Monthly Archives: June 2017

Global Terrorism

Religion

 

This is a topic about which I have grappled for the past couple of years.  Probably because I could not find a way to address it without making unfounded generalizations.  In light of last night’s events in London, you  probably think the title of today’s post and my past hesitancy in blogging about extreme acts in the name of religion refer to the increase in random violence perpetrated by or inspired by ISIS.  That is not the case.

When I picked up this morning’s edition of the Washington Post (actually pulled it up on a computer screen), any personal intellectual contradictions about the role fringe religious elements play in modern day society were resolved by the following two headlines.

  • 12 Suspects Arrested in London Attack That Killed 7
  • Why Many White Evangelists in Trump’s Base Question Climate Change

I will leave the details of the latest assault on innocent British citizens and Comrade Trump’s self-serving response to the mainstream press.  While I add my voice to so many others who offer solace to the victims’ families or friends, the number of people who suffer from these unjustifiable acts will pale in comparison to the multitudes who are at risk if nothing is done to address the effects of climate change.

Which brings me to Sarah Bailey’s enlightening analysis of why evangelicals who voted for Donald Trump seem to be at odds with most Catholics, mainstream Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Hindus when it comes to the threat of global warming.  Bailey writes:

Half of white evangelicals say global warming is occurring, according to a 2015 survey from the Pew Research Center, but only a quarter of them say it is caused by humans. And just 24 percent say global warming is “a serious problem.”

For many conservative Christians, climate change taps into a deeper mistrust they have of science over issues like abortion and transgenderism.

To understand how much alt-right politicians, commentators and clergy are guilty of perverting the Gospel to an equal or greater extent than ISIS uses the Koran to justify its unholy crusade, consider the following.

Erick Erickson, conservative talk show host, tweeted in defense of withdrawing from the Paris accords,  “I worship Jesus, not Mother Earth. He calls us all to be good stewards of the planet, but doesn’t mean I have to care about global warming.”

At a town hall meeting in Coldwater, Michigan, Republican congressman Tim Walberg said, “As a Christian, I believe that there is a creator in God who is much bigger than us. And I’m confident that, if there’s a real problem, he can take care of it.”

An evangelical interview subject told Katherine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist at Texas Tech University, “God told Noah he would never flood the Earth.”

So much for the Republican mantra of “personal responsibility.”  Erickson talks the talk of stewardship but sees no reason to walk the walk.  Walberg probably throws refuse out of his car window knowing God will be there in an orange vest with a deluxe trash picker to clean up after him.  And Hayhoe’s interviewee must have been in a Rip Van Winkle-like coma during Hurricanes Katrina and Sandy.

So the next time a public official, journalist, cleric or citizen refers to “global terrorism” by ISIS or any of its predecessors or off-shoots, call it for what it is, “A bunch of malarkey.”  Their brand of horror and trepidation is most often local.  The true soldiers of “global terrorism” include fundamentalist Christian climate change deniers, as the impact of their actions will cause worldwide suffering, despair and death on a previously un-experienced scale.

Sunday Morning Postscript

News the Trump administration announced it is requesting Supreme Court review of the appeals court stay of its travel ban made me realize a comic who wanted to take down Donald Trump could have been more creative than Kathy Griffin.  A better visual would have been a picture of Donald Trump holding the bloody head of a decapitated Statue of Liberty.  How dare Lady Liberty defy authority by colluding with the enemy, “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”

POSTSCRIPT UPDATE:  My daughter knew this sounded familiar and found the following Der Spiegel magazine cover from April 4, 2017.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

The Whimper Heard Round the World

Politics, Religion

 

In my May 24, 2017 post titled, “You’re Going To Need a Bigger Bed.” I highlighted the hypocrisy associated with evangelical Protestant support for Donald Trump who violates every tenet of this religious sect.  In hindsight, this condemnation was unfair.  Not because evangelicals are not hypocritical.  Hardly.  I was unfair by singling them out.

T. S. Eliot closes his poem, “The Hollow Men,” with the now famous prediction:

This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but with a whimper.

So, dear readers, I have good news and bad news.  If Eliot is correct, we can put aside fears of a nuclear holocaust.  There will be no second big bang.  The bad news?  That “whimper” is scheduled for 3:00 P.M. EDT today.  At that time, it is reported Trump will announce the United States is withdrawing from the Paris climate accords.

Image result for tikkun olamSo what does that have to do with religious hypocrisy?  The two people in the best position to dissuade His Orangeness from this course of action, Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump, self-proclaimed Orthodox Jews, have chosen to violate one of the most sacred tenets of Jewish tradition “tikkun olam,” which is Hebrew for “repair the world.”  According to MyJewishLearning.com, “The phrase has origins in classical rabbinic literature and in Lurianic kabbalah, a major strand of Jewish mysticism originating with the work of the 16th-century kabbalist Isaac Luria.”

Today, the term refers more to individual and collective social responsibility.  Again, from MyJewishLearning.com:

Tikkun olam, once associated with a mystical approach to all mitzvot (good deeds), now is most often used to refer to a specific category of mitzvot involving work for the improvement of society — a usage perhaps closer to the term’s classical rabbinic origins than to its longstanding mystical connotations.

Now I know what you’re going to say.  Aren’t there reports that Jared and Ivanka have been working behind the scenes to discourage Trump from shedding (or as some say, shredding) the agreement?  Yes.  In a May 8, 2017 article on ForeignPolicy.com, Robbie Gramer and Dan de Luce reported:

It’s unclear how Trump will come down on the issue (Paris climate agreement), but for his inner circle, the battle lines are drawn. On one side are Trump’s daughter Ivanka, his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who are lobbying the president to keep the United States in the deal, several sources tell FP. On the other side of the argument: White House Chief Strategist Stephen Bannon and Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt, both of whom reject climate change science.

This debate took place is a what is called a “principals” policy meeting, supposedly involving those officials and advisers most knowledgeable about the issue under consideration.  However, neither Defense Secretary James Mattis nor National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster were invited, possibly because both view global warming as more than an environmental threat.  As to the Defense Secretary’s perspective, Gramer and de Luce wrote:

Mattis has spoken of the dangers posed by global warming, and in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee in January, the retired Marine general said the U.S. military had to bear in mind the security challenges posed by the melting Arctic and droughts and famines in global hot spots.

We know Donald Trump does not believe in a level playing field.  And in this debate, the heirs-in-chief were outgunned by two climate change deniers and the former CEO of Exxon/Mobil, the single largest producer of carbon-based fuel in the world.  Did they demand that Mattis and McMaster join them?  NO!  Did they tell their benefactor they did not want to be associated with a decision which breaches a sacred doctrine of their faith?  NO!

Now it appears inlaw-in chief Kushner has even placed personal standing above principle.  Three days ago, the London Daily Mail reported Kushner, following revelations of unreported contacts with Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak and oligarch banker Sergei Gorkov, is backing away from his alleged opposition to withdrawing from the Paris accords.

His basic position is that the standards need to be changed and the question is can you stay in the Paris agreement and can you stay in the Paris agreement with the changes? (Source: DailyMail.com/May 29, 2017)

So much for being the voice of reason in a White House filled with climate change deniers.  Fortunately for Jared, Orthodox Jews do not believe there is a place called “hell.”  Instead, punishment comes in the form of “torment by demons of their own creation.” (Source: Judaism101.com)  Obviously, images of his own children and grandchildren living in a dystopian world, where people compete for depleted clean air and water, is not torment enough.

So, dear readers, when journalists report Donald Trump “went to Jared,” just remember he did not leave with an authentic gemstone,  more like a cheap imitation zirconium diamond masquerading as a valuable diamond.  But then, everything since January 20th has been about appearance, not substance.

Thursday Morning Postscript

Welcome to the world of equal-opportunity stupidity.  Today’s award winners are comedian Kathy Griffin and Hillary Clinton.

Griffin did the one thing Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee warned during Watergate.  Following a minor discrepancy in their reporting, Bradlee told Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstien, “You did the one thing I did not think was possible.  You made people feel sorry for Richard Nixon.”  Great comedy always contain a kernel of truth.  Suggesting physical harm to the oval office occupant is no laughing matter.  It is a cheap shot which does not exhibit creativity, but rank stupidity.

Yesterday, Clinton demonstrated she has not yet learned the most important lesson from the 2016 election.  Yes, she was the victim of external forces which should not have been part of the campaign narrative.  But she is not the one who should be talking about it.  By doing so, she is opening herself to being played by the Trump propaganda machine just as she was throughout the presidential contest.  What could make the Trump communications team happier than being able to remind their base Clinton is a sore loser?  If she is correct, Clinton will be vindicated by the Robert Mueller, several congressional investigations and historians.  This story is about both the message and the messenger. Please Hillary, stop handing ammunition to the Trump agitpróp apparatus.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP