Pages

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Beautiful Souls, by Eyal Press


Few and far between

What does it take for a human being to stand up to evil, to say no to cooperation with corruption, to step in to stop violence? Despite the fact that many people admire those who stand up to dictators, bullies and thieves,  the answer, according to this book, is "just the right circumstances.” Author Eyal Press travels around the world to interview a few “beautiful souls” who did resist evil: a man who served as a Swiss border guard in 1938, letting Jews escape Nazi Germany; a Serb who saved Croat prisoners just after the shelling of Srebrenica; an Israeli soldier who refused to take part in harassing Palestinians; and a woman who lost her job at the Stanford Financial Group at the time the financial giant was running a Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors. The stories are vivid and harrowing, but not the straightforward  tales of idealism and superior empathy that you might expect.

What Press found was that his heroes did not usually act solely from a sense of morality or fellow feeling. These are not the saints or the super-athletes of empathy one might expect. Instead, they acted from a mixture of idealism about their government and from (frankly) personal peculiarities. The Serbian man, who saved a hundred Croats by claiming they were Serbs, was the kind of guy who doesn't give a damn what anyone thinks of him. Dig into his character, and he's almost boorish about lacking interest in the agendas of others. This is interesting, but Press digs deeper, into the web of his Croatian acquaintances and his girlfriend. Each layer reveals a seemingly different person -- one who cares deeply about those he loves, but not about ethnicity. Put this person in the right place, and he becomes an unlikely hero.

The same goes for Press's other subjects. Each is utterly ordinary, neither an activist nor political nor religious. But happenstance moved them and their oddities into the crosshairs of destiny. Take the Swiss border guard. Unlike other Swiss officials faced with an influx of Jewish refugees before the war, he found himself face to face with human suffering. And he could not bear to turn people back to their doom. It was his sense of fulfilling his country's ideal of hospitality to strangers that moved him, not abstract notions of the refugees' humanity. He thought (wrongly as it turned out) that anyone would do what he did. Yet his actions saved hundreds.

Press's most thought-provoking chapter concerns Israeli soldiers refusing to move Palestinians out of their homes in the West Bank. The Israeli army actually has a "black flag" policy that can protect such soldiers from dismissal or abuse. This seems exemplary. But Press tells of soldiers from the other side of the political divide who, egged on by conservative rabbis, refuse to move Israeli settlers out of their homes. The question: how does an army, which relies on discipline to allow the will of its government to be done, deal with soldiers who pick and choose which orders to obey? The question is particularly sensitive in Israel, which suffered under a Nazism whose soldiers claimed they were just following orders in executing the Holocaust.

"Beautiful Souls" is not a feel-good volume intended to salve the feelings of the reader. This is not a book in “Chicken Soup” mode. It is a serious, sometimes moving and often disquieting study of the seemingly very few souls who bother to lift a finger for others in times of peril. It also details the peril of standing up for righteousness. Most of Press’s interviewees were treated shabbily during and after their truth-telling. The public, which supposedly celebrates acts of goodness, is often hostile to those who blow the whistle on evil. After reading the book, those of us whose goodness is untested might not presume so easily that we would rise to the occasion when the time came.

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Guns and Crazy People




I'm all for gun ownership. But like ownership of cars, medical degrees and cases of beer -- all items that can cause grievous injury in the wrong hands -- ISTM that common sense regulation of guns should be a no-brainer.

And to gun-advocacy groups like the NRA, gun ownership IS a no-brainer. Their arguments bypass the brain completely and lodge firmly in the gut, the place where fear overpowers reason. Fear of tyranny keeps gun owners terrified that President Obama will take their guns away. Fear of break-ins and home invasions keep homeowners terrified in their own homes. Fear of random violence prompts citizens to demand further and further expansion of the presence of guns -- witness "stand your ground" and concealed carry laws.

Gun groups like the NRA stoke that fear, while gun sellers use it to increase sales and politicians pander to it to get votes.

Meanwhile, the body count mounts, while the Founders' ideal of a gun-carrying "well-regulated militia" recedes further and further.

The image, clockwise from upper left: Arthur Bremer (shot George Wallace); James Holmes (Aurora shooter);  Lee Harvy Oswald (shot JFK); Dylan and Kelbold (Columbine shooters); John Hinckley (shot Ronald Reagan); Mark Chapman (shot John Lennon); middle: Charles Guiteau shoots James Garfield.

I could have added more: Sirhan Sirhan and John Wilkes Booth, for starters.

Thursday, July 12, 2012

The ultimate make-work job!



You have to wonder how our Congress think it's making good use of their time be repeatedly voting against Obamacare, knowing that the Democratically-controlled Senate will just shoot it down. If you came to work and re-did what you did the day before, how long would it be until you were asked to move onto to your next opportunity? The US Congress: the ultimate make-work job!

ARGUMENT #5 FOR SUPPORTING THE ACA

ARGUMENT #5 FOR SUPPORTING THE ACA

IT'S NOT SOCIALISM AND IT'S NOT A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER!!!

Everybody worries that with ObamaCare, we have steped onto the slippery slope that will lead us straight to socialized medicine. But how close are we to a governemnt takeover?
...
A sample of what the spectrum of healthcare options looks like:

1) Laissez faire (very evil version): the system bases care on ideological grounds: you support the government (or ruling junta) and you get healthcare. We are not here yet. Although, by constantly trying stripping health care from the poor, we are on conversational terms.
2) Laissez faire (slightly less evil version): the system bases care on your ablity to pay and ability to pressure Congress to vote your way. Those with big bucks or political clout get care. The rest have to rely on Bill Gates, nuns and good samaritans. No death panels, but you wish there were -- to increase your odds of surviving.
3) ProfitCare: Insurers, Big Pharma, legislators and health care providers conspire to keep rates high, divert funds to high-profit procedures and medications and bump sick people from the rolls. No new vaccinews, but plenty of drugs for erectile dysfunction and the blues. Sound familiar?
4) ProfitCare with a (kind of) heart: This is ObamaCare. Insurers, Big Pharma and health-care providers stay in business, with some regulation of their activies. Profitability is protected by insuring more people, or getting them to kick in their share. The industry still makes hefty profits, but at least most sick folks get some level of care.
5) Light control: Insurance rates are more highly-regulated, administration is centralized to save money and paperwork, government taxes or subsidizes Big Pharma to get them to provide public service meds like cheap insulin, insurers and hospitals still compete for business and get to and make profits if they are efficient, lucrative fields like cosmetic surgery are open, small-town docs get small stipends to offer care to the inner city, elective procedures available for the wealthy. This is close to what is offered in Europe.
6) Heavier control: like its soft version, but with increasing regs and taxes for elective or medically-unwarranted procedures
7) Goverment takeover: government controls everything: how you pay, how much doctors get, which procedures are covered or legal, how many hospitals exists and where, etc.

We are so far removed from the government takeover of the medical system that the hysteria around ObamaCare is laughable, when it is not a cynical manipulation that seeks to maintain high profits. There are, of course, garduations and variations on all these options. What's amazing to me is that by taking a half-step away from a laissez faire medical model, critics claim that we are "becoming like Europe." As though that is a bad thing, with Europeans dying in the streets by the truckload. As though American health care couldn't possibly get any better.

Sunday, July 08, 2012

My heresy from Me

I felt tired yesterday. Maybe from a thought of one of the guys in my prayer group. He had lost a child last year, and said he was tired of trying to figure out what or who God was.

I think I understand.

I spend quite of a bit of my time wrestling with God, who God is and what God does. I don't care for the messages coming from the fundamentalists about a judgmental God who "loves" by condemning, and who never has to answer to questions posed by scientists and nosy scholars. And I am unconvinced by my own Church, which has the answers to everything. "Q: Why did God God created us? A: To love him, serve him and to live with him forever in heaven."

I don't know about that.

But I am tired of trying to figure out God. Today, it seems like such a fruitless pursuit.

Which led me to what is, for me, a "heretical" thought: Perhaps the dumbest things that we Catholics did in the 1950s and 1960s is to try to figure out God. We tried to change our Church from the nice, dumb collections of strange rituals, colorful medieval costumes and ancient chants into an exercise that was within the grasp of our intellect. We tried to know what Jesus "really" looked like, to get an accurate picture of his death on the cross, to dig into the gospels to find his real words.

And I'm not sure we have gotten any closer to the mystery that is God. In fact, we have deconstructed two millenia of myth and supposition, to the degree that nothing seems to remain. Our scientists have given us the tools to understand the physical and chemical workings of the Universe, once ascribed to God. Our scholars have shown us that our sacred writings have flaws and inconsistencies incompatible with the idea that they are God-given. Like Job, we sit on the dunghill, upon the wreckage of our past expectations. We have taken apoart the grand machinery of our beliefs, but are not sure how to put it back together. And whether we can.

So, I sometimes long for the days when we did not dream of getting into the soul of the machine. When we just left it alone to churn along, its noisy gears and spinning axles whirring pointlessly. But happily.

Of course, I will come back to my senses. I know that religion's unseeing God machine was at least as destructive to human lives as it was inspiring. But I wonder if something useful can be constructed from the piles of disconnected parts that remain.

For now, I see myself graced by the presence of God as it emerges from the ordinariness of my life. I do not need a priest or a prayer to be blessed. I am blessed by my existence. Even if its source is veiled to me. Yet I see signs of God's love everywhere. In the devotion of a doctor to heal a poor child. In the chance to sympathize with a coworker with eye problems. In a chance encounter with a stranger who read a book review. In delighting at the familiar coarseness of my wife's hair. In an anniversary wish from an African I met ten years ago.

I don't need to beg for a miracle or a sign. I live, I love, and I am loved by a God as distant as the distant quasar but as close as the pesky dragonfly flitting about my deck.

Drainage Water of Life?


There's evidently a crucifix in Mumbai that is dripping water. The faithful says it's a miracle. A skeptic says it's drainage water seeping from a nearby restroom. A local Catholic group demands he apologize. Ai yi yi!

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/new_scientist/2012/07/a_statue_of_jesus_oozing_holy_water_an_indian_skeptic_debunks_miracle.html

Friday, July 06, 2012

Argument #4 for supporting the ACA

WHAT, ME SUFFER?

Imagine a world in which one out of 6 homes did not have fire insurance. And in which people who lived in fire-prone areas, who were regularly burnt out of their homes, refused government aid to buy affordable fire insurance. "We'd rather live on the street than protect our homes from catastrophic fires!" they'd scream. "Better dead than fire-engine Red!"

Alas, when it comes to health care, that's the world in which we live.

But why should it be?

Why should I be the only kid on the block who maxes out his health insurance when he turns 6, because of some dumb ol' childhood leukemia? Later, when I need my tonsils out at age 8 and my wisdom teeth out at age 12 and a broken arm set at age 15, my folks will have to pay full boat. Then I get to miss college and skip birth control (can't afford it) and end up stressed with a houseful of kids, but can't get therapy because that's out of reach too.

Why should my folks lose their home because Mom's hysterectomy and chemo, needed to kill her ovarian cancer, wiped out her savings and lost her a job? Should the children of such as mother have to live in poverty and go to substandard schools because of an accident of biology?

Why should my hard-working friends, who had the bad luck to have their car rammed by a drunk driver, and have to spend months in hospitals and rehabs, see their retirement fund wiped out. Not only have their plans for travel after retirement gone out their window, but also their hopes to retire in modest comfort. They hope they can scrape by on Social Security and the charity of their kids. Speaking of which, the kids never intended to have Mom and Dad on their hands.

From a completely selfish point of view, the potential for all of this suffering should make people cry out for a system that can ease the burden of those burdened by bad luck. And don't let anyone fool ya: bad luck (and bad genes and bad timing) get everyone to some degree at one point or another.

200 years ago, wise old Ben Franklin organized a system of fire insurance in Philadelphia. Everyone paid a little to compensate the few whose houses burned. Today, there might not be a large chance that fire will burn down your house, but if it does, the effects without insurance are catastrophic and far-reaching. Yet the chance of getting seriously ill are far higher than having your home go up in smoke. Between cancers (pick your favorite) and diabetes and emphysema and heart problems, our chances of getting pretty sick are almost 100%. Why should we be the ones whose families gets wiped out because we refused to participate in a plan that would protect us from the worst ravages of illness?

And why would I wish that on anyone else?

Argument #3 for supporting the ACA

IT'S PATRIOTIC! (or, THE COMMON GOOD)

What's more patriotic than the image of our doughty Pilgrim forebears, huddled below the decks of the Mayflower in the bay at Cape Cod, preparing themselves to step onto American soil land to start a new life! But what did they do just before hitting the beach? They made themselves an agreement about how they were to act. An excerpt:

[We], in the presence of God, and one of another, covenant and combine our selves together into a civil body politic, for our better ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the Colony, unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.

Talk about governmental overreach! Not a single word about me, me, me! The "general good of the colony"? Not the gross enrichment of each individual and the accumulation of tchotkes thereof? Why, it seems positively communistic, all this talk about the common good. They should have call it the Pilgrim Soviet of Plymouth!

And yet...

Patriotism and the common good have barely been spoken of during the debate, The focus has been on the mandate, and why the government has any business meddling with our precious individual liberty to act like idiots. But unlike many private vices, health is a public concern. You catch a cold, and I'm going to catch it from you. You refuse a vaccine, and a classroom full of kids gets killer diseases. You don't get preventive care, and you show up three-quarters dead on the hospital steps -- on my dime!!!!

The mad rush to maximize personal liberty AT ALL COSTS is the peculiar sickness of the "bodie politick" in our own day. Let's get patriotic and remember our founders, who went so far as to put the public good above the wishes and desires of individuals.

And while we're at it, how about some socialist Commie twaddle from another bunch of radicals?

"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."

Thursday, July 05, 2012

5 arguments for suporting the healthcare bill

I am working on a piece that describes 5 reasons for supporting President Obama's health care bill, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. God know the bill has more than its share of detractors -- the folks who need it the loudest among them. It may be an impossible task, but I want to see if I can persuade them -- maybe even with new arguments that haven't been floated yet.

Reason to support the ACA #1 -- LIBERTY!!!!

Why hasn't the liberty argument been advanced to support the ACA? I mean, think about the many ways that the current health care system ties us down. I am afraid to leave my job because I'm not sure I can get health care, especially as I get older, from a new employer. There might be a job in a start-up company that would be a great fit for me. But without a guarantee that I can leave my old employer and maybe move to another state, I am stuck at the same old grind.

The ACA breaks the chains that bind me to my old employer and to my old locale. With the ACA, I am FREE to move anywhere I want, knowing that I and my family will be covered in case of a medical crisis.

Reason to support the ACA #2 -- PRO-ENTERPRENEURS!!!!!

I hinted at this above. But one reason people (especially old farts like me) might not want to risk starting a new company -- or joining a fledgling start-up -- is that the new job might not come with health insurance. I know that people take this risk anyway, but I'll bet there are plenty of folks who would just as soon play it safe with a dull job that has health care, than with an exciting opportunity that doesn't.  But with everyone being required to get health care (and having an affordable way to get it) the next middle-aged Bill Gates or Steve Jobs might take a chance and spread their wings -- to the benefit of themselves and the country.

Reason to support the ACA #3 -- TBD!!!!

Working on it! Watch this space or another installment!