Exit, stage left

In 1965, The Byrds covered a Pete Seeger song that ended up being the US #1 hit with the oldest lyrics, namely, Ecclesiastes 3:1-8. It was wisdom all decked out in hippie garb. And even though the song has faded to a mere "classic", what it had to say was as true then as when the words were first written down, and they're just as true today. There is a time for every purpose under heaven.

William Shakespeare, one insightfully poignant observer of life and the human condition, eloquently expressed a corollary of thereof, which we also recognize as true when we are reminded of it, namely,

All the world’s a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts ...
(As You Like It, II, vii)

He then goes on to describe the several seasons of one human life, and in each of these seasons, all those purposes of the Preacher take on differing degrees of emphasis, if not necessity. That is the way of life. We are all called on to decide which roles to play when and how, and what to leave in and what to leave out.

The world is not any better than it was when The Byrds caught my fancy and fired my desires so long ago. I make no bones about it. The world wasn't in good shape then, but I thought it could be changed. I was shown it can be changed, but not necessarily for the better. Well, at least for the better for most of us. Some folks made out like bandits, because most of them were. I believe we're in this life to learn, and I've learned that much at least. Still, I'm ashamed of myself for not managing more. I'll try to do better next time.

This time, of course, it would be tempting to get lost in that thick forest of remembered hopes, dreams, aspirations, failures, illusions, and disappointments, but I have grandsons now who will have to live with what we have done. I have a lot of explaining to do, and more.

In other words, it has become clear, to me at least, that my own purposes, role, and part to play have changed, and there are just so many hours in a day. I think Robert Frost ("Stopping By Woods On A Snowy Evening") sums it up best:

The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep.

Godspeed.

#StopCetaTTIP #StopTISA #CETA #StopTTIP

I'm not at my desk today. Very early this morning, I headed out to do what little I could to make a difference. Today, I'm in Frankfurt am Main, demonstrating against the so-called "free-trade" agreements that our governments are trying to ram down our throats. We need to stop these -- all of them (there are no "good" ones) -- so today I would just like to remind you why:

1. These agreements affect every single one of us, from the highest ranking politician to the highest paid CEO of an international corporation to the lowest paid employee in any of the countries involved in the agreement and all those citizens of those countries, including those not yet born. Any agreement that comprehensive can't be negotiated in secret, for it affects too many people. When so many people have so little to say about what happens to them, it is undemocratic at best, but subversive at worst.
2. If, as we know these agreements foresee, extra-judicial, extra-political, extra-legal "courts" must be established that take precedence over the duly and democratically elected governments of the countries involved, then these agreements are additionally undemocratic and by definition partial to the negotiators and not those afflicted.
3. There is no reasonable, let alone reliable, research that supports the claims regarding increased economic activity or numbers of jobs to be created. Any and every claim is nothing more than a statement, at best, a fraudulent depiction at worst, and should be rejected in either case.
4. Agreements that favor large, multi-national corporations discriminate against and are antithetical to small, local companies (not only mom-and-pop organizations, but also small and mid-sized regionally active ones as well). In other words, such agreements discriminate against an established and desired class of businesses.
5. Although touted as "free-trade" agreements, there is nothing in them (at least not as far as any of the leaked documentation regarding the agreement or the negotiations is concerned, that reflects free-market theory. You don't have to be a fan or advocate of Smith or Friedman to feel that your needs aren't being met here.
6. The most fundamental assumptions underlying any such agreement are based on philosophies and economic theories that have no justification in or documented relevance to actual social and economic realities. (The neo-liberal assumption that all actors in all markets act out of "enlightened self-interest" has never been reasonably or convincingly demonstrated.) There is a serious disconnect between theory and reality.
7. The frameworks that are to be established by such agreements derive from the assumption that governmental intervention in markets is undesirable, yet the benefactors of such intervention are the strongest supporters of such agreements for they have been assured that such interventions will continue once the agreements are in place. In other words, for them, they can't lose.
8. Another underlying assumption of the agreement is that privatized undertakings are always more efficient than government-influenced undertakings, but there is not a shred of reliable evidence anywhere, worldwide, that supports the contention. In other words, the agreement is based and founded on premises that have no basis in reality.
   
9. There are many other, time-tested and proven, ways to promote increased economic activity between entities. There is not just one way. There are alternatives.

All of these issues are known. In other words, they are the simple conclusions that can be drawn from the available documentation, the political discussion, and the factors that have been made public. It hasn't been easy to get this far, for the public discussion up until now has been thwarted by vicious propaganda, clouded by distractions and irrelevant side-discussions, and undermined by so-called experts who are taking part in the negotiations but who are unwilling to divulge necessary details.

If for no other reason, all of these so-called free-trade agreements should be rejected because of the negotiators' insistence upon secrecy. I don't care that education has been driving into the ground in recent decades. I don't care that "the public" is allegedly not well-informed enough to make a competent assessment of the agreement itself. Business and trade are not that complicated that even half-way reasonable individuals can't form an informed opinion about them. The fact that free-trade-agreement whistleblowers have been so aggressively pursued is reason enough to question the legitimacy of the agreements themselves. When one has to resort to such heavy-handed methods for a matter that is purportedly in all our best interest, I don't think it is unreasonable to conclude that perhaps the advocates aren't putting all their cards on the table. And if they aren't, I think it's more than reasonable to ask "why". And I haven't even begun to address the environmental, safety-standards, quality-standards, health, healthcare, or infrastructure issues, just to name the most obvious, but certainly not all of them, that need to be considered as well. The list goes on and on. There is truly not a single aspect of our lives not addressed in some way by these agreements, but we should trust that the negotiators are acting in all our best interests. It boggles the mind.

The mere notion of "secretly negotiated, free-trade agreements, which -- just to add a bit of spice to the discussion -- really not even need to be approved by the governments of the countries involved is, well, suspect. Upon what experience am I -- or anyone else -- supposed to base the voluntary acceptance of something so far reaching being negotiated by people with a proven track record of deception and misinformation?

Yes, that's what I thought. And that's exactly the reason I'm not at my desk, but rather on the streets, in Frankfurt, to give voice to and to make a statement against what is being imposed upon us against our collective will. There is a growing number of citizens who want to know more and deserve to be informed. There is a growing number of families who have questions that need to be answered. There is a growing number of individuals who doubt the veracity of the claims being made. There is a growing will in the citizenry that wants to be included in the democratic discussion that should be taking place. All of these things the supporters of the agreement would like to deny.

It is amazing, if not breath-taking, in this day and age that in light of the minimal information that has leaked to the public that non-participants can be in favor of such agreements. From all we know about what is involved, we have to ask ourselves upon what are the proponents basing their approval? Still, there are those who want to force these agreements through come what may. But, for my part, I can't see why they're necessary, nor can I see what advantages they are going to bring, nor can I just sit back and wait to see whether the supporters get their way at the expense of the rest of us.

I'm not at my desk today. Very early this morning, I headed out to do what little I could to make a difference. Today, I'm in Frankfurt am Main, demonstrating against the so-called "free-trade" agreements that our governments are trying to ram down our throats. We need to stop these -- all of them (there are no "good" ones). Our future, and the future of our children and grandchildren hang in the balance.

I have to do something other than just wait till it's too late.

Maybe we just can't change ... then we deserve everything we get

There are a lot of people who -- and quite a few of those I know -- think the world is the way it is because it reflects, what they call, human nature.

Think about it: death, destruction, mindless devastation of resources and the environment, wanton disregard for human life, crime, oppression, lust for power, greed, brutality, glee over the pain and suffering of others, violence of all kinds (verbal, psychological, social, physical), insatiable desires ... everything that turns the world we know into the hell we fear. That's the natural way of things. The world is as it is because it is simply in our nature to be that way. It's in our genes. It defines who and what we are. What an interesting view of one's fellow man. But, it seems to be the dominant perspective. Every time something goes wrong, someone gets killed, someone's oppressed: well, that's just the way we are. We are evil by nature. That's got to be the crappiest of all possible worlds.

In spite of all that's wrong with the world, there are still glimmers of hope: wanton acts of kindness, altruism, compassion, empathy, people willing to sacrifice (sometimes, big) for others, not to mention the sheer breathtaking beauty of just about any place on this planet that hasn't already been despoiled by the other humans who don't give a care about what's going to happen to us. The contradiction couldn't be more obvious. The paradox of life -- especially human life -- couldn't be more apparent. What are we to make of all this?

Given the fact that there are some -- albeit few -- people who don't believe the world is to be despised, and given the fact that there are some -- albeit few -- people who believe there is more potential for good than we're led to believe, and given the fact that there are still plenty of individuals -- albeit few -- who are more than willing to make sacrifices for things generally considered positive, it is difficult to draw the absolute conclusion that the world is the way it is because our nature as humans dictate that it must be so.

This is the part that has always fascinated me.

In a similar vein, I have a few (very materialistic-minded) friends who never tire of reminding me how closely we are related to our not-so-distant simian cousins. This doesn't bother me, to be perfectly honest, for I am thankful and actually happy about our closeness. We're not the same, that's for sure, but we're similar, and this is a good thing. We humans are different -- and that is not to say "better" in any sense of the word, but that's not something my friends have grasped yet. They -- I believe -- want to impress upon me that we are simply, or just, or only, animals. But, we're not. we're different. Very different, and it's this difference that captivates me, that captures my attention, that makes me ask all kind of "why" questions.

For the longest time, we've (and by that I mean, we humans have) interpreted this difference as "superiority". There is a "more" involved, of course: Koko attained the (sign) language equivalent of a three-year-old, but most of us have more comprehensive vocabularies and communication abilities. Great apes have learned the significance and value of fire, but we humans have taken this to ends that are -- I'll be the first to admit -- questionable at best (e.g., what good is nuclear power if it creates waste that can't be disposed of safely). "Better" or "worse" are ethical categories that apparently only we humans are capable of, even if we don't deal with them well. All that interests me, I can assure you, is that there is a difference and that, when all is said and done, that difference obligates. We're not meeting, let alone fulfilling, that obligation.

It would seem, then, that we humans are capable of great (and even, good) things, but we don't often give ourselves the extra push to turn potentially damaging ideas and actions into beneficial ones. It would seem to me, then, that we are not inherently "evil" or "bad" or even "sometimes harmful" by nature, rather, given half a chance, we'll take the path of least resistance and when it turns out to be less than optimal, or even desirable, we'll make use of that other human-only characteristic, namely rationalization: we'll use every communicative strategy and ability we've ever acquired to "make clear" why it had to turn out as it did. In other words, it would seem that we're just fundamentally lazy.

Our animal cousins, for better or for worse, but in accordance with their nature, have to find food, eat, and, as any good biologist will tell you, reproduce in order to keep the species going. They really can't just lay back and say, "Screw it, I'm not foraging today, and I'm not copulating next mating season." We can. There are those who do, I know, but they are not nearly as plentiful as our conservative friends would have us believe (and by that I mean all of my friends who are so upset by how good welfare recipients have it while they have to work overly hard for anything and everything they get.) Generally speaking, I would say, that given the slightest option, most human beings will opt for less than more when it comes to expending energy for gain. I'm sure it contributes more often than not to the sad state of the world in which we find ourselves.

In the lower levels of the society (or social economy) we've created for ourselves, this is viewed as parasitical. In the upper echelons of that same society, this is considered evidence of efficiency. When we stop to think about our behavior, we find rather quickly that we all pretty much act the same but some of us are permitted more leeway in judgment than others. This selectivity of perspective becomes a problem as soon as it becomes a public way of thinking (i.e., political). What's good for the goose is never, ever good for the gander, regardless of what the old saying says. And here we start getting closer to the real problem when it comes to so-called "human nature".

Humans have a notion, if not a concept, of "power". Our animal cousins don't. Whoever is the alpha male or female of the group gets there through very, very different rules than whoever becomes an alpha male or female in human groups. Our animal cousins have very grounded, biological, instinctual determinants at play that we humans have transcended quite a long time ago. We like to point to this or that behavior and compare it to this or that behavior of our animal cousins, but the behaviors, due to the motivations underlying them and the psychological, affective, and mental abilities enabling them, in humans are quite a different thing. And this is, in the end, what we need to recognize and acknowledge: humans are simply different from other animals. Yes, we share a lot, up to 98.5% of our DNA and all that goes with that, but there in that 1.5% difference is more challenge than most of our human compatriots are willing to deal with.

The mere fact that we know that we are oppressing/causing pain to/dominating another makes us different. The mere fact that we are aware of the discomfort/pain/anguish we are causing another makes us different. The mere fact that we can conceive of ways of domination that go beyond mere physicality attests to the fact that we are different from our animal cousins. The actual fact that many people choose the non-oppressive, non-painful, empathetic path in their relations with others underscores the fact that we are, in the end, different. We are capable of being different, even if we most often choose not to be, and choose to be, unfortunately, mere animals.

Irrespective of what our materialist compatriots would like to believe, we humans are capable of "more". And since we are capable, it is incumbent upon us to find out precisely what this "more" is and act accordingly. We can't merely fall back on some nebulous notion of "human nature" and maintain that the world is in such bad shape because we can't do any better, or that our "human nature" prevents us from being better than we are. There is a "more" that defines what it means to be human, and it would serve us well to find out just what that is. But, instead of letting it go to our head (as it has in the past) and using this difference to justify all the death, destruction and devastation we've visited upon the planet, maybe, just maybe, it would be worth our while to think about what that difference means in "being human" and rise to that challenge.

I'm convinced that the sooner we start acting (truly) human; that is, in accordance with our potentialities, not our actualities, the world could -- and would -- become a better place. Who knows, maybe it could become a place worth living in.

But, that would take energy and effort, and what lazy sod is going to invest that?

Déjà vu, all over again (or Thanks for the memory, Yogi)

Most of you don't know who Yogi Berra is, and that's OK. He was a part of my childhood. Every kid who grew up in America during my time, grew up with baseball. I was never a big fan, but there are times I still think of hot, muggy, summer nights at the ball park. That's a memory worth preserving ... but that's a subject for another time.

Anyhow, the title of this blog is one of Yogi's famous lines. A lot of people thought he was a little slow, but still a nice guy. I think he was a little ahead of the rest of us, and still a nice guy. I wonder if it matters which it was. I doubt it.

You know, it's weird when you get that déjà vu feeling. We've all had them, that's for sure. Usually, they sneak up on you when you least expect it, and suddenly you're overwhelmed by that feeling that you've been here before and done this before, and heard these exact words before ... it's like reality gets into a strange kind of time loop. It scares some folks, or so I've been told, but I've always found those situations exhilarating somehow. Well, I did, that is, until I realized my whole life is turning into one big déjà vu.

Just recently, an old internet-who-stepped-out-into-real-life friend stopped by for a visit. Since I'm back to where I started when Uncle Sam sent me overseas during my dodging-the-war-in-Vietnam days. Through more twists-of-fate than most people are allowed, I ended up doing liaison on the German-German border. I was sitting there in the Fulda Gap just waiting for "the balloon to go up" marking the onslaught of the savage Russian hordes who were just chomping at the bit a mere five miles as the crow flies from where I called home.

Yep, that was me at the End of the (so-called) Free World, keeping the world safe for democracy, ensuring that you could all sleep well at night. I was there. I did that. And, to this day, I wonder what I was doing.

We all knew the drill back then: when those Russian missiles full of nuclear warheads were screaming in to kill us, well, just hide under your desk at school and then, once the big dust cleared, walk quickly (don't run) home, and take a buddy with you, someone who would have had to take a bus to get to his or her own home. It didn't matter if you liked them or not. The fate of the world was at stake, and everybody has to do his part, you know.

And then, well, there I was, staring Ivan and his evil cohorts in the face, just wondering when they were going to take advantage of the slightest lapse in our vigilance and come thundering over the border with their thousands of tanks. They were just salivating, waiting for the order to attack ... at least that what was I was told. I spent a lot of time out on that border, I can assure you, and not once did I see a bit being chomped nor anyone salivating. I did see a lot of sad-sacks like myself being forced to pull duty somewhere they never thought they'd be. And every once in a while, one of them would escape and we'd have to debrief them, and well, their lives weren't going all that well and they were looking for something better, so they risked life and limb to go for it. I wanted something better too, but in comparison I was too much of a coward to risk life and limb for it. I just wasn't getting that life-and-limb thing.

Ivan wasn't coming, not if he could help it. And neither was Klaus or Dieter or Hans or whatever their parents had named them. They were sitting out their duty and the end of their world just hoping that Paul Bunyan wasn't going to get frisky, like I was hoping that none of them were getting the itch to conquer either. Turns out, they weren't. Little foot soldiers like we were (and that we had 100% in common) don't want to conquer anything. We'd rather be at home, or with our friends, or having a beer, or looking for a date, or just avoiding hassle. Anything would have been better than what we were doing, but we were under orders. Big brains somewhere knew a whole lot better than we did what was good for us.

Well, that's what they wanted us to believe, but I didn't believe it then ... and from what I was able to gather, neither did Ivan, nor Klaus, nor Dieter, nor Hans. To quote my idol, Bob, we were "Only a Pawn in Their Game".

That Cold-War thing was a big deal. A lot of people invested a lot of time, energy, and other resources, not to mention money in keeping that illusion going, to get us to buy into the fear and uncertainty, to get us to live in abject fear of total annihilation, so that other people, most definitely unrelated to any of us normal mortals, could gain a helluva lot of power and make one whole helluva lot of money. Down here, on the ground, there were millions of ignorant, exploited, drones who were working their butts off in hopes of a better life while up there, in ephemeral spheres, a small number of spoiled elites were ensuring that we drones kept our noses to the grindstone so that their lives which were immeasurably better already could be even more immeasurably better, or something like that.

One thing I know for sure: none of it had anything to do with freedom, democracy, the will of a people, or any of those high-falutin' ideals we get beaten about our heads and shoulders. Ideals are just a red herring. In the end, it's mostly about money and power, but not for those who don't have it, rather for those who do (and they always want more).

So, I took my friend out to Point Alpha, the Cold-War Memorial site nearby, where they still have an actual compound that was used by the troops on the border and where you can see in real life what lengths both sides went to in order to keep alive that illusion that something great was at stake.

For my part, it was, and is, nice to be able to share a part of my life with another human being. I like taking people out to the border so that they can see the physicalities of what was going on back then. There is a little museum out there as well, so you can see pictures and artifacts and models and listen to real-life testimonies of people who experienced all that, back then, when the world was clearly divided into black and white, us and them, friend and foe. And while you're walking around, telling your friend what you were doing then and how and why, you suddenly realize that it's over 40 years later and at bottom, not a damn thing has changed at all.

Suddenly, you're overwhelmed: it's déjà vu all over again.

Again, the old heroes push their way into your head. Dylan, a classic if there ever was one, "With God on our Side", near the end, sings:

I've learned to hate the Russians
All through my whole life
If another war comes
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side

What the hell are we doing? NATO's piling in as many troops around Russia as is possible, though there is no (just like there wasn't then) any clear, reasonable indication that Russia wants anything more than to be left alone ... or be given a seat at the table, but apparently we'll be having none of that. The USA alone has more than 1,000 military bases overseas, and apparently it's not enough. And they've got themselves trying to stare down the Chinese in the South China Sea, and just what they're doing in and around Syria is anybody's guess, but one thing is for sure: the Russians aren't going to have any say in anything if Uncle Sam has anything to say about it.

And there I was: staring at the fence, trying to formulate a coherent thought, and it had slithered its way, unseen and unsuspected, into my ill-prepared consciousness: not a damn thing has changed no matter how much water has flown under the bridge of history.

None of this inspires confidence in my view of human beings and their ability to learn. None of this comforts me when I have trouble sleeping at night. There aren't any facts involved now, just like there weren't any then. It serves some interests to have this full-blown, heavily armed, and propaganda-rich animosity towards the Russians so the long-gone, almost-forgotten, Cold War has been heated up again. What's for dinner tonight, dear? Left-overs.

Things were, in many regards, simpler in Yogi's days. But, truth be told, they weren't much different. That's kind of sad, when you stop to think about it.

Think about it.