Category Archives: Culture

Things That Scare Me

Culture, Politics

 

I love horror flicks.  I read almost every Stephen King book as soon as it is released.  And I still sleep well at night.  Why?  Because I know there is no Jason who will rise from Crystal Lake and kill me if I have pre-marital sex (as seems to be every victim’s sin in Friday the 13th movies). And I don’t believe  bullied students can seek revenge with telekinetic powers (Carrie), homicidal clowns live in the neighborhood sewer (It) or having been the site of a vicious murder results in a hotel being haunted for all time (The Shining).

There are only two King novels which actually gave me the willies.  I have been bitten by a dog (as in Cujo) and experienced the anxiety of not knowing whether I would need a painful regimen of rabies shots.  And there are too many instances of mentally unstable fans, like Annie Wilkes in Misery, who stalk celebrities (John David Chapman/John Lennon or Yolanda Saldivar/Selena) or crave attention and commit violent acts (John Hinckley, Jr./Ronald Reagan).

If I were to give this syndrome a name, it would be “anxiety déjà vu (ADV).” It emerges when one’s fear index rises having witnessed something they have seen or experienced before.  Fortunately, occasions on which I suffer bouts of ADV are very rare and very infrequent.  This morning was again one of those instances.

Several news outlets, reporting on a Trump rally of Iowa evangelicals in Council Bluffs, quoted the Republican presidential candidate as saying.

Raise your hands, Christian Conservatives…everybody.  Raise your hand if you’re not a Christian conservative—I want to see this, right. That’s—oh, there’s a couple people, that’s all right. I think we’ll keep them, right? Should we keep them in the room, yes? I think so. (Source: Time.com, September 28, 2016)

Huffington Post reported Trump “appeared to be joking.”  And that very well may be the case.  But even an attempt at humor triggered my ADV.  How can a candidate for President of the United States not appreciate asking people to identify themselves according  to their faith has historical precedence?  Whether those asking were Roman, German or the Islamic State, the outcome has always been the same.

Photograph of the smashed interior of the Berlin synagogueDo I believe Donald Trump is the next Hitler?  No.  But history tells us he doesn’t have to be. Kristallnacht (Chrystal Night also known as the Night of Broken Glass), the most infamous pogrom (violent riot) against German Jews was not conducted by the military under Hitler’s command. The November 1938 event was carried out by German citizens and the Sturmabteilung (the paramilitary arm of the Nazi party).  All the German government had to do was look the other way.

And that is what REALLY scares me.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

The Case for Due Process

Culture, Media, Uncategorized

 

In a previous post, I shared The Daily Show host Trevor Noah’s observation you can both support Black Lives Matter AND be pro-police.  I still believe that.  In fact, my pro-police side was affirmed several times over the weekend following the largely unsuccessful terrorist bombing in the Chelsea neighborhood of New York City.  (NOTE:  Though this is hardly a laughing matter, it did remind me of a segment from the early days of Saturday Night Live titled “Dangerous, But Inept” which profiled among others Gerald Ford’s attempted assassins Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme and Sarah Moore.)

For the three days following the bombing, life again imitated art as the arrest and arraignment of accused bomber Ahmad Khan Rahami could just have easily been episodes of  CSI and Law and Order. Through meticulous detective work and forensics, law enforcement officials quickly identified Rahami as a suspect and issued an all points bulletin which generated a tip as to his whereabouts.  On Monday Morning, Rahami was taken into custody following a gun battle in which one officer and Ramani were injured.  Within 24 hours, Rahami was charged in federal court on several criminal counts including use of weapons of mass destruction and bombing a place of public use.  Additionally, he faces state charges including attempted murder of a law enforcement officer.

This is EXACTLY how our system of criminal justice was designed to work.  Everyone involved from police to prosecutors to first responders who tended to the injured deserve our praise and gratitude.  Now that the primary suspect is in custody, one would hope those appointed to try Ramani for these crimes continue to adhere to constitutional principles.

No one should be surprised that Donald Trump immediately questioned whether Ramani was entitled to medical treatment and due process.  At a Ft. Myers, Florida rally he told his supporters:

But the bad part, now we will give him amazing hospitalization. He will be taken care of by some of the best doctors in the world. He will be given a fully modern and updated hospital room. And he’ll probably even have room service, knowing the way our country is.

And on top of all that, he will be represented by an outstanding lawyer. His case will go through the various court systems for years and, in the end, people will forget and his punishment will not be what it once would have been. (Source: NPR, September 19, 2016)

Contrary to evidence dozens of terror suspects have been tried and convicted in U.S. courts since 9/11, CNN sadly took the bait and raised the question, “Does bombing suspect deserve due process?”  Viewers were quick to counter this inquiry including a tweet from @goddamnedfrank  which read, “CNN is now normalizing fascism, questioning the rule of law and the civil rights protections enshrined in the US Constitution.”

But Arlo Guthrie is again whispering in my ear, “That’s not what you came here to talk about.” Here are the questions I have concerning the response to the Chelsea bombing.  There is no doubt Ramani was armed and dangerous.  He proved it by engaging in an exchange of gunfire prior to his capture.  He wounded a law enforcement officer.  He resisted arrested.  I doubt anyone would have felt authorities where unjustified in using “deadly force” in response to this perceived threat.

But they didn’t.  In this case, where the suspect posed a far greater risk than many of the individuals now being championed by Black Lives Matter,  he was disarmed and taken into custody.  And unlike the young black men who have died due to the use of “deadly force” whether justified or not, Ramani will have his day in court.

Here are my questions.  “If law enforcement officers can disable and capture the most dangerous among us, why is this not the case in instances associated with traffic violations and petty crimes? Although I have not seen a detailed medical report, Ramani appears to have been wounded in the right arm and right leg.  Are police officers involved in the shooting deaths of some of these black men so poorly trained  marksmen they are not capable of incapacitating a suspect short of death?  And why doesn’t CNN focus on the denial of due process in cases where law enforcement, in addition to its legitimate and necessary role in the criminal justice system, also becomes judge and executioner?”

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

Leading from Behind…or Farther Back

Culture, Politics, Uncategorized

 

There I go again.  A hopefully provocative headline which will entice you into reading this post.  And you likely thought the subject matter involved United States foreign policy.  If you’re still reading this, it worked.

Actually, this post is about philanthropy, a topic which has received considerable attention during the last couple of weeks, largely due to the Washington Post’s David Farenthold and his investigation into the Trump Foundation.  Farenthold has pointed out a number of instances in which the Trump Foundation is guilty of either illegal or questionable transactions including:

  • A $25,000 donation to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi’s re-election campaign at the time Ms. Bondi was considering whether to join her New York counterpart’s case against Trump University.
  • Failure to make a $1.0 million donation to veterans’ organizations in lieu of participating in a Republican debate until he was shamed into doing so after being exposed by Farenthold.
  • Use of charitable funds by Trump to purchase two portraits of himself.  NOTE: The charitable tax benefit goes to the individual who donates the item to an auction, not the person who buys it.
  • The use of charitable funds for donations to civic organizations  to settle lawsuits related to violations at his Mar-a-Lago home and one of his golf courses in New York.  The settlements were supposed to be paid with corporate or personal funds.

As reported by Farenthold, what makes this more unconscionable is the fact the Trump Foundation, since 2008, has been funded by third parties, not by Trump himself.

Sometimes I have to research an issue to better understand it.  This is not one of those cases as I have personal experience, having proudly been an associate for five years at the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation in Kansas City, Missouri.  What struck me as I read Farenthold’s reporting was not these individual instances of charitable malpractice, but the difference in philosophy between Trump as an philanthropist and Mr. K (as he was affectionately called by friends, colleagues and the Kansas City community).  Mr. K practiced what he preached and held himself to the same standards he expected of others.  For someone like Trump, who is quick to suggest he would be out front rather than “leading from behind,” you should look for him to demonstrate that leadership style in other aspects of his life.

Which brings me back to Mr. K.  When he felt people did not appreciate the heritage of Negro Leagues baseball or acknowledge the talent of the players who never had an opportunity to play for major league teams, he put up the money to build the National Negro Leagues Baseball Museum.  When he believed the rich history of Kansas City jazz might be forgotten, he funded the American Jazz Museum.  He did not wait for someone else to ask him to join these projects.  It was his lead funding, desire and initiative which brought others to the table.

Although not a charitable endeavor, Mr. K also demonstrated a commitment to his home town when he personally committed the dollars which secured a major league franchise which became the Kansas City Royals.  While many owners view sports franchises as a wise business investment, the extent to which Mr. K viewed the Royals as a community asset became clear when he directed the proceeds from the sale of the team after his death to go the Kansas City Community Foundation, not to his own foundation or to the family.

There is one other major difference between Trump and Mr. K.  Neither the Negro Leagues or jazz museums bares his name.  And when he put up the money for a new stadium for his beloved baseball team, he insisted it be called Royals Stadium.  Only after he was diagnosed with cancer and his imminent death became apparent, his friends and the community demanded the name be changed to Kauffman Stadium so they could honor him while he was still alive.

Mr. K’s philosophy of philanthropy did not extend to his business dealings.  Just the opposite.  The principles which guided the foundation were honed during his years as president and CEO of Marion Merrill Dow.  He was among the first to institute profit sharing with his workers.  He changed the relationship between management and labor by referring to everyone as associates.  He attributed his success to hiring people smarter than himself.

This is what taking the lead looks like.  More importantly, it is not demonstrated through individual transactions, it is manifest in the overarching philosophy on which those transactions are based.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

Are We Really THAT Dissatisfied?

Culture, Media

 

Among the questions included in the Reuters/Ipsos “Core Political Data” tracking poll is the following.

Generally speaking, would you say things in this country are heading in the right direction, or are they off on the wrong track?

The sample size is 1607 American citizens with a sampling error of plus or minus 2.8 percent.  Below are the results based on the latest responses on August 18, 2016.

Ipsos

These results are touted nightly on cable news to explain everything from the rise of outsiders like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump to citizens’ concerns about national security, the economy and education.

I’m quite sure the survey developers, by starting with the phrase “generally speaking,” feel respondents are looking at the big picture.  But what if they are wrong.  What if passionate feelings about one or two issues is driving the negative feedback.  Let’s take a look at how that might happen on both sides of the political spectrum, starting with the Republicans.

What are some of the reasons the 90 percent of Republicans might think the country is heading in the wrong direction?

  • “I can’t believe Americans elected a foreign-born Muslim president.”
  • “Obamacare is just one more example of how America is moving from capitalism to socialism.”
  • “I don’t know what I get in return for all the taxes I pay.”
  • “America seems to be more and more divided along racial lines.”
  • “For me, marriage is reserved for one man and one woman.”

Many of the above sentiments are directly linked to policies advocated or implemented by the Obama administration and judges, many of whom Republicans view as liberal activists.  So how do you explain the plurality (45 percent) of self-described Democrats being equally dissatisfied?  All you need to do is consider the adverse of the reasons Republicans might have chosen the “wrong track” option.

  • “I can’t believe we live in an country where so many people can’t accept the fact an African-American citizen was elected president.”
  • “Obamacare is a cash cow for private health insurers.  We need a public option.”
  • “The wealthiest Americans do not pay their fair share of taxes.”
  • “America seems to be more and more divided between the haves and have nots.”
  • “There are still too many laws which discriminate against members of the LGBT community.”

I understand what the pollsters are trying to measure, and I’m not sure I could come up with a perfectly worded question which would more accurately gauge public sentiment.  In 1980, Ronald Reagan presented the satisfaction question in a different way when he asked Americans, “Are you better off today than you were four years ago?”  Political and ideological preferences might still influence one’s response.  But this makes it personal (am I?), not generic (is the country?).

The clearest evidence this individual versus collective phrasing might make a huge difference is another frequently asked question on political surveys.

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Congress is handling its job?

The Gallup organization’s last poll prior to the 2014 mid-term election (taken October 29-November 2) reported only 20 percent of respondents chose “approved” while 75 percent “disapproved,” a negative differential of 55 percent.  One might have expected a massive turnover.  However 96.4 percent of incumbents retained their seats.  In other words, even though we may collectively despise Congress, we like our individual representatives.

Which makes me wonder, “Even if the pollsters are asking the wrong questions, is there something we can learn from the responses?”  In the two examples above, I better realize why I think the country is on the wrong track.  For whatever reasons, opinions and voting preferences seem to be driven more by their impact on an individual than on the collective citizenry.  For me, America will be on the right track (i.e. the one the forefathers laid out in the Federalist Papers) when, for example, the one percent sincerely questions the impact of lower tax rates on everyone and Social Security recipients stop demonizing those who promote an honest debate about the future of entitlements.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP

 

Irrational Fear of Islam IS-LAMe

Culture, Religion

 

Janet Adkins, a candidate for school superintendent in our community, included the following in an op-ed piece in the local paper:

As a mom, I have had my child come home and share with me how he was offered “extra credit” if he could memorize the “five pillars of Islam.”…I am opposed to instruction of Islam ideas in our public schools. We should not allow instruction in the classroom to minimize the threat that is posed by Islamic terrorists who are seeking to destroy us. (Source: Fernandina Beach News Leader, August 17, 2016)

In contrast to Ms. Adkins’ immediate and visceral response to the assignment, my first thought was, “Why would a teacher give this assignment?” And since I was unfamiliar with the specifics of the “five pillars,” I Googled the term. Guess what? The only difference between the “five pillars” and similar tenets of Christianity and Judaism is semantics. Consider the following:

Pillar #1: Shahadah: sincerely reciting the Muslim profession of faith. How does this differ from Christian belief that salvation is only possible through Christ the savior or the conviction by Jews they are the chosen people? Are these not also religion-specific professions of faith?

Pillar #2: Salat: performing ritual prayers in the proper way five times each day. Who could argue Judaism and Christianity do not have their own rituals? What is communion? What is the wearing of the yarmulke and prayer shawl?

muslim prayercommunion jewish prayer

Pillar #3: Zakat: paying an alms (or charity) tax to benefit the poor and the needy. Do the terms tithing and tzedakah ring a bell?

Pillar #4: Sawm: fasting during the month of Ramadan. According to beliefnet.com, the Muslim fast during Ramadan is a way to seek purity of heart and mind. Is that not the same goal for Jews who fast on Yom Kippur or Christians who observe Lent?

Pillar #5: Hajj: pilgrimage to Mecca. At the end of the Passover seder, Jews close the ceremony with the words, “Next year in Jerusalem.” When I Googled the term “holy land tours,” the first listing described the trip as “a Christian journey of a lifetime.”

So why would a teacher offer extra credit to students who research the five pillars of Islam? Perhaps that educator felt, in light of some individuals’ efforts (including a candidate for superintendent) to divide people, this was an opportunity to demonstrate that even diverse cultures have more in common than we are led to believe. What would be more heartening than a Christian or Jewish student reaching out to a Muslim classmate and having the following conversation?

Jewish Student: I can’t believe you have to fast for a WHOLE month. We only have to do it for 24 hours.

Muslim Student: Our fast is just during the day. We break fast every night. Is it true you don’t even take drinks of water during your fast? I don’t know if I could do that.

Christian Student: Sounds like we have it easy. All we have to do is give up one thing of importance to us. I gave up video games last year.

Muslim Student: I have a great idea. Let’s observe each others’ tradition during Ramadan, Yom Kippur and Lent.

Christian & Jewish Student: It’s a deal!

If opponents of multi-cultural content in our schools find the pillars of Islam so distasteful, are they willing to make the same pronouncements about similar tenets and rituals of their own religions. I challenge people like Janet Adkins to tell me what they find so offensive about the five pillars of Islam? Education should be about enlightenment. It appears she would rather keep our students in the dark.

For what it’s worth.
Dr. ESP