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?

We have to get over the hill before the holiday

Easter's coming (and I'm going to talk more about that next time). Easter's also a big deal -- I don't care if you're Christian (professing or avoiding) or not. In our oh-so modern, secular, ununderstanding, misunderstanding, materialist, person-centered realities, it's difficult to make anyone aware of anything more than themselves.

Now, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but you/your ego/your view of yourself aren't the center of the universe; your city/region/country is not the center of the universe; your social/political/moral views are not the center of the universe. I know you like to think that they are, but they're not.

There was a time (and I'll be the first to admit that I miss it) when "meaning" meant something. We could (and were encouraged to) find "meaning in our lives", "meaning in the things we read", "meaning in our jobs", well, meaning in just about everything. Most of us don't have that anymore. Science, for example, has shown/told/proved to us that "meaning" is mere illusion: the world as we know it and encounter it is the product of a random series of random mutations of genes that has brought us to where we are and we have no idea where anything is going. In reaction to this, some have sought refuge in religion, each of which have thick books written a long time ago that tell exactly where we came from, why we're here, and in most cases, why we're suffering now and will continue to suffer throughout all of eternity. Yeah, I always found comfort in religion too.

It's time for a confession: I love science and have for as long as I can remember. The science I loved, though, the one that was searching for truth, that was willing to adapt based on the evidence, that was putting forth hypothesis to be falsified, and more, no longer exists. I don't recognize science anymore. Another confession: I love religion and have for as long as I can remember. The religion I loved, though, the one that had a view of truth, that was willing to measure itself against others, that was willing to proclaim that its approach to life could make life better for all, and more, no longer exists. I don't recognize religion anymore. The same is true for many of the big-ticket subjects we have to deal with: politics, economics, sociology, psychology, anthropology, ethnology ... the list goes on. At one time, all of them seemed open to what was new, what was to come. Now, they all pride themselves on their exclusivity. How sad, how sad.

And so, I find myself in something of a "meaningless" world. As Buffalo Springfield sang, "Nobody's right, when everybody's wrong." Unfortunately, inspite of everything, I am still looking for meaning because I personally believe that without meaning, life is, well meaningless. But, I hasten to add, I'm willing to talk about it.

A notion close to "meaning" is "sense" and I'm one of those hopeless idealists who would like some "sense" in his life, even if there's on meaning. It may be that we can't have it all, but it would be comforting to think that we could at least have something, anything, no matter how meagre it is. Our modern world doesn't want that.

Oh, I understand when people flee into pre-packaged solutions (or promises of solutions): believe science because they know; accept Jesus as your Lord and Saviour and you'll go to Heaven; get more guns because Obama is curtailing the Second Amendment; the one who dies with the most toys wins; I'm rich because I work hard and you're poor because you're lazy; or many, many more. Yes, I can understand that people do that, but I'm having difficulty understanding how, in a world of universal (so-called) education, we can still fall for the same old snake-oil cons that we fell for before. Maybe, just maybe, we haven't been educated at all.

We're not over the hill yet, but we're getting there. We've a holiday coming and I think we should stop and enjoy it. We hardly ever take the time. But, we should always take the time.

Gotta shift gears, we're heading uphill

Sometimes I think the world is simply going insane. I know a lot of you agree with me. You can't open your Facebook page, read your daily newspaper (on or offline), watch the news, or simply turn on your TV without being overwhelmed with more insanity than the normal person deserves: war, plagues, famine, aggression, crime, immorality, corruption ... it's the order of the day. Yes, these topics have been attracting our attention for as long as we, as humans, have been around, but I know a lot of think that there all getting worse, not better.

We do have major issues confronting us, no doubt about it: global warming (it's a fact, learn to live with it), wealth inequality (it's not getting better), worldwide migration (both due to climate change and unwarranted military aggression), debt, food insecurity, water insecurity, natural-resource depletion ... all of these things are very, very real, and whether we like it or not, they affect all of us. We may not agree on the definitions or delimitations of these issues, and we may have differing views on who is allow and justified in doing what on the world stage, but the least that we can expect at the beginning of the 21st century is that we should be able to talk, discuss, and debate about them. But we can't.

In my (OK, perhaps not-so-humble) opinion, that is the biggest, most threatening problem facing humankind: our unwillingness (in too many) cases and our inability (generally) to interact with one another to resolve it.

In a world in which everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, how can we decide which opinions are worthy of further consideration and debate, and which ones are nothing more than what they are on the surface: opinions (the replacement, not the result of thought)? You can shrug this off as mere playing with words and clever turns of phrase, but the real issues around which these words are dancing is as real and as threatening and as potentially devastaing as any we have faced as a species thus far. What I am seeing -- and what particularly disturbs me -- is a decreasing willingness and abililty to talk (in the most fundamental and essential sense of the word) with others. In a word, this bothers me tremendously.

There was a time, not long ago, when we could discuss and debate. The reasons we can't anymore are legion. I don't care at all who is at fault. For me, I would much rather fix the problem than fix the blame, but that's one of the reasons so many people think I'm odd. That's not how things are normally done.

OK, I'm one of those hopeless, hapless dreamers who thinks that there are such things as right-and-wrong, true-and-false, correct-and-incorrect, but I am also one of those nerds who thinks we can establish rules and standards, criteria, against which we can judge our claims. These might be pragmatic (what works) or ideal (abstractions of some kind) ... I don't care. Some things are more physical than others and the measures that we might agree on to determine the goodness, badness, validity or inapplicability of any standard should be able to be discursively determined (that is, we should be able to talk about and agree on what we mean).

In other words, we could talk, discuss and debate, if we wanted to. This isn't going to happen politically at the moment, though there are certainly politicians who could. It isn't going to happen religiously, though there are people of faith who would be more than welcome in the discussion. It isn't going to happen nationally, for the issues that most need to be resolved apply to everyone, not just one nation or group of nations, and the issues transcend "interests", regardless of how they are nationally or politically defined.

What I'm saying, in simplest terms, is that we are in dire need of a new dialogue: one that doesn't care in the least who you are, but is completely concerned with what you have to say; one that is impervious to where you come from, but is in tune with how you apperceive the world around you; one that doesn't care in the least what your interests are if they are not in tune with everyone's interest.

I am not talking about some utopian ideal, quite the contrary. I'm talking about every serious discussion between any two human beings on this planet. For me, this is the absolute baseline. If you're not willing to engage, if you're not open to otherness, if you're not serious about what might be good, right or wholesome for anyone other than yourself or those close to you, you're never going to be part of the solution, you'll always be part of the problem.

Americans aren't the only ones

Although "nations" are a rather recent phenomenon on the world stage, there is no dearth of supporters who wouldn't trade them for anything. Americans are right at the top of the list, but a lot of others, like Russia, China, a couple of the Southeast Asian group or a few in Africa would like to get in on the deal. I don't know what the fascination is to be honest, just what is it that makes them so desirable?

A lot of you don't get the reason for the question. It's quite clear that we've had nations forever and it's as natural as four seasons in some parts of the world or rain in spring (if you're from the Northern Hemisphere). Actually, prior to 1648 and Treaty of Westphalia, there weren't ever really "nations" in our current understanding of the world, but, hey, why should we let historical facts get in the way of our beliefs? Life is certainly easier when you just pick and choose what suits us rather than getting the bigger picture. Why we have border where we have them or whether they make sense, well, those are issues that have been decided, of course, so there's no need to worry our little heads about them. Or is there?

In the Western Hemisphere (a rather artificial construct, if I may say so) 1776 is a year worth nothing. In the Eastern, however, it's 1789. In both years, revolutions took place and both these revolutions had a significant impact on everything that followed. The former was a conscious (even if perhaps, unnecessary) decision; the latter, a spontaneous act that developed into something that no one foresaw. This raises a question whether revolutions are a matter of choice or fate. I don't know. What I do know, however, is that some folks peg their beliefs on the one, while others will tell you it was the other date that matters. It really doesn't matter at all.

Sometimes I think that the petty and silly animosity between Americans and the French is about who had the "real" or the "true" or the "better" revolution. Depending on who you are reading, one year or the other can be used as marking the shift of humanity into "modernity". Whoopee. So far, no one's been able to make clear to me why that makes any difference at all.

When we look at the facts, we're left with this: a lot of violence occurred, a lot of blood flowed, a lot of innocent people suffered, and a lot of misery was visited upon the participants. In the decades that followed, a lot of violence occurred, a lot of blood flowed, a lot of innocent people suffered, and a lot of misery was visited upon those who benefitted from the "revolutions". And for what? For me, that's the key question.

The reasons for both were more similar than different: injustice, be it because of taxes or the simple ability to feed one's family. The results of both were more similar than different too: a different group of oppressors took over, a lot of people had to pay taxes and couldn't feed their families, and we have a different illusion of what our role is in the grand scheme of things.

Don't get me wrong, there are good things that came out of both. But ... are we moderns really better off than those revolutionaries. I often wonder.

Good Book, bad behavior

The Good Book tells us that the span of our lives is but "threescore years and ten" and, if we're lucky, another 10 on top of that (cf. Ps 90:10). That's not a lot of time. Now, we could be foolish enough to take the statement literally and then point out all the cases above and beyond and go on about how wrong the Bible is, but that would be missing the point. This statement was made a couple of thousand years ago and given that the current overall life expectancy for the US is just under 80 years (#36 worldwide), it's still valid enough.

To the Ancients, you should know, numbers had more significance than as mere placeholders, as they are to us today. Different times, different ways of thinking. Seven was the number of knowledge, both secular and spiritual. Any number to the first power (that is, times 10) was a spiritualization of that number's meaning, so 70, in a sense would be something akin to deep insight, perhaps wisdom. Eight was the number of material satisfaction, hence 80 would mean something like having come to terms with the world. No, there are no extra-deep, esoteric secrets here, rather a simple, at the time, perhaps, generally accepted principle of life: we're not here for long at all, it might not be such a bad idea to make the best of it, not just materially but spiritually (or intellectually or psychologically, if you prefer) as well.

To me, however, the real point to keep in mind is 70 or 80 years is really no time at all in relation to the world as a whole or the entire cosmos. And here, it really doesn't matter if the world is 6,000 or 15,000,000,000 years old (whereby the latter number really hammers the point home): our participation in the Grand Scheme of Things is orders of magnitude less than the total; at best it is more or less a bit-part, walk-on role in the Greater Cosmic Drama. No reason to take ourselves too seriously, on the one hand, but on the other, we should never forget that we really don't have much chance to get a handle on that bigger picture anyway. For as smart as we allegedly are as a species, we have to overcome a significantly small window of opportunity on what's going on, and most of us don't ever even try.

There's another passage in that Good Book that's always been one of my personal favorites: "To every thing there is a time, and a time to every purpose under the heaven" (Ecc 3:1, of which, by the way, the Byrds did an awesome cover, "Turn, Turn, Turn"). Not only is there really "nothing new under the sun" (Ecc 1:9), it keeps repeating itself. We go over the same territory, through the same experiences, have the same learning experiences over and over again, and nothing seems to change. As I've said before, as a species, we're slow learners. In this case, too, we could conclude that there's nothing we can, nor need bother to do, because it's all going to come back around anyway. But, as above, that would be a terrible misreading of what we're being told.

There are a couple of reasons why things happen over and over again. Take the seasons, for example, they go through the same rhythm and sequence year after year. The same is true for the months of the year and days of the week. We need to sow when the time is right and reap when the fruit is ripe. Whole civilizations were built upon this very simple principle (e.g., Ancient Egypt), but there are other things, very human things that could be different, that don't have to be repeated, if we would put our minds to it.

In both cases, we end up with the same result: we start thinking there's nothing we can do about anything, it's just the way things are. And while it often looks that way, the real secret lies in being able to determine what you can and what you can't change.

Apocalypse soon ...

... at least that's what a lot of people think. I can't blame them. As the last two series on "responsibility" and (shared) "myths" have shown, we're not in very good shape. We don't want things the way they are, but we're reluctant to do anything about it. That's not a good combination. But, as the old saying goes, if you don't decide for yourself, someone else will decide for you.

It could be someone, or, maybe, something else, though. The options on the "people" side aren't all the inspiring. We've got a hooligan-leaning group with too much power, too many weapons, of which too many are deadly, no, downright destructive who are dead set on having a little guy with a massive ego and a deep-seated rejection complex pushing back for all he's worth. There's no sign at the moment that either side is willing to back down, and so we find our long-dead, almost forgotten Cold War suddenly heating up again. And, speaking of which, we've got way too many people -- too many of them in positions of authority and some power -- who not only deny the planet as a whole is warming, but that their own limited, ignorant view of the world needs to be imposed on everyone else. And, on the imposition front, we've got two huge, fundamentalist, religious blocs squaring off, whereby it is not the religions per se that are threating each other, it is a loud-enough minority of blind-faithers on both sides who aren't willing to compromise because they insanely believe they all have get-out-of-hell-free cards and are going to go to heaven, regardless of how much bloody death and destruction they unleash. And finally, we have a small elite of insatiably greedy gluttons who would rather the whole world implode before they share anything they think they've "earned", when in fact, they're little more than pesky, life-threatening parasites sucking the life out of everyone else.

Yes, at times, it's almost as if you can hear the pounding of the hoofbeats of the 4 Horsemen of the Apocalypse rising in the distance.

That's it folks. The outlook is anything but rosy. The crash, implosion, explosion, whatever you want to call it is not a mere possibility. It is a reality that is going to become more real than any of us desires, and it's going to happen sooner than later. It is no longer a matter of whether, it's merely a matter of when.

There are more than enough optimists in the world who are willing to believe and tell you that we can still turn back the doomsday clock. What should have become clear over the past few weeks is that the number of people who are willing to make that happen constitutes a disappearingly small minority. They get no media time, they get no attention, they get laughed at and abused, verbally and otherwise, and they're seen as weak, tree-hugging, trail-mix-eating, soy-milk-drinking hippies who have no clue. But, in the end, they're the only ones who have figured it out. They weren't always the way they were. They changed. They changed themselves. They stood up, gathered up all their courage and told themselves that when they went, at least they'd go with the knowledge that they did whatever they could, regardless of how little or seemingly ineffective, to make a difference, to make the world a better place.

Yes, you can think of them however you want, but in the end, it is they who are going to go out with integrity and dignity.

Chapeau.

Winter is here again

Many winters have come and gone since I started my Great Journey. Of some of them I was aware, and there are others that have melted away without leaving the slightest trace.

What I have noticed in recent years is that they're getting colder. Well, in the way I'm thinking all the seasons are starting to cool off. Oh sure, temperatures are increasing. Physically, climatologically we're experiencing a global warming, and its effects are being noticed the most in the developed regions of the world. We have the time and opportunity to devote to things like that.

But inside ... well, that's a whole different story. Inside, it's getting colder. Inside, we're getting colder.

This is also in my experience a developed-country thing. We in the West have got it good ... in some regards, too good, in others, there is plenty of room for improvement. But I've noticed a coldness descending upon our hearts. We're too ready to blame the victims for being victims. We're too quick to judge by appearances. We're ignorant of our collective history and when we find out how different it is from what we were told -- in school, at home, in church, wherever -- we distance ourselves and cry foul when we as individuals are asked to accept our responsibility from it. We're lightning fast at generalizing from our own anecdotal experience and so slow and recognizing, let alone, acknowledging the bigger picture.

The detachment from others that comes from individualization has many positive aspects. It is a good and necessary part of our development that we become our own persons, but we become less, not more, of a person when we allow that detachment to actually separate us from others. We can still smell, hear and see far beyond the boundaries of our own bodies and those oders or aromas, those wails or harmonies, those nightmarish images or inspiring visions still affect us ... if we let them. Most people know on the inside how they are affected, even if they don't often show it on the outside. To know more, to use our other senses, to taste or to feel, we'd have to get closer, but we don't ... for fear of becoming infected, I suppose.

And so we distance ourselves from our own world. We avoid being touched or touching. We stay aloof, unmoved, ensconced in our individual little fortresses that we foolishly think will protect us from what's "out there". And we become isolated, and lonely, and cold.

Many winters have come and gone since I started my Great Journey. And they're getting colder.

End-of-the-year close-out

A long-term acquaintance of mine recently asked me why I'm so hard on Americans. My reply? They deserve it. Hey, they have it way too good and have no idea how good they've actually got it. Yes, yes, Thanksgiving has just past, but I didn't see (again) any sign that the celebration of the holiday had anything to do with its Spirit. For those who could: a big stuffed turkey and we're all a bit fatter, a bit dumber, and, of course, a bit happier.

C'mon. What do you say about a democratic nation in which less than 40% of the registered voters (notice I did not say eligible voters, or it would be even lower) turn out for an election? What do you say about a democratic nation that gerrymanders so that incumbents win and constituencies lose? What do you say about a country that overwhelmingly re-elects a legislative body that has an approval rating under 10%? I'll tell you what I say: it's just what I'd expect of a fat, dumb, and happy populace.

OK, OK, I'm being harsh again ... sorry. It's too easy, or, well, it's just too hard not to be. Oh sure, most Americans I know like to tell me that American society is so complex that no generalized statement is possible. They know, and I know, that such a statement is simply and blatantly absurd, but it's said anyway. Why? Because otherwise, somebody might have to do something about, well, anything.

Affordable-Care Act or no: 40 million un(health-)insured Americans; child poverty rate of more than 22% and rising; infant mortality rate ranked 34th (behind Croatia and Cuba); most extreme wealth-poverty divide in the industrialized world; world's 3rd largest population (whereby #s 1 and 2 have over three times as many people) but world's 2nd biggest polluter. Oh yes, there's just so much to be proud of.

It all wouldn't bother me so much if I didn't have so many other people I know telling me what a great place it is. When you look at it from the outside, it's anything but great, but the propaganda machine is churning both inside and out in a measure unknown ever before. I'd like not to be so critical, but I don't know how. With all that going on, I don't see a shred of evidence that anyone there really wants to do anything about anything. If the blacks protest (e.g., in the Ferguson aftermath), they're turning everything into a race issue. If Occupy protests against the banks, they are being radical. If one protests against Eternal War, one is being unpatriotic. If you feed the homeless on the streets, you go to jail. Give me a break. What about any of that makes sense?

No, the end of the year is upon us, and I'm going to turn my attention to other, more important matters. If Americans were all alone in their bubble island, I don't suppose I'd care, but they keep reaching out and touching the world, and what's even worse, most Americans think everyone else wants to be touched. No, if Americans want to do something, if Americans want to change something, then there's no better place than home. Get your own house in order before you start telling others how to clean up theirs.

And that's all I have to say about that.

Lullabies from La-La-Land

On the whole, I'm a pretty easy-going guy. In general, I don't get too upset about too many things. But, like everyone else, I have things that can just set me off and having to deal with things that could have been easily avoided is right up there at the top of the list.

OK, I'll admit it: what irks me is that fact that most of the folks I know would rather sit on their well-padded backsides and tell themselves that everything's OK instead of recognizing that we're all being taken to the cleaners. We're being duped, and dumbed down to boot. I'm not saying there is a conspiracy. Power doesn't need a conspiracy, it only needs to take things as they come. We've been deluded, and most of it has been our own doing. Because we love to be deluded ... it takes so much responsibility off our own shoulders.

We like to think that life is so much easier these days, that we've somehow progressed as a species, that we've overcome so many limitations that our forebears suffered under. This is largely untrue. Some societies have suffered long and hard, and have suffered more because others, allegedly more civilized societies, have made life miserable for them. Just ask the Africans or Native Americans. They both enjoyed more freedom, health, and natural wealth than we like to admit. And for all the comforts of modern living, like indoor plumbing and the Internet, we're not really all the better off for it. We've got gene-modified food and we have no idea if it's good for us or not; we have industry processed food and we know it's bad for us. We have artificial light and no more natural routines, be they daily or yearly. We have bad air, bad water, and a whole lot of bad ideas. Our life expectancy is longer, yes, but that's simply an actuarial bet, not a fact. And who would want to live in Hell for 80 years?

No, life is a struggle. It was very early on in our history as a species, and the one thing we really haven't changed -- but could have -- was our struggle for life. Yes, we are barraged by stimuli our ancestors couldn't imagine in their wildest nightmares. Yes, we are faced with food and environment that makes us sick instead of nourishing us. Yes, we devote inordinate amounts of time and energy trying to "get ahead" only to realize we are slowly sliding behind. Oh yes, we've come such a long, long way and life isn't any easier today than it was 100,000 years ago. The specifics have changed, but the big picture really hasn't. Oh, don't we have so much to be proud of?

And you see, all of this was avoidable. It doesn't have to be this way. Again and again throughout our history people have tried to get others to see that we weren't doing all of us a favor. But, we haven't been smart enough, and lord knows, not wise enough to stop and listen.

All of the ills of modern society are the result of rules we have made for ourselves. Yes, we made it up. It is, in the truest sense of the word, a fiction. We are in a position to make the world into just about anything we want, and we can do it to the benefit of all or the benefit of the few. Why we have chosen the latter path is incomprehensible to me.

The clock is ticking however. It is precisely all those things that we thought had brought us further that will be the seeds of our undoing. We simply believe it is otherwise. But, we love to be deceived.

Why do only catastrophes motivate us?

Exaggeration? Hyperbole? The title sort of sounds like it, doesn't it? Unfortunately, I don't think it's all that far off the mark.

Think about it: most of us "have ours" (whatever that really means) ... we've got a job or a decent retirement, a house, a nice car, decent prospects. If nothing really bad happens, we'll continue doing OK. Life can be tricky, we all know that, so purposefully rocking the boat may not be Option #1. Admit it. That's how most of us think.

What most of us don't think about, however, is that we make up a rather small minority of the world's population. Oh sure, we'd like to think that just about everybody in America or Europe is getting along pretty much like we are, but we know -- at least in the back of our minds -- that this is not the case. So, there's only 6% unemployment in the US these days; in Germany it's around the same; but, we all know that the way the statistics are counted is for the sole purpose of making things not appear as bad as they really are. We all also know -- whether we like to admit it or not -- that wages have been stagnating, that inflation is still making itself known, that the disparity between rich and poor is still growing steadily in the entire developed world. In other words, economically, we tend to put on our rose-colored glasses whenever we think about these kinds of things. After all, acknowledging that so many others aren't doing so well doesn't really do much for us when we're trying to be satisfied with ourselves.

And, in the back of those same minds, we know that the planet is warming, the climate is changing, and it doesn't really matter whether we humans are behind it or not. Any change, any significant change, is going to disrupt our peaceful, and rather oblivious, way of life. We know that we've got infrastructure problems, energy problems, that the housing and banking industries are still shaky, that the US, at least, as a massive crime problem ... in other words, the future is not exactly set on a positive trajectory. We know all of this, but still we act if there weren't any real problems at all.

Don't get me wrong, I know full well that many people are living paycheck-to-paycheck, that others are saddled with crushing debt (and not just students), that taxes keep going up for the most of us and that we are too often just busy dealing with the squeeze that all of us are feeling. And that's my point.

Let's be honest: as long as we're busy keeping our heads above water, we're not all that "worried" about the big picture. I, for one, can understand that, but it doesn't help. You don't have to be either a genius nor a conspiracy theorist to recognize that the more I have to deal with the details, the less I can deal with the big picture, and those who allegedly represent us have done so much to allow that big picture to fade, to ensure that we have more than enough details to deal with that things will most likely just keep going on as they are till they finally go down the chute.

I'm not exaggerating when I say that it will most likely take a catastrophe -- environmental, social, economic -- to get us motivated. I'm not talking about a scare like happened in 2008. That was a wake-up call, and guess what? we're still sleeping. Pleasant dreams.

Not everything you can count counts, but ...

Numbers can be fascinating and for many they are simply painful (when they remember all those torturous hours in math classes). Other find them to effective tools, some use them as weapons. There have been and still are those who think that they hold the key to life and the universe. Regardless of where you stand and what you think, sometimes they are simply interesting in their own right.

Numbers can take many forms: formulas, facts, accounting figures, statistics, and more. Each of these can be used in any number of ways, some for good and some to the detriment of others. We're confronted with them all the time, and a lot of us simply feel that we are somehow powerless against them. Still, I find them interesting nevertheless. Of course, my engagement with numbers always remain on a small scale. For example, Google (which hosts this blog) provides statistics (or analytics, as they like to call them ... sounds much more impressive) and I like to check them out from time to time, just for fun.

For example, Google shows me how many times a blog post has been viewed. Notice I didn't say "read". There is no information how long any individual remains on a page, only that the page was called up; that is, viewed. It seems to me not all that far-fetched to compare how often a blog is viewed with its topic. People who write are always interested in what interests their audience and one possible indicator would be how often a given post on a given topic is viewed. If you make the effort to look at these over a period of time, it is also not surprising that trends can appear. We have to be careful with trends because we can see what they are, but there is nothing in the numbers to actually say why they are that way. Still, patterns arise, and I've noticed one lately.

It would appear that posts I write which deal with general, broad, encompassing topics, be they historical, political or such generally get more views that those posts which deal with us as individual human beings. In other words, when speaking to "you" plural there is more attention than when speaking to "you" singular. I simply find that interesting. When I'm suggesting we clean up the planet, there is more of a "yeah" than when I suggest we clean up our own acts. There could be any number of reasons for this, and as I said, the numbers don't really provide a clue. Still, I can tell you what I am thinking:

To me, there are two possible, and I believe equally probable, "explanations". First, we simply don't feel spoken to. Even though the point is always that even though you may think you've got your act together, it never hurts to double check, perhaps against other, more broadly based criteria. Second, people don't like to think they're part of the problem. I can understand that, for I often feel that way myself. But a simple point remains: we are all part of the problem, if not the problem itself.

The world is as it is because we -- all of us -- allow it to be that way. The only sure way to change it, even minimally, is to change ourselves. The moment we think it is "the others" who are the problem, we become the problem. Think about it.

Why it matters, why you matter

All of the big issues -- war, prolific criminality, wealth inequality, economic instability, pollution, climate change, diminishing resources, animal extinctions -- affect all of us. The world has become small enough that none of us can escape the effects of these. Other than "war", (which has always been a scourge that we've never learned to deal with) the rest of these issues simply started small and were allowed to grow unchecked. Yes, the rollback is going to be more challenging that it perhaps needed to be, but the rollback can still be done. Still. At the moment. The window of opportunity is closing on a number of these, to be sure.

As I said last time, though, we don't have to try and save the world ourselves, and even these big-ticket issues have deep, but tender, roots that can be dealt with. Quite a few of them are the result of other factors: lack of quality education and training, narrow perspectives, isolation, and more. In other words, we don't have to start at the top and work our way down, rather, the most effective strategy would be to get together and work from the bottom up. There is strength in numbers, so we need to generate the numbers that can make a difference.

Your piece of the solution puzzle is small and it is local. It can (and should) be found in your own house, your neighborhood, or community. Those of you who think big and aim high can do so, but they need to recognize that most of us don't think or act that way. But again, we all should be building on our own strengths, not solely on the strengths of others.

Broad-based support for local and community activities matters, be it improving the public schools, helping the needy, supporting local businesses and organizations, bringing your own ideas into making your own little world a better place, not only for yourself, but for those around you. The point is that by finding something you can do and doing it will inspire others who are more hesitant about taking that first step. Succeeding at solving even small, non-complex problems is a motivator to expand one's horizons and scope of activity. Nothing succeeds like success.

Yes, some things are being done, but they're being done by too few people in too many uncoordinated ways. The vast majority of us are waiting for the others to get started, but if we all wait, nothing will ever get done. This is why you matter. You can't wait for the others, you have to do what you can, if for no other reason than it is the right thing to do. All of have friends and family whom we care about and for whom we are willing to act. Then do that, and then find the others like you who are of the same mind.

Start the snowball rolling. From then on, it will gain size and momentum on its own. But someone has to start. Why shouldn't it be you?

Get involved

Yes, get involved. As the saying goes, if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.

There is more wrong with our world today than is right. There are too many altercations, crises, issues, and pending catastrophes that we can simply lean back and think that someone else is going to take care of them. Not every one of these "problems" affects every one of us. Some are more obvious, some reflect our own interests, some are such that we wouldn't know where to start. All of that is OK.

No one ... absolutely no one is expecting you to save the world all by yourself. You aren't and are not going to become a superhero. You don't need to be one. In fact, there are none, except in comic books and films based on them. No, you are just like everyone else: human, subject to error, of limited time, energy and other resources. No one is asking you to do everything, all I'm asking is that you do what you can. Every little bit helps.

OK, I do expect you to at least be trying to get yourself together, to become secure in your person and your beliefs, to realize that you can't know everything and can't have all the answers, and to be tolerant of others, just as you want others to be tolerant of you. All I'm asking is that you put your own person behind the problem. All I'm asking is that you put the problem first, then do what you can.

Sociologists and psychologists will tell you that your effective range of influence is no more than about 150 people. Physiologists will tell you that your effective range of operation is probably not much farther than you could walk in a day. That, in case you hadn't noticed, is actually your world. Sure, you've got all this modern technology to expand those ranges, but the farther the range, the lower your effectivity. It's not only time to get involved, it's time to get back to basics.

This is not an original idea, to be sure. I'm not that bright a guy, nor do I have to be. I'm happy that I can recognize and learn from the genius and insight of others. The point I'm trying to make was stated best, I think, by Marian Wright Edelman in her commencement speech to the Milton Academy 1983, in which she said,

"Pick a piece of the puzzle that you can help solve while trying to see how your piece fits into the broader social change puzzle." [1]

That's all you really need to do. Find your piece of the puzzle, and get involved.

Notes
[1] As quoted in Howard Zinn (2003) A People's History of the United States, New York, HarperPerennial, p610.

Have suggestions, not answers

Beside the side effects mentioned in the previous post, there is another -- to my way of thinking much more important -- side effect to knowing oneself, being secure in oneself: you realize you don't have ready-made answers for problems you are confronted with.

I'm talking about "bigger" problems, like war & peace, wealth inequality, interpersonal and intercultural relations, religious tolerance, social policy, education, or any number of others with which we are confronted every day. We all know people who have an answer for everything, a quick fix, a pat solution. Very often we've elected just these sort of people to public office, too. It turns out and it becomes very obvious very quickly that in truth, these folks have really nothing on the ball. They're just talking heads, blusterers, con men, fast-talking glad-handers ... the epithets go on and on.

Although the world is simpler than we often make it out to be, it is still a rather complex place. A person who has gone to enough trouble to take that inner journey known as the Hero's Quest soon realizes that there are any number of conflicting needs, interests and desires within us and that trying to satisfy them all all the time is a hopeless endeavor. You also realize that in many regards that the outside is like the inside in the respect and trying to juggle and accommodate a wide range of needs, interests and desires of others is a sizeable challenge. Those who are insecure of themselves will want solutions, answers, because they don't have the (inner) security necessary to come to terms with life. They want others to make decisions for them, they want others to take the responsibility, they want others to tell them what to do. A person who is secure in him or herself knows that at best you can try things and if you give it all an honest effort, you'll find out quickly what works and what doesn't and you'll be open for new, reasonable suggestions as to what changes need to be made to keep things moving forward.

If you stop to think about those seeking answers and leaders, you also quickly realize how dangerous these people are in the greater scheme of things. When you abdicate your own responsibility, when you place your power in the hands of others, you can be pushed, shoved, flattered, and cajoled into doing just about anything those "leaders" want. You become a "yes person", a blind follower, a passive pawn who would rather be liked than be effective. You become a person who is easily scared, easily frightened, easily manipulated, and easily sacrificed. And you will be. Believe me. History is replete with just such examples. And every day we provide countless more.

A brief look out into the world quickly reveals that the issues we need to deal with and the problems we need to solve are such that we truly need everyone's full attention and energy. The luxury of passivity is one that we can no longer afford. We all need to get involved.

Be secure in yourself

Who you are, why you think you're here, what you think you need to do ... these are all important questions to ask. If you don't, you simply don't know ... you don't know yourself. You're guessing. You're on uncertain ground.

When you're on uncertain ground, you're a prime target for those who love to divide and conquer. If you can't decide, if you can't make up your mind, well, they are more than ready and willing to do just that.

A side effect of being secure in your person is what we call a "moral compass". You tend to not only know the difference between right and wrong, for example, but you are also more inclined to act in a way consistent with that knowledge. Say you have a problem with ethnicity (or race, if that's the word you understand), then when it comes to killing, you will most likely recognize that this problem is influencing (if not dictating) your attitude. You'll most likely pull back. If you realize, in another case, that you find no reasonable grounds to think that any one human life is worth more than any other human life, you come to realize that all killing is questionable at best, immoral in most cases. Some of tried to make the case that, say, serial killers know exactly what they are about, but I would argue that they often don't acknowledge that what they are doing is wrong because they lack the empathy that normal human beings have. In other words, it is a person who is of healthy mind who can know him or herself. People who can't are ill and in need of help. In other words, knowledge in general, and self-knowledge in particular, tends toward and leads one to consistency and uniformity on the one hand, but also to a strong(er) recognition of "the other" as well.

Another side effect of being secure in your person is increased sensitivity of what I'll call your "nonsense" detector (though any other reasonable terms, such as "insanity", "stupidity", "bullshit", etc. would work as well ... I'm trying to keep it neutral). You hear someone trying to make a point, presenting what they think is a cogent and coherent argument, offering a (at least to them) "reasonable" opinion, and you immediately realize that they don't have a point, their argument is full of holes or what they are offering isone of those opinions that is uttered in place of, not as a result of, thought.

The upside to this is that you needn't lose your cool when another starts spouting nonsense. You realize, very quickly in fact, they aren't contributing to the dialogue, and they certainly aren't contributing to the needed solution. You needn't waste any time trying to convince them of what they don't want to believe, and that frees up you and your own energy to find other thoughtful, reasonable, individuals like yourself who are secure enough in their beliefs and their persons that they are willing to try and fix real problems, not merely fix the blame.

Divide et impera

Yes, this has been "wisdom" for a long time. Even my old friend Julius (Caesar) knew this adage: divide et impera ("divide and conquer").

This can, of course, apply to just about anything: the family, the neighborhood, the community, the country, or more. It is relevant in just about any field of endeavor, too: in politics, in the military, psychologically or sociologically. But it works only as long as one group can keep other groups pitted against themselves.

It's not all that difficult if you see an opportunity to employ it, and those who realize they can quite often do employ it at every turn. It could be the 1%, the political or military establishment, the educational system, or the so-called, but certainly not-so, free market.

Why does it work? How does it work? It is, as I said, rather simple. You identify the fears of your opponents and you simply turn those fears most suited toward one of the others' fears. For example, if I am ruthless and rich, I can acquire lots of land or resources, and I can thereby create a shortage for others. I favor one group, let's say white workers, and give them jobs enabling them to acquire small pieces of that land or resources. There are other groups, let's say unemployed blacks, who now have nothing but think, rightfully so, that they should be able to have some themselves. All I have to do is convince the whites that those blacks want what little they have, and they will go to great lengths to ensure that the blacks are not going to get it. I who control everything have very little to worry about as long as the blacks and whites are fighting amongst themselves. Divide and conquer; very simple indeed.

There are enough fears to go around, and all I need to do is feed them from time to time. I can tell the blacks that the whites are actually trying to eradicate them like they did the Native Americans, for example, and I can tell the whites that those blacks only want something for nothing and certainly aren't deserving of what they have worked so hard to achieve. In other words, I control the primary flow of information, of opinion, of psychological energy. Yes, it's very, very simple. Why? Because we all have too many fears we don't know how to deal with. We have too many fears that we simply don't understand.

One of the necessary by-products of the Hero's Journey is confronting one's fears, of facing them, of recognizing that in all cases they are illusions which evaporate under the close scrutiny of truth. You come to realize that we human beings have much more in common with one another than what is different, and that what is truly different is a source of enrichment, not a reason for fear. At that point, my dear friends, you free yourself, you become truly free, not just as free as those who are trying to control you would like you to think you are.

This is what Goethe meant when he said, "None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." So, free yourself. Know thyself.

Life in the mirror

This is a different way at looking at the turning point. Truth be told, things have gotten turned around.

Let's assume, just for the sake of argument, that you were willing to take the inward-journey challenge. Let's also assume, just for the sake of argument, that you have started (or are somewhere along the way) on the path to self-recognition. And, let's assume, just for the sake of argument, that you are coming to the realization that things could be better than they are, that it is, in fact, up to you, too, to see that the world becomes a better place. Now what?

It could just be that you realize that we actually live in the mirror. Everything is backwards from how it should be: the have's profit at the expense of the have-not's; the rich can buy their rights, but there's really no justice; your own success or failure depends not so much on what you know and what you are capable of, but on who you know and how much of your self you are willing to sacrifice for it (at the expense of others, of course). Or, at the political level: that the greatest military might the world has ever known is powerless against ideas; that the freedom and democracy they claim they are spreading through the world, they are denying their own citizens; that what is portrayed as aid and support is actually exploitation; that notions like the "free market" are deceptions; that people who need help the most get the least, while those who really need no help at all get things shoved down their throats anyway; that what "the people" want and believe is only important as far as it coincides with what the wealthy and big corporations want and believe.

This isn't anything new. I'm not exposing any deep, hidden secrets. In the US, for example, it has been this way for so long and most Americans have no recollection or knowledge of history that they tend to think things have always been this way. And, Europeans, by contrast, see the biggest, toughest, allegedly strongest country in the world behaving a certain way that they start believing that that's just how things are. There's nothing natural, given, or even normal about all of this. Since time immemorial, mirrors (or shadows, in Plato's case, but the effect is the same) have been used as metaphors for getting reality backward. That the few should benefit at the expense of the many has been a sham perpetrated by the few for as long as anyone can remember. That it necessarily be that way is not given at all.

It is only that way because we buy into the illusion.

If you embark on the Hero's Journey, and especially if you are successful, you come to realize that none of these givens are given at all, that none of this well-that's-just-the-way-it-is is really that way at all, that while everyone need not necessarily all have the same things or the same amount of things, that so few should have so much that so many should suffer so terribly is, well, in a word, unnatural. We've allowed things to be turned around.

The time is coming -- quickly, I might add -- to turn them aright.

At a turning point

To sum up the thrust of the past few posts, I'd say: if you have no real idea who you are and why you're here, you're most likely making life unpleasant for at least one other human being. I'm not being harsh, I just have a very low tolerance for people who simply take up space and don't contribute even the least to making the world a livable place.

The more conservative of you will be thinking of long-term unemployeds and welfare recipients, but I'm not talking about them. They're not the problem, really. Granted, they may not know precisely who they are and why they're here. In fact, they may spend a lot more time thinking about what happened and how they got to where they are. I don't blame them. Most of them have had limited opportunities and a limited range of choices all their lives. They've learned to manage with all kinds of limitations. No, I've been talking to and I'm still talking to you: someone who has a comfortable-enough life to be reading this blog; someone who is in the luxurious position of being able to decide and choose how much of a boon or bane one is to humankind.

Granted, we're a disappearing species. We are. The ranks of the wealthy grow slowly. Very slowly. Glacially slowly. The ranks of the impoverished, on the other, hand, are growing faster than rabbits can reproduce. Most of you, I'm sure, have never stopped to wonder why. But I can tell you, that is one of the reasons that things are the way they are.

Let's face it: we bust our backsides ... at our jobs, at raising our kids, at trying to get ahead, at paying the bills. We spend inordinate amounts of energy trying to succeed, make the grade, get that next promotion. And while I may be right that it would be great if I took a few minutes to look inside, to find out who I really am, well, the rat-race, the daily grind, the job, the family, the ... just fill in the blank ... really make enough demands on me that I don't get to it as much as I would like. I know. Been there; done that. It sucks. But it doesn't have to be that way. All of that is just an excuse. Really. Those are all excuses.

There's an old saying, "If you want something done, ask a busy person." Why? Busy people always seem to manage. People who aren't busy never, ever have the time for anything. They're always overwhelmed. So, if you're one of the busy ones, you can do it. If not, perhaps you should revisit you self-evaluation. The point is, nevertheless, that if anything in this world is really going to get better, it's up to you to make it happen. OK, you and everyone else like you. We're all the folks in the middle, the ones being squeezed, and we're the only ones left to make a difference.

Because we're in the middle, we have the greatest possibilities, the greatest chances of success. Because we're in the middle, we have the greatest liabilities, the most to lose. That puts us in the proverbial pivotal position. We're not just at a turning point in the year, or at the threshold between inside and out. We have arrived at an existential turning point as well, and I'm not sure we're up to the challenge.

Beware, humans!

I would hate to think that anyone has got the idea that I'm condemning or belittling or making a case against a good number of my fellow human beings. A couple of points are worth noting.

Juat as they say, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is most likely a duck. So too, if it walks like a human being and talks like a human being, regardless of how much nonsense that might be, it is definitely a human being. We can, and do, recognize those of our own species, easily and readily. It's hardwired into us, so to speak. And this is good so.

Of course, we humans are the only creatures on the planet capable of cruelty, of sadism, of unbelievable acts of depravation and violence, but never are these people not human, nor subhuman. In our rage and anger and sheer horror, we may refer to them as such, but that does not make them so. They're still humans. Bad humans, evil humans even, but nevertheless humans, and they need to be dealt with accordingly. The moment we allow ourselves to become just as cruel and depraved, say, out of feelings for revenge, we are really no better than they are, even if we like to think our reasons for our actions are justified. In all cases, where actual insanity is not involved, the perpetrators have also found a justification that permits them to do what they do. The line between right and wrong is always fuzzy. It would be nice if things in life were clear-cut and simple, black-and-white, if you will, but more often than not they are not, they're grey. It's always a good idea to keep this in mind.

You see, not only can we humans know, we can know better. We have conceptual -- often, moral -- categories of right & wrong and good & evil, preferences & dislikes, positive & negative prejudices, sympathies & antipathies, and more. If asked point-blank to explain the criteria for any of these, we most often soon have trouble making ourselves clear. They are not always hard and fast, clear-cut, easily describable criteria, and we soon realize that the boundaries tend to be fluid depending on context, prior history of participants, their closeness or distance to ourselves, and many other factors.

No one ever said it was easy, but I'm here to tell you that it is necessary to get a firmer handle on whatever it is we think we believe ... in regard to ourselves and certainly in regard to others. More often than not, even the best of us get in our own way. We can be our own best friends, and our own worst enemies.

Difference obligates

When a horde of locusts sweeps over a land destroying all the vegetation in its path, neither the horde nor the individual locusts have any idea that they are destroying at all. They are just being what they are. Many in the world would consider them pests that need to be eradicated, others hear of locusts and think of a fried-peanut-like delicacy, and far too many people think absolutely nothing at all, because they weren't directly affected one way or the other.

When a horde of marauders or bandits or whomever sweeps over a land destroying everything in its path, both the horde and the individuals within it know perfectly well that they are destroying. They are not being simply what they are, they are being what they, at that moment, want to be. Those affected by their actions certainly see them as more than just pests that need to be eradicated. Others hear of what has happened and think how awful, and far too many people think absolutely nothing at all, because they weren't affected one way or the other.

The difference between the actions of all involved in both cases is that we can tell the difference between what just is and what needn't be. Another difference is that we can hear about both, regardless of how far away we might be. In other words, we know; we are aware; the event has become part of our individual experience, perhaps not radically or existentially, but a part nevertheless. Fish don't know about locusts, and neither do most other animals. But we know because we're different. We are capable of knowing. That makes all the difference in the world.

Whereas a bear or a dog or a fish may simply go on about its business, we can't. We would never expect the bear or the dog or the fish to react at all because we know they don't know about locusts or marauders so it would truly be unfair for us to expect them to care. We, however, are different. We know. We know the difference, because we are different, and that difference obligates.

When you know, when you have been made aware, you can no longer claim ignorance as a defense. Once you know, you are involved ... perhaps only tangentially, perhaps only remotely, but you are involved. Sure you can maintain that you're half-a-world away so what could you do? Quite a few of those that are helping those people, though, often come from half-a-world away. So why should we allow you that excuse? You can claim you're just one person, what effect could you have? But you have no friends? You know no one? You live in a bubble?

But, hey, we don't even have to go that far: what about the homeless person you pass on the way to work? The street musician you love to hear but cross to the other side of the street so you don't have to toss anything into her hat? What about the guy next door who keeps beating his wife or girl friend? What about, well, anything you know and do absolutely nothing about? Yes, what about it?

A significant difference between us and the animals is simply that we can know. But when you know and you do nothing, you aren't doing anyone a favor, especially not yourself. You are simply denying your own humanity.