Belief
For a long time, in RL and on-line, I have been railing against religion. Not that I am an atheist as that is, in effect, a religion of its own. I am a devout agonistic... I don't know if there is some sort of "higher being" and I think anyone who claims they know for sure is an idiot or a liar. I know that if there is such a "force" in the universe it is beyond our power to understand.
But I have long maintained that organized religion is the root of all evil. In the days following 9/11 I was amazed by all the "God Bless America" crap... it was fanatical belief in God that lead to the events of that sad day. In fact, the "Allah" to whom the Islamic peoples are so devoted is just a different version of same alleged Being Christians call "God the Father" and Jews "Jehovah".
Throughout history religion has been, more often than not, just a convenient excuse to kill. It seems that some otherwise rational people are so afraid to die that they will embrace any claptrap, no matter how far-fetched, that promises them eternal life. Some take it to the point where they will give up this life for the promise of eternity; to wit, the terrorist hijackers who flew those planes into the Pentagon and the WTC.
In the past couple of months, however, I have thought a lot about this and have concluded that religion is, in and of itself, not really the core of the problem. The real issue is one of belief, period. Human beings have a magnificent capacity to believe the most ridiculous things, and believe them fanatically. Belief against all evidence, belief in the face of known facts, blind belief, this is the true enemy.
This fall I was working "credit applications" in stores of a major national retailer, giving away bottles of soda pop to persons who applied for a card. Besides those who felt compelled to tell me that "we don't believe in plastic" I was informed by a number of "believers" that soda pop "is bad for your stomach", "is bad for your gall bladder", "rots your insides", "takes the calcium out of your bones" and "destroys your immune system". Amazing that these "truths" are not common knowledge! I had to wonder where these people got this nonsense, from the pages of the "Weekly World News"? The point is, however, they all seemed to believe that what they were telling me was true.
So what we need to do as human beings is overcome, do away with, "belief" based on “feelings”, emotion, tradition, wishful thinking, fear and anything except cold hard proven facts. Realize that if we cannot see, smell, touch or taste it, it is likely not real. Substitute logic and empirical data for blind, unreasoning belief.
If we can manage to do this, many horrors will disappear from the world.
November 27, 2001
Designer Labels
I’m going to put my name on a T-shirt and sell it for $49.99. Yep. I’ll make a fortune. Know why? I saw Tommy Hilfinger on TV the other day. The man is a dork... a cross between Jerry Lewis and Dick Van Dyke 30 yrs ago. But juicy young girls just can’t wait to slap his moniker across their pointy chests. I’d much rather see my name there.
When I first saw kids wearing “Tommy” shirts a few years back my first thought was…”Hmmm, The Who is making a comeback?” Then I began to see the whole name and at first did not put the two together; I wondered what team “Tommy Hilfinger” played for. Figured it must be the NBA, a league/sport I studiously ignore.
When I found out who “Tommy” was, courtesy of Andy Rooney one Sunday evening, I was quite surprised. What a marketing scheme... get people to pay you to wear their advertising! Are the shirts for $50 any better quality than those for $12.99 at K-Mart?... I doubt it. Like all cotton/poly blend Ts they will fade and get tattered in a few dozen washings. So why would someone pay 4 times what a shirt is worth, just to be a walking billboard?
Of course, this is not a new phenomenon. For a quarter century or more we have been made “brand conscious”. In certain products, this makes sense: a Sony TV is superior to an Emerson, a Benz to a Kia. (Does Kia stand for “Koreans in America”? If so, does the cell phone brand Nokia mean “No Koreans in America”?) But in clothes…who the fuck cares. and why do they?
I guess it began with Levis... brand loyalty to a somewhat superior product is understandable. I still wear them and also their Dockers line of slacks. In the ‘70s, Adidas came into the picture. I had a pair of blue suede Adidas waffle-stompers back in High School. I bought them because I liked them…but when I got to school people of the soch set said “Wow! You got some Adidas!” Hell, I had thought it said “Adios”!
Then came Calvin Klein. There is something amusing about a gay man making a fortune off the wet dreams of hetro adolescents. How many dumb jock boys wanted to get between Brooke and her Calvins? How many pimply faced or smooth skinned young girls bought them to be more like her?
Then there is Nike... the “Swoosh”. How many of the dumbasses who wear that stuff realize the “Swoosh”, then called the “Flying Wedge”, was the symbol of an obscure American Fascist group of the 1930s? The “Swoosh” on a black beret sends quite a different message to this observer than the hot young thing wearing it intends!
I was watching a program called “Intelligence” on A&E a while back. One segment started with a group of impalas (not Chevys) in an African glade. A lion is stalking them. They get the sent, look around with concern, and then run for their lives. The narrator, in his mandatory clipped Oxford accent, said, “One of the surest signs of intelligence is a healthy sense of fear.” Ummmhmmm, that explains a lot about those who wear shirts proudly proclaiming “No Fear”!
Clothing is a necessary evil. It was first intended to provide warmth. Later, its mission was expanded to the protection of modesty and Fashion was born. I cannot claim to be immune from the appeal of fashion; a gal dressed in a red mini and boots or a midi top and leather pants will certainly catch my eye more than one in jeans and a sweatshirt with kitties on it. But labels do nothing for me and I look forward to them going back inside the garment, where they belong. I will confess to owning one Ralph Lauren shirt…gray with red paisley. I bought it because it was marked down from $44.99 to $12.99 on a final clearance rack. But never ever would I wear a T-shirt or jacket promoting its designer or, for that matter, Budweiser or Miller or Coke or Pepsi or…..
December 4, 2001
Scene from “Circle of Decision” (1957)
Time and Setting: 1882, an arid salt flat in the American West, reddish stone mesas and bluffs in far background.
The Action: A wagon train just coming under attack, the circling of the wagons and passing out of weapons and ammo. Two leaders of the wagon train, the trail boss Old Dub (John Wayne) and Parson Kerry (John Carradine), meet behind the supply wagon. Old Dub is quiet but fierce, unshaved, sweating and fully in control. He wears jeans, boots, spurs, chaps, a plaid shirt, a fringed leather vest and a yellow US Cavalry scarf. His head is topped by a beat up mustard colored officer’s hat. He holds a Winchester in his hand and has a pair of Colt revolvers in twin holsters at his hips. Parson Kerry is tall and grave, perfectly groomed in a somber black suit, black button-up boots and a white shirt with high stiff collar and black string tie. He wears a flat, wide-brimmed black hat and his eyes dart about nervously as he fingers a tiny derringer and a small Bible.
Old Dub: Looks like Chief Osama and his Alkyda are on the warpath again. (He spits tobacco and takes a fresh bite off a plug.)
Parson Kerry: Oh my! What have we done wrong this time?
Old Dub (glaring): WE ain’t done nothin’, but if they wants a fight I means to give ‘em one!
Parson Kerry: But surely we can’t fight them alone! We need hold here and negotiate while we send messengers to the Territorial Governor and the Sheriff and the US Marshall and Fort Indecision and Washington and... Paris... and... and...
Old Dub (snapping): ...And by then we will all be dead!
Parson Kerry (whining mumble): Can’t we just buy them off with guns and whiskey and gaming rights?
(The fight is intensifying: Old Dub fires the Winchester one handed and one of the Colts at the same time. When one pistol is empty he deftly tosses the rifle from one hand to the other and draws the other Colt. Parson Kerry cowers behind a barrel, clutching the Bible to his chest, the derringer limp in his fingers. Two women run up in a crouch: Laura (Donna Reed) is a wholesome farm girl type dressed in blue and white checked gingham and a white bonnet, Tessa (Bette Davis) is older, harder and wears a fancy red gown with black fringe, black gloves and is hatless. Laura kneels and quickly begins reloading Old Dub’s guns; Tessa glares at Parson Kerry.)
Tessa: (shrilly to Parson Kerry): Put away that toy and grab a real gun, John!
(Parson Kerry just stares at her as if in a trance. Wyoming Dick (William Bendix) enters on the run, firing as he comes. He is older, spectacled, dressed in overalls with a red “Union Suit” under and a beat up farmer’s hat on his head. He has a pair of mismatched old pistols.)
Wyoming Dick: They got young Johnny Edwards… I told him that it was suicide to go out and try to negotiate!
(Old Dub spits, Tessa gasps, Laura looks sad, Parson Kerry trembles, still fingering the derringer and Bible. The firing intensifies, it is clear the Alkydas are closing on the position. Laura begins to fire one of the pistols between reloading; Tessa glares at Parson Kerry.)
Tessa: John? John! JOHN!!!
(Parson Kerry remains immobile.)
Tessa (to Old Dub): Throw me that extra Winchester!! Someone has to be the man of this family!
Old Dub (grinning, tosses her the gun): You know how to use it?
Tessa: Of course! Remember... I used to be a Republican!
October 8, 2004
Doctrine
I've been working on the campaign of a friend running for Congress (www.dougcloud.com), a solid Republican conservative making his first bid for office. While I support him fully and we agree on most things, we do have disagreements over some issues. This has led me to think quite a bit about what I believe in and, beyond that, the direction that I would like to see our Nation and World move in. So far, I've come up with this:
Neo-Federalism: In essence, turning the current power structure on its head, giving greatest power and authority to city/county government, next greatest to the State and leaving the Federal Government with none but the most essential powers (defense, foreign relations, transportation infrastructure, etc). Thus, if Seattle, San Francisco and Boston want to be cradle-to-grave-social-welfare Worker’s Paradises and those cities' voters approve such a plan, so be it, but they must pay for it themselves. Conversely, Houston, Phoenix or Pittsburgh would have the right to be havens of rugged individualism, low taxes and almost invisible government if that is how their people vote.
Taxes: A flat-rate (10-12%) income tax with no deductions and the first $10,000 exempt per wage earner or $20,000 for a family of 4 or more with one income, collected on the local level, with the proper percentages then passed up to the State and Federal levels. Local and State governments may impose other temporary taxes for special projects with voter approval. The Federal Government would impose modest taxes on energy and “vice” taxes on alcohol, tobacco and so on, and in times of national emergency, such as war, the President may, with the approval of Congress, institute National Sales or Consumption Taxes.
Education: Institute full freedom of choice in Education, including tuition tax credits and charter schools. Institute strict performance standards for teachers as well as students with tenure and pay raises based on merit at all levels. Make school mandatory to Grade 10, after which students would receive a School Leaving Certificate (GED). The young person could then pursue College Prep, Vocational or Apprenticeship/Work Training or pre-Military National Service training (absorbing the current Job Corp and other various youth programs, particularly in the forestry/conservation field). Undergraduate studies at State Universities and Colleges would be tuition-free, with admission based strictly on merit, but maintaining the current paid tuition system at Community Colleges and at Private Colleges and Universities. Corporations, with their tax burden substantially lowered, would be expected to help support Education at vastly increased level as a trained workforce is to the benefit of employers and the economy as a whole.
Defense and National Security: The only area of the Federal Government that would not be cut; in fact there would be some increase the size of all the Services and no expense would be spared on weapons, facilities, transport and equipment. Merge Department of Homeland Security, FBI, CIA, ATF, DEA, Customs, Border Patrol, FAA and who knows what else into a single agency with many branches, but one Cabinet-level person in charge and responsible.
Labor Relations: A new form of “Open Shop” system would break the corrupt Union stranglehold on business and industry, introducing a free market in employer/employee relations. Each individual would be free to negotiate his compensation with his employer in any way he chooses. A highly skilled, valuable employee may choose to negotiate as an individual, others may band together into one or more Unions for negotiating with the employer. Union dues should be strictly limited to meeting overhead and any Union pension or insurance plans should be administered by outside professionals, not potentially corrupt Union officials.
Mass Transportation: All public transportation systems and projects must be either privatized or put on an actuarially sound basis with rider fares supporting 100 per cent of the real cost of the system. All tax subsidies to these systems must be eliminated. In the end it would be more cost effective to give the working poor, elderly and disabled taxi script to get around, thus creating demand for new low-end taxi companies and with them jobs, than to continue dumping money in these financial black holes.
October 14, 2004
