He has not been arrested to date.
In America, we have a system of laws and law enforcement, which for the most part, works. We have a court system which also works pretty well. And as citizens, we all have rights. If we are involved in a crime, theoretically we are subject to law enforcement and the judicial system. Here is another fact for the Martin case portfolio. As of this writing, the law enforcement and judicial parts of our system have malfunctioned. Ultimately, this may change, but I wonder if that would be the case if there had not been so much public attention. I think not. Since Trayvon was killed, there have been 16 killings, attributable to race, which have not received any amount of public scrutiny.
I sympathize with Trayvon's parents, and can never truly understand the underlying fear that parents must have for the safety of their children if they are poor, minority or of some other group that might be targeted. But as I have already said, the white middle class is not immune, and if the conditions which allow such killings are not controlled and eliminated, we may be hearing about killings in revenge, but with no relation to the kids who are killed. They will be declared as random or unrelated, but we will all know that the reason was simply a response to our failure to demand justice when we know that it has been ignored.
I don't know what happened when Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman met that night in Florida. I do know that Zimmerman admitted the killing. I also know that were the roles reversed, Trayvon would have been arrested. Period. No question. Only through a court process will the events be presented and judged. I don't know what the outcome will be. But I have studied history, and there are many examples of institutional failures which led to the end of civilized society. We have seen it before and we have today a much more rapid means to let the world know what is going on. The social media has helped to end the regime in Egypt. It has described the situation in Libya and in Syria. It has expanded the "99%" movement, and has a major role in political activities here. The use of the ether can be a source to change our social interactions for the benefit of all, or it can be a source of creating warring factions which will destroy what we all want to consider a civilized society.
There are two common factors that connect unrest with uprising. The first is a fertile environment; the second is guns. And without the second, you can grow flowers.
Thanks for stopping by.
In America, we have a system of laws and law enforcement, which for the most part, works. We have a court system which also works pretty well. And as citizens, we all have rights. If we are involved in a crime, theoretically we are subject to law enforcement and the judicial system. Here is another fact for the Martin case portfolio. As of this writing, the law enforcement and judicial parts of our system have malfunctioned. Ultimately, this may change, but I wonder if that would be the case if there had not been so much public attention. I think not. Since Trayvon was killed, there have been 16 killings, attributable to race, which have not received any amount of public scrutiny.
I sympathize with Trayvon's parents, and can never truly understand the underlying fear that parents must have for the safety of their children if they are poor, minority or of some other group that might be targeted. But as I have already said, the white middle class is not immune, and if the conditions which allow such killings are not controlled and eliminated, we may be hearing about killings in revenge, but with no relation to the kids who are killed. They will be declared as random or unrelated, but we will all know that the reason was simply a response to our failure to demand justice when we know that it has been ignored.
I don't know what happened when Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman met that night in Florida. I do know that Zimmerman admitted the killing. I also know that were the roles reversed, Trayvon would have been arrested. Period. No question. Only through a court process will the events be presented and judged. I don't know what the outcome will be. But I have studied history, and there are many examples of institutional failures which led to the end of civilized society. We have seen it before and we have today a much more rapid means to let the world know what is going on. The social media has helped to end the regime in Egypt. It has described the situation in Libya and in Syria. It has expanded the "99%" movement, and has a major role in political activities here. The use of the ether can be a source to change our social interactions for the benefit of all, or it can be a source of creating warring factions which will destroy what we all want to consider a civilized society.
There are two common factors that connect unrest with uprising. The first is a fertile environment; the second is guns. And without the second, you can grow flowers.
Thanks for stopping by.
Friday, March 30, 2012
Some things for Spring
It occurs to me that we need a little whimsy on a sunny Spring day. This is the time of year that I love the best. For the past few years, I have increased my gardening skills to make an impact on my morning walk to pick up the newspaper. (Yes, I still read one, made of printers ink and wood pulp!) Spring came early here this year. Two weeks ago, crocuses said "We're back." The daffodils followed, and are now completing their visit. This week, the tulips exploded in the colorful display I keep hoping for. Bright red, soft white, yellow, purple. Lilies are pushing up, daylilies are green and growing. I dug a new bed for the three hydrangeas I bought. I have callas, oriental lilies, begonias, and foxglove ordered. The peonies are stretching and after 3 years, I hope to have some SERIOUS plants. The rhododendron is starting to bud. Even the boxwoods have a bunch of new growth. I love digging in the dirt. Next come the veggies-tomatoes, peppers, and whatever else seems interesting.
Winter officially ends on Monday, according to me. After a long winter, the NCAA March Madness finals will crown a champion, and winter is over. And next week is Opening Day. For those of you who don't know, that means its baseball season. Finally, again. Go PHILS.
Thanks for stopping by.
Winter officially ends on Monday, according to me. After a long winter, the NCAA March Madness finals will crown a champion, and winter is over. And next week is Opening Day. For those of you who don't know, that means its baseball season. Finally, again. Go PHILS.
Thanks for stopping by.
Monday, March 26, 2012
Guns and Tears, Part 2
What occurs to me in the aftermath of the Trayvon Martin killing is that there is a long trail of death caused by those willing to use violence against those who are different. As painful as it is for this kid's family, as difficult as it is for people to come to grips with the inaction of authorities, and as inexcusable as the action itself is, it is enlightening to look more closely at the plethora of "hate" crimes, not just in America, but through the world. What is most important in looking at the history is finding the complicity of authority in the continuance of crimes of murder, assault, and other forms of terrorizing.
There appear to be two kinds of activity that can be called "hate crimes". The first type is individual or group on individual; the second is actually more deadly, government sponsored and protected murder. In recent times, according to the American Psychological Association, "Most hate crimes are carried out by otherwise law-abiding young people who see little wrong with their actions. Alcohol and drugs sometimes help fuel these crimes, but the main determinant appears to be personal prejudice, a situation that colors people's judgment, blinding the aggressors to the immorality of what they are doing. Such prejudice is most likely rooted in an environment that disdains someone who is "different" or sees that difference as threatening. One expression of this prejudice is the perception that society sanctions attacks on certain groups." "Extreme hate crimes tend to be committed by people with a history of antisocial behavior. One of the most heinous examples took place in June 1998 in Jasper, Texas. Three men with jail records offered a ride to a black man who walked with a limp. After beating the victim to death, they dragged him behind their truck until his body was partially dismembered."
In France, last week, an attack was made on a Jewish school, killing 3 children and a rabbi. Three white men in Mississippi pleaded guilty last week for killing a black man, beating him to death last year. A woman in California was beaten to death with a tire iron. She was an Iraqi Muslim and was found with a note saying "Go back to your own country, you terrorist."
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in 2011, the number of hate groups in the United States exceeded 1000 for the first time.
This is not new, folks, but is ingrained in American history. Starting with white settlement in the 17th century, systematic killing of those who are "different" is a part of our national DNA. We all know about slavery, the abuses of immigrants, Jim Crow laws and lynch mobs, the KKK, the neo-Nazi "skinheads", the militia groups. We also know about the varied abuses either overlooked by police or direct police participation. Rodney King? What about the gay kid at Rutgers University? or the one in Wyoming a few years ago?
Then we can add those crimes which have been condoned by or caused by the governments world wide. Shia versus Sunni throughout the Middle East. Protestant versus Catholic in Ireland, and throughout history. How about "niggers", "spics", "gooks", "kikes". And there's plenty more, just pick a group. How about Nazi Germany? or the gulags of the Soviet Union? What about the tribal conflicts, murder, maimings, rapes, in a variety of African countries? All these are because people are "different".
What is the common thread? Weapons and power. The power of a government over the people it controls acting outside of moral law is heinous. So is the power of a group to attack, terrorize, and kill. Add to the mix available weapons, and murder is an expected outcome. It hasn't had a reason to stop, because "good" people don't raise their voices. In my opinion, this is the reason that the Trayvon Martin case has been so visible. A kid walking home from a store, talking on the phone with his girlfriend. Dead. Some good people have said, "ENOUGH". Weapons, power, and a government structure willing to look the other way, outside of the law.
I don't know how to stop hate, not a clue. But I do know that if we continue to allow the worst to happen to anyone, randomly, we are in danger of more widespread and dangerous times. And the problem is that we have so much more in common than we have differences, but are unable to get beyond what we have absorbed for so many years. It is naive to think that there are not those who benefit from the continuation of social hatred.
I don't want to think that when I am walking the dog that I need a gun to go around the block. No one should.
Thanks for stopping by.
There appear to be two kinds of activity that can be called "hate crimes". The first type is individual or group on individual; the second is actually more deadly, government sponsored and protected murder. In recent times, according to the American Psychological Association, "Most hate crimes are carried out by otherwise law-abiding young people who see little wrong with their actions. Alcohol and drugs sometimes help fuel these crimes, but the main determinant appears to be personal prejudice, a situation that colors people's judgment, blinding the aggressors to the immorality of what they are doing. Such prejudice is most likely rooted in an environment that disdains someone who is "different" or sees that difference as threatening. One expression of this prejudice is the perception that society sanctions attacks on certain groups." "Extreme hate crimes tend to be committed by people with a history of antisocial behavior. One of the most heinous examples took place in June 1998 in Jasper, Texas. Three men with jail records offered a ride to a black man who walked with a limp. After beating the victim to death, they dragged him behind their truck until his body was partially dismembered."
In France, last week, an attack was made on a Jewish school, killing 3 children and a rabbi. Three white men in Mississippi pleaded guilty last week for killing a black man, beating him to death last year. A woman in California was beaten to death with a tire iron. She was an Iraqi Muslim and was found with a note saying "Go back to your own country, you terrorist."
According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, in 2011, the number of hate groups in the United States exceeded 1000 for the first time.
This is not new, folks, but is ingrained in American history. Starting with white settlement in the 17th century, systematic killing of those who are "different" is a part of our national DNA. We all know about slavery, the abuses of immigrants, Jim Crow laws and lynch mobs, the KKK, the neo-Nazi "skinheads", the militia groups. We also know about the varied abuses either overlooked by police or direct police participation. Rodney King? What about the gay kid at Rutgers University? or the one in Wyoming a few years ago?
Then we can add those crimes which have been condoned by or caused by the governments world wide. Shia versus Sunni throughout the Middle East. Protestant versus Catholic in Ireland, and throughout history. How about "niggers", "spics", "gooks", "kikes". And there's plenty more, just pick a group. How about Nazi Germany? or the gulags of the Soviet Union? What about the tribal conflicts, murder, maimings, rapes, in a variety of African countries? All these are because people are "different".
What is the common thread? Weapons and power. The power of a government over the people it controls acting outside of moral law is heinous. So is the power of a group to attack, terrorize, and kill. Add to the mix available weapons, and murder is an expected outcome. It hasn't had a reason to stop, because "good" people don't raise their voices. In my opinion, this is the reason that the Trayvon Martin case has been so visible. A kid walking home from a store, talking on the phone with his girlfriend. Dead. Some good people have said, "ENOUGH". Weapons, power, and a government structure willing to look the other way, outside of the law.
I don't know how to stop hate, not a clue. But I do know that if we continue to allow the worst to happen to anyone, randomly, we are in danger of more widespread and dangerous times. And the problem is that we have so much more in common than we have differences, but are unable to get beyond what we have absorbed for so many years. It is naive to think that there are not those who benefit from the continuation of social hatred.
I don't want to think that when I am walking the dog that I need a gun to go around the block. No one should.
Thanks for stopping by.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)