About the Terrorist Situation

The terrorist attacks in France have dominated news media for eight days. When innocent people are killed for no direct reason, this truly is murderous and beyond the reasoning of normal human beings. The terrorist battle is shaped by the power of the Internet, communication satellites, and sophisticated weaponry, which includes bombs placed in soft drink cans.

It also is shaped by a world economy based solely on profiteering. The world economy today, including current trade agreements and international treaty organizations, is designed to protect participants against nonmember incursions – military, economic and cultural. Nations with low gross national product, especially nations with authoritarian governments coupled with countering terrorist groups, are not allowed. The problem is that these nations are full of millions of people who can’t be called the poorest of poor – they truly are destitute and battle death every day from starvation, disease, civil war, terrorist murder – and an indifferent world economy. Is there reason for their animosity?

For the last half century in particular, the United States has led the way in the design and application of the world economy with its singular focus on profit. In fact, the US has set an exemplary example of a government and culture run for the purpose of profit and the power that accumulated profit brings to key players in the economy. Today, the US has become an oligarchy run by plutocrats. The idea that profit (money) is the same as speech in the First Amendment is a telling belief that the US is a profit-based culture.

That the US population (not just the billionaires) has hundreds of billions of dollars to spend on show business, sports, vacations, opulent homes, and other ancillary but expensive pastimes, suggests an abundance of cash well beyond a culture that would use excess income for education, health and social services, technical advancement, 21st century infrastructure, and government-driven charitable support for those less fortunate in the US and around the world. It is noteworthy that none of the above excesses is considered unethical or even out of the ordinary; they are expected benefits of living in a profit-driven culture.

These broad-based observations about the focused pursuit of wealth in modern times – over the centuries since the beginning of colonialism coupled with the industrial revolution and subsequent profit-based ages – are the background that has fostered inequality and poverty as quickly as it has drawn income to the winners of economic profits. It fosters a class system among nations: 1st tier industrialized nations, 2nd tier developing nations, usually commodity economies, 3rd tier undeveloped nations, in truth meaning these nations are not participating in the profit-based world economy because for one reason or another they cannot accumulate an ante to play the profit game. Like the poor in the US, they aren’t allowed to reap benefits from the profit culture.

Another benefit provided by a profit-based economy is the opportunity to feel secure, to feel good about one’s self, and to invest time in socializing and other rewarding pastimes. Conversely, those not wrapped in that security and opportunity for personal growth do not feel secure nor can they mature in a well-rounded way because they are too busy trying to survive not only in body but in spirit as well. Add to this disadvantage – especially among the ancient cultures of the Middle East – a religion that has not had the benefit of cultural upgrades and has not engaged in the evolvement of modern dependable governments – and further has no benefits from modern technology, infrastructure and lacks an income-based workforce, there exists an opportunity for terrorism. This is a common description for Somalia, Sudan, and Nigeria, just to name countries regularly in the news because of terrorism.

Understandably, these populations are starting from scratch; no dependable government exists to influence their thinking, no money to expand personal wellbeing, no nurturing history to assuage them intellectually. They are required to experience to a significant degree the nation making battles of early Europe to sort out their own winners, their own acculturation, their own form of government not based on Christianity. Like primitive man before them, metaphorically they have only spears, their fervor and their lives. While unacceptable to nations who have evolved on schedule, their only choice at the start is terrorism.

By no means do these background thoughts justify their violent behavior. But there is context. In a similar context, because of the permission ostensibly giving every American the right to bear arms, 30,000 US citizens are killed with guns every year. Because our culture condones this horrific violence and it is in the context of our laws and culture, we discount its immorality.

If we understand the context of Middle East terrorism, we may more easily have success eliminating it. The rest of the world must set an example of civil behavior else, we regress to primitive man.

Ancient Mariner

 

Today’s Issues are about Paradigm Shifts

So many deep cultural and behavioral patterns are under duress today. To name only a few of many, In the US and Europe, consider the transition of religious practice: many churches are becoming anachronisms with falling attendance, bound by generation gaps and overburdened spiritually by large, old fashioned denominational hierarchies. On the evangelical side of the spectrum, literal allegiance to old rituals and intense isolationist attitudes prevail. A few churches are blessed by location in supportive communities and have excellent leadership. Yet the path they follow grows narrow. The current role of Christian faith in society is under pressure to change its paradigm, its model of behavior and purpose.

In the US, political process is grinding to a halt as our body politic undergoes a meiosis of culture – moving farther right and farther left – leaving little ground in the middle for common purpose. Eventually, what new political identity will emerge? What will be the new paradigm?

International relationships are confronted with global issues that require a new, stronger bond between nations. Not just climate change, a profound confrontation for which there is scant preparedness, but other global issues as well involving cybernetics, instant awareness of global activity, population management, multinational economic models, distribution of food and medical support, and the international role of corporations.

Every one of these patterns of behavior, or paradigms, is under duress, highly vulnerable to disorganized response, militaristic rebellion, profit taking, denial, and short-sighted solutions. The news of the day focuses on terrorist atrocities in France. In the Middle East, cultural wars have erupted in response to religious differences, economic inequality, cultural conflict and political disparity. Many nations struggle to find solutions to mass emigration, irrational abuse of citizens by governments and armed conflict in a war with no boundaries, no front lines, and no hierarchical organization.

What is the world to do? What are the processes by which solutions can emerge?

First, we must acknowledge that profound changes are occurring. These changes introduce new values that do not exist in the current perception of world order. Intransigent Christian concepts of society, government, and ethics have shaped the history of Western culture since the time of Constantine. Meanwhile, unnoticed histories shaped by Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism have evolved unnoticed until recent times. In many respects, these other historical influences have not experienced the demand for innovation and competition that Western societies require. Hence, many Eastern practices exist according to older behaviors established as long ago as the eighth century. Many Eastern governments exist today in forms that were adequate until economic and social influence from the West interfered. Tribal values persist even today; the East, particularly the nomadic Middle East, had no need in the past to develop new social solutions similar to Western mechanisms that cope with power and competition. The East never had need of a Magna Carta, parliaments, or the right to vote.

Without the cultural tools developed by the West, that is, trust in government to manage important issues, democratic tools to shape government as times changed, and the rule of law, the Middle East is bound to manage a paradigm shift with what is at hand: aggression and lashing out with violence.

The cultural conflict today, particularly the Islamic-Christian conflict, cannot be ignored. Further, it cannot be contained by armed aggression; it cannot be contained by Western political tools like treaties, international agreements like NATO, or buying compliance through economic favoritism. Of particular importance is that Middle Eastern governments are theocracies – whether dictatorships, sheikdoms or subordinate governments; the religious leaders are in charge – or at least dominate national options. Middle Eastern theocracies have not experienced the pragmatic influence of secularism first melded in Max Weber’s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism and other publications. Further, separation of church and state mandated by a few Western nations is an unknown precept to Middle Eastern theocracies.

An assumption held by many westerners is that the West must be tolerant but controlling while waiting for the Middle East to “grow up” and become part of the modern (Christian) world. It may not be addressed as simple as that. What if the roles are switched? If the West had the attitude that it must allow the Middle East to develop a new world order inclusive of the Islamic tradition – a tradition that at least would alter Western perceptions of ethic and personal freedom.

Here are some facts about the world and Islam that may be of interest to the reader’s contemplations:

Bill Maher provides a stark comparison between Islamic and Christian ideology that’s simplistic but reveals in short order the different approaches to justice. See:

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Islam+Vs+Christianity&FORM=VRIBRE#view=detail&mid=792282120BE4D111E919792282120BE4D111E919

The number of Christians in the world is 1.99 billion. The number of Muslims in the world is 2.08 billion. Muslim population is growing faster (1.84%) than Christian population (1.13%).

A column from CNN compares religious behavior between Islam and Christianity. See:

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/03/conflict-theology-and-history-make-muslims-more-religious-than-others-experts-say/?hpt=hp_c1

Considering population in terms of gross income between Islamic countries and Christian countries, the Islamic paradigm restricts economic flexibility. Advances in technology, science and cultural adaptation often contradict the Quran, especially when these advances influence a change in societal behavior.

A classic example exists in Iran, an Islamic theocracy and population, struggling with its own emerging technical (and imperial) capabilities versus centuries-old religious traditions that are in conflict both with new technical ideas and with old Shiite-Sunni rivalries. Unlike other Middle Eastern nations, Iran has a growing middle class pressing for Western values and economics at the same time that Middle Eastern politics require Iranian support of Shiite wars and objectives, including ISIL and declaring the West as evil even as its middle class uses ipods, eats fast food and wears western attire.

Clearly, the Middle East is in the throes of a paradigm shift between a religion that requires strict allegiance to Islamic values going back as far as the first century and the overwhelming human experience of the twenty-first century. The gap between the old Islamic paradigm and the new paradigm is catastrophic. It will take the rest of the century to adapt to the new paradigm. In the meantime, the West must mitigate violence perhaps with little reward as Muslim nations come to terms with the modern world.

The new international paradigm that eventually emerges will call for a different West and a different Middle East. Twenty percent of the world’s population will become a new, equal and active participant in the global experience.

Ancient mariner

He Gives us all His Love

“A mother and father whipped their 19-year-old son to death with an electrical cord during an all-night spiritual counseling session triggered by his desire to leave their church, a New York court has heard.

Lucas Leonard was subjected to a 12-hour ordeal by his parents, sister and fellow church members at the Word of Life Christian church in New Hartford, New York, on Sunday, police and witnesses alleged.

His 17-year-old brother Christopher was also beaten and was admitted to hospital in a serious condition. See full story:”

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/17/new-york-church-beating-teen-whipped-word-of-life

An antidote is needed before we discuss the above story. See:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/16/dog-who-stood-guard-over-friend-week-receives-award/74061712/

Given no other solution, how many people would stay with a family member without food and shelter for six days?

Back to the Christians. What is it about religion? Europe was plagued with one religious war or another for more than a thousand years. Richard the Lion Hearted waged war with Muslims for no historically relevant reason. Jews and Arabs have attacked one another since before recorded history and continue to this very day. Now, terrorists, presuming instruction from the Quran, roam the world seeking mindless destruction. Muslims fight Muslims between Sunni and Shia. Even among the ‘civilized’ Roman Catholics and Protestants, there is an obvious competition. During the last half of the 17th century, Massachusetts Puritans split open the noses of Quakers and cut off their ears – just because they were Quakers.

As it is with our 33rd cousin the chimpanzee, Homo sapiens likes to mix it up every once in a while for some materialistic cause – worthy or not. Chimpanzees don’t have religion. Humans developed religion to explain the unknowable universe; religion is based on having respect and love and compassion. Yet, as a single cause, religion has started more wars than any other cause. What is it about religion that two boys will be beaten by their parents for twelve hours until one dies and the other is in serious condition? What happened to the two Great Commandments, the Beatitudes and the Ten Commandments?

Mariner certainly doesn’t understand. He notes, however, that when Christians leave their New Testament to roam around in the Jewish Old Testament, something strange happens.

He gives us all his love
He gives us all his love
He’s smiling down on us from up above
And he’s giving us all his love

Lyrics by Randy Newman, from Cold Turkey, written and directed by Norman Lear (1971).

Ancient Mariner

 

Follow Up Stuff

Liberal Arts
The mariner recently submitted a number of posts about the importance of the fact that liberal art majors are disappearing. The group of subjects in this major includes what is commonly referred to as “humanities:” literature, languages, art history, music history, philosophy, logic, history, mathematics, psychology, and general science. The general theme in all these subjects is to have an understanding across several disciplines of thought. This broad understanding sharpens the student’s awareness about people and their cultures; it provides space in one’s knowledge base to make comparisons and apply lateral thinking across disciplines. Every subject has something to do with human interaction.
The mariner watched a book review on Fareed Zakaria’s GPS show (Sunday 10/04/15 CNN). The book is “Succeeding at Life – What High Achievers Know that Brilliant Machines Never Will,” by Jeff Colvin. Colvin has a stellar reputation as an organizer of startup businesses and the automated technologies that support them. Until recently, he was CEO of CIGNEX Datamatics Corporation. He now is a board member of The Estes Group, a prominent consulting firm. The next two paragraphs start the book:
“What hope will there be for us when computers can drive cars better than humans, predict Supreme Court decisions better than legal experts, identify faces, scurry helpfully around offices and factories, even perform some surgeries, all faster, more reliably, and less expensively than people? The unavoidable question – will millions of people lose out, unable to best the machine? – is increasingly dominating business, education, economics, and policy.
The answer lies not in the nature of technology but in the nature of humans. Regardless of what computers achieve, our greatest advantage lies in what we humans are most powerfully driven to do for and with one another, arising from our deepest, most essentially human abilities—empathy, creativity, social sensitivity, storytelling, humor, building relationships, and leading. This is how we create value that is durable and not easily replicated by technology – because we’re hardwired to want it from humans.”
Colvin goes on to cite a number of relationships where people strongly prefer human-to-human service. People find more comfort, trust and satisfaction visiting a human medical doctor or nurse than punching keys on a machine – even if all the doctor does is punch the same keys. Similarly, social workers, managers, organizers, consultants, attorneys and virtually every profession that interacts with people in a reflective situation will become more important than their technical counterparts associated with computers.
The mariner learned from this review that Australia and Japan are reducing humanities and increasing classes on computer programming as early as the fifth grade. He agrees with Zacharia and Colvin that wisdom, leadership and innovation are found in the humanities, not in computer code.
Church and State
If the Monday School class is still studying church and state, the mariner offers a “middle of the road” perspective for those areas where church and state conflict with one another. See post “Among the People” (Sep 22 2015)
In 1962, Eugene Rostow, a former dean at Yale Law School, coined the phrase “civil religion.” It related to government sponsored religious speech that was as conventional and uncontroversial as to be constitutional (example: In God We Trust on US money). In 1984, Justice William Brennan first used the phrase “ceremonial deism.” He said, in a Supreme Court case that involved a government sponsored Nativity scene that also included reindeer and candy canes, that some religious displays could be permissible under the first amendment. [Details from Church and State magazine March 2015]
The mariner recently wrote a letter to the editor of a local newspaper that was covering a local conflict between an atheist organization and the city mayor about putting a cross in a government park. In his letter, mariner claimed that Christian and Jewish tombstones in military cemeteries – and even government memorials – serve only to remind us what we required of these men that they gave their lives for us. It is the buried soldiers that are sacrosanct, not the tombstones and memorials. In reference to Rostow and Brennan, the tombstones are an example of ceremonial deism.
Ceremonial deism is a grey area along the barrier between church and state. State advocates complain these “uncontroversial” exceptions are an example of deism and religiosity slowly creeping into the state domain. Is this good, bad, or irrelevant? Perhaps the Monday School can advise us.
REFERENCE SECTION
An easy read that talks about various subjects of controversy between religion and science, culture, and changing attitudes. Easy. Quick. See:
http://altreligion.about.com/od/history/p/History-Of-Deism.htm?utm_term=galileo%20book&utm_content=p3-main-1-title&utm_medium=sem&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=adid-a521dd03-6347-4247-9136-0d38501528e2-0-ab_gsb_ocode-4954&ad=semD&an=google_s&am=broad&q=galileo%20book&dqi=books%20about%20galileo%20and%20church&o=4954&l=sem&qsrc=998&askid=a521dd03-6347-4247-9136-0d38501528e2-0-ab_gsb
Billy Collins, Poet
Reading Billy Collins’ poetry is not what the occasional reader of poems imagines. Billy Collins was the Poet Laureate for the US twice in a row and holds the same title for the State of New York. He is, by far, the most entertaining poet alive today. If you desire to broaden your mind by reading some poetry, read Billy Collins. The poem below is from his collection, The Trouble with Poetry: And Other Poems. He has written several collections.
“The Lanyard”
The other day as I was ricocheting slowly
off the pale blue walls of this room,
bouncing from typewriter to piano,
from bookshelf to an envelope lying on the floor,
I found myself in the L section of the dictionary
where my eyes fell upon the word lanyard.

No cookie nibbled by a French novelist
could send one more suddenly into the past —
a past where I sat at a workbench at a camp
by a deep Adirondack lake
learning how to braid thin plastic strips
into a lanyard, a gift for my mother.

I had never seen anyone use a lanyard
or wear one, if that’s what you did with them,
but that did not keep me from crossing
strand over strand again and again
until I had made a boxy
red and white lanyard for my mother.

She gave me life and milk from her breasts,
and I gave her a lanyard.
She nursed me in many a sickroom,
lifted teaspoons of medicine to my lips,
set cold face-cloths on my forehead,
and then led me out into the airy light

and taught me to walk and swim,
and I, in turn, presented her with a lanyard.
Here are thousands of meals, she said,
and here is clothing and a good education.
And here is your lanyard, I replied,
which I made with a little help from a counselor.

Here is a breathing body and a beating heart,
strong legs, bones and teeth,
and two clear eyes to read the world, she whispered,
and here, I said, is the lanyard I made at camp.
And here, I wish to say to her now,
is a smaller gift—not the archaic truth

that you can never repay your mother,
but the rueful admission that when she took
the two-tone lanyard from my hands,
I was as sure as a boy could be
that this useless, worthless thing I wove
out of boredom would be enough to make us even.
Billy Collins

Ancient Mariner

The Fullness of Time

The Fullness of Time was a period of expectation in Israel that began in intensity around 700-600BC when the Book of Isaiah was written (there were other prophets before and after Isaiah). In essence, the Hebrew population was admonished for being lax in faith and practice; at some point in time, when the time was right – AKA fullness of time – God would send a Messiah to lead the Hebrews from this degenerate period of history. The Christians leaned heavily on these prognostications when pronouncing Jesus as that Messiah (See Galations 4:4).

What is relevant in the fullness of time today is that the same paradigm is occurring. Not limited to Bible interpretations but more broadly framed in the 21st century’s international, cultural, technical, scientific and multi-religious history, our fullness of time has reached a point of advancement that requires a significant shift in humankind’s values. When Jesus was born, the few hundred years before provided advancements that set the stage for Christianity to represent a new age of understanding; the Greek language (capable of documenting precise ideas), the emergence of a larger Earth (Roman Empire), and the spread of monotheism (Israel) required a new culture and a new understanding of human value.

Reaching the point of salvation, that is, passing through the tumultuous whorl of change and finally living in a new age is not a pleasant trip. As a clear example, consider the history of slavery in the United States. Slavery was present in US colonies in 1609 and reached as far north as Massachusetts by 1629; slave sugar republics in the Caribbean Islands began around 1650. Southern slave states in the United States emulated the culture of Caribbean slave republics leading to a plantation society.

Slowly, over a period of 150 years, the US transitioned into a northern society where slavery became a social and moral issue – thereby gradually passing legislation that outlawed slavery. Nevertheless, even in the north, common rights afforded by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were not available to most blacks. In the south, where the economy of slavery and the social prejudice of color were firmly entrenched, there was no intention to abolish slavery. It took the Civil War in 1860-65 where 750,000 citizens died to change government laws that would protect minimal rights for African Americans. Education remains an issue in the US even today; in 1957, the National Guard had to be called to have nine African Americans enter Central High School in Alabama over the objections of Governor George Wallace. Even today, voting rights, affirmative action, and segregation are unresolved.

Today in 2015, 406 years after the first slave entered the United States, the residue of prejudice remains. In former slave states disdain for the Federal Government remains strong. The slavery age is not over but is there a fullness of time? Is there a moment when US culture will become multiracial without prejudice? Slowly, the race issue is changing before us with the increase of immigrants from all over the world – especially Central America and the Gulf region. Changes to slavery have been brutal and continues to suffer in a wrenching time of change.

Add to slavery the fullness of time for a fair economy, stopping the abuses of international corporatism, providing dependable financial support for all citizens, health reform, and protection of a planet capable of supporting its biomass – not to mention many civil issues like starvation, war, prison reform, and better treatment of livestock – the new slave on the block.

All these issues are entering the whorl of rapid change. Congressman Boehner is but one tick of the clock.

Ancient Mariner

 

 

Among the People

The mariner had the privilege of visiting an adult Sunday school class. The class, however, met on Monday. Why can’t things just remain as they always have? There’s a reason Sunday school is called Sunday school! This disregard for tradition, however, is the hallmark of the class. It is a small class of about six to eight members; the class members typically are women. Instead of studying the Bible, the Monday school studies contemporary thoughts provided by religious authors and speakers.

Having just written a couple of posts on church and state, the mariner visited the class to observe the subject discussed in a real environment by real people. Being a new visitor, the mariner didn’t say too much. The dynamic for discussion is provided by a retired professional from the national Methodist Church, a reformed Texas Baptist, two existentialist Christians, a skeptic, an ontologist, and a traditional Bible-based Christian. On second thought, perhaps their church insists they meet on Monday. . .

The combination of excellent congeniality and disparate backgrounds allows for creative discussion. The DVD played on this occasion was a lecture about the conflict raised between a Christian and a US citizen. The speaker accepted that one had to survive both in God’s Kingdom and in man’s existential world at the same time. The primary point was that the existential world depends on the influence of Christians for society’s morality and purpose. The mariner would have liked to hear more about the state as juxtaposed to Christianity.

He observed that the class had difficulty sorting out the balance between church and state because the speaker framed both in the context of religion. Perhaps the class would have had an easier time if the speaker had provided more about the state side of things. In his May 25 2013 post, the mariner cited Christianity and the Encounter of World Religions by Paul Tillich. The world religions are capitalism, communism, socialism and authoritarianism. Tillich said that Christianity morphs into a hybrid combined with the prevailing form of society. In the US, the prevailing society is capitalist. Hence, a balance of behavior evolves accommodating the two religions.

In this age of information, Paul Tillich can add another world religion: secularism. Secularism is void of religious reason. It is the mariner’s opinion that the emergence of secularism is reworking the definition between church and state – a definition which was more or less adequate until Norman Rockwell stopped painting and Pablo Picasso, Marcel Duchamp and Henri Matisse popularized the Cubist movement. Stretched across fundamentalist Christians, traditional Christians and existentialist Christians, it will take a couple of generations to sort the balance between Christianity and secularism.

Ancient Mariner

Behind the Headlines

The mariner is working hard to avoid the mindless traps of television pundits, mindless presidential candidates, old-fashioned attitudes about major professions and institutions (old-fashioned meaning since 2005), and mindless bickering about cultural icons. One almost must turn off communication with the commercial information world and search the back roads to find reasoned evaluations of the real world today. What follows are a few counterpoints to the common press insights that most of us live by. Certainly, we must always remember that thoughtfulness is washed away by the race to have the most viewers, the most readers, and the most acceptable opinions.

Economy

The mariner has reviewed several respected economic journals and even a few foreign reports to determine how the US is faring economically on the world stage. It turns out the US is not doing too bad. In fact, compared to the Euro zone, the BRIC nations, and the Middle East, even Mexico, Japan, India and other trading allies, the US has grown in economic power around the world. The US has come out of the recession faster and with more growth than any other nation on the planet. This opinion does not dismiss the disparities of oligarchy, wage suppression and blatant pressure to diminish citizen rights nor does it take into account the environmental cost that grows by the year. Still, Donald is wrong. America is already great and beating other countries in the game of economics.

Middle East

All the Middle East nations comprise very much a hodgepodge of foreign policy issues. The Iran nonnuclear agreement appears to be accepted by citizen majorities in both the US and Iran. Those objecting to the deal are the US hawk conservatives and the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. Reports indicate that the agreement will survive resistance.

The Syria/Kurd/Turkey/Iran/Iraq/Isis/US/Russia/Shiite/Sunni/mass emigration conflict is in free fall, obviously. Russia has come into Syria to support Bashar al_Assad, which suggests Assad is weakening. Russia’s presence puts a new spin on speculation about escalation of war. The mariner suspects that Russia does not want escalation but somehow must sustain influence with Syria and indirectly, demonstrate that Russia can’t be forgotten as an influence in the region. Again, the Obama administration remains publicly silent but US intelligence is active.

The emigration into Europe is an issue all its own, acknowledging that the migrants are fleeing the aforementioned war zone. The United Nations count is 4.1 million refugees. Germany may benefit more because it took a large number that will offset aging population in Germany. Other European countries also have aging populations and aging economies. Perhaps this is the reason Europe is more willing than not to receive large numbers of Syrian immigrants. Perhaps, as well, the US should bump its number significantly since the United States also has an aging population. It should be noted that the US is the largest contributor of funds to the migrant crisis.

Proper Leadership is Lacking in US Culture

The mariner was checking out the book The Silo Effect, The Peril of Expertise and the Promise of Breaking Down Barriers by Jillian Tett (Simon and Shuster). Today on Global Public Square, Fareed Zakaria featured the same Book and Chris Hayes, MSNBC anchor, reviewed the same on his website. Great minds. . . .

The mariner is intrigued because so much of the text reflects his own career experience as a consultant who, by the nature of his assignments, was constantly battling highly territorial departments that did not want to change or share their information. Tett calls these vertical departments ‘silos.’ Tett’s point is that specialization – both of organizations and personal ambition – prevents innovation, creativity, and intelligent interpretation of reality. Historically, these open-minded attributes are the edge that made the United States a premier nation among nations. (Reference mariner’s posts about the demise of liberal arts education.)

Tett cites a number of institutions that deliberately reorganized to improve corporate functionality, customer service, innovation, and efficiency. Tett is a PhD anthropologist; her explanations tend toward behavioral modification rather than the management modification prominent in Deming, Drucker, and others popular in the 60’s and 70’s. An example at the Cleveland Clinic is not only to reorganize medical departments but also to renovate the building so that meeting spaces, casual spaces, and medical processes draw mixed teams and managers into an open space concept. Tett uses SONY as an example of death by specialization; the company was tightly organized and highly specialized at the worker level. SONY lost its top-of-the-heap position selling SONY Walkman music devices – failing to read new market pressures. In the meantime, Steve Jobs stepped in with the IPod. SONY hasn’t been at the top since.

Politics, Religion and Economics

Thinking about Jillian Tett’s book and its emphasis on creative problem solving, and the desire to integrate values to better predict future reality, turns the mariner’s mind to the battles of church and state, conservative right versus progressive left, oligarchy versus democracy, etc. All these issues and many more are bound by their belief systems. One cannot share absolute principles – only defend them. One cannot merge polarized attitudes – only seek to destroy opposites. Today, suffering our dysfunctional governments, our religious institutions that long ago forgot Christian principles, and our descent into greed, we are at a huge intersection in the nation’s history. An open question: How can we introduce innovation into an age of specialization?

Ancient Mariner

Marriage

Marriage. A cause for war or peace, a furtherance of power, an icon for the act of proliferation, a guarantee of lineage and wealth, something nice if it is affordable, a device of psychological need, a hobby – perhaps an act of genuine love.

Marriage is much in the news recently with an abundant set of examples that suggest marriage has its own niche aside from church versus state bickering. The mariner read an extensive book review of The Marriage Book, Centuries of Advice, Inspiration and Cautionary Tales from Adam and Eve to Zoloft, edited by Grunwald and Adler, published by Simon and Shuster. The Marriage Book is a deep collection of marriage history, photographs, charming and entertaining examples of marriage by famous couples in history, and some serious thoughts that marriage as an institution is becoming class centric.

There is no need for the mariner to recite the details of several marriages in current events, he will just name the keyword; the reader will remember. There is a set of Monarchy weddings: Andrew, Charles, William (Great Britain), Madeline (Sweden), Philippe, Laurent, Armedeo (Belgium), Frederik (Denmark), Sophia (Greece)……

There is a set of Hollywood marriages. No, there is a superset of Hollywood marriages, second marriages, third marriages, etc. There are even remarriages.

There are notable marriages in families like Clinton, Kennedy, Nixon, Eisenhower and too many iconic wealthy marriages to note.

There are religious marriages. Roman Catholic, Fundamentalist Protestant, Baptist, generic Protestant, Jewish, Muslim Sunni, Muslim Shiite, Greek Orthodox, Latter Day Saints, Hindu, Buddhist, atheist, and Scientology.

There are nationality weddings. Polish, Israeli, Greek, Italian, Icelandic, Sudanese, American courthouse…..

There are shotgun marriages, good idea when drunk marriages, underwater marriages, skydiving marriages, “The baby is two years old; should we consider marriage” marriages…..

There are minority marriages: interfaith, interracial, homosexual, international and underage.

Finally, there are non-marriages. Statistically, the number is far larger for African American women and senior citizens. Next in line are young people under the age of 27.

Increasingly, there is no marriage. This is the point of discussion. In the United States, the median age at which women marry is now 27, the highest it’s been in a century. The same trend exists in Europe. That’s according to a new report by Bowling Green State University’s Julissa Cruz, published by the National Center for Family and Marriage Research. Not only are marriages occurring later, marriages are occurring less frequently. Note the table below.

 

Year Marriages Population Rate per 1,000 total population
2012 2,131,000 313,914,040 6.8
2011 2,118,000 311,591,917 6.8
2010 2,096,000 308,745,538 6.8
2009 2,080,000 306,771,529 6.8
2008 2,157,000 304,093,966 7.1
2007 2,197,000 301,231,207 7.3
20061 2,193,000 294,077,247 7.5
2005 2,249,000 295,516,599 7.6
2004 2,279,000 292,805,298 7.8
2003 2,245,000 290,107,933 7.7
2002 2,290,000 287,625,193 8.0
2001 2,326,000 284,968,955 8.2
2000 2,315,000 281,421,906 8.2

Despite an increase of 32.5 million in population, there were 184 thousand fewer marriages. Generally speaking, upper classes are marrying late, while poorer women are deciding that they’re better off single.

Consider the following:

The decrease in the divorce rate reflects later marriages more than anything else. However, the later average age of marriage rising to the late twenties and thirties is more controversial. Economists note that the increase in the age of marriage and falling divorce statistics are only a small part of the phenomenon. Economists say these statistics reflect the increasing tendency of the well-off to marry similarly well-off partners; those marriages are more likely to last at any age.

Class-based behavior is the dominant factor driving the statistics. On the one hand, male and female college graduates will marry and stay married. On the other hand, marriage is disappearing from the poorest classes. Also increasingly, women across the board are marrying men who aren’t the natural fathers of their children.

The later age of marriage for college graduates is caused by a new middle class behavior: Women are investing in their own education and earning potential, which extends the age of marriage and childbearing. For men, it takes a two income family to live a middle class life. Further, men must pursue not only college and post graduate education, career success often depends on relocation, job changes and personal investment in qualifications beyond college. Once established, men, and the women who wait to marry them, are ready for a stable family life. As the economy becomes more difficult for any working adult, early marriage is inconvenient until as late as the thirties. Commonly, children aren’t born until the early forties.

Changes in the last quarter century indicate that marriage is increasingly becoming a marker of class — the delayed marriages of the middle class produce steadily lower divorce rates, very few non-marital births, and substantial resources to invest in a falling number of children. For the rest of the country, the statistics may simply confirm a greater move away from marriage altogether.

The conflict between church and state in Kentucky provides volatile news and skirmishes among advocacy groups but the larger scope of marriage as a social phenomenon is not about church and state – it is about economics and the future job market for all young adults.

[Some contribution to the above analysis is provided by June Carbone, the Edward A. Smith/Missouri Chair of Law, the Constitution and Society at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.]

—-

Just a side note on the series about achieving the reader’s liberal art education online: CNN often is criticized for chasing time-filling non-news instead of working harder to produce genuine news that affects everyone more directly. However, amid the Tower of Babel produced by pundits, there is one journalist who produces top-drawer information, explains more deeply the what, how and why of events, and offers opinions for those who think a bit more than others. His name is Fareed Zakaria. The mariner admits he is a fan and counts Fareed among his favorite authors. Nevertheless, Zakaria is college and graduate level in his presentations. A self taught liberal art major will have an excellent sense of current events that will lead to mysteries for the search engine. See:

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com

Watch his Sunday morning show, Global Public Square, at 10AM Eastern on CNN. Definitely worth copying to the DVR for more convenient viewing. Of importance to those tracking Presidential candidates, Fareed had an opening opinion piece on the Sunday, September 13 broadcast. If you missed it, check his blog.

Sharing Fareed’s investigative style is Frontline on PBS. This series covers larger, substantive issues in many subject areas. Many topics relate to the wellbeing of each of us in an often conflicted world. See:

http://www.pbs.org Frontline.

Finally, California passed legislation that makes physician-assisted suicide legal. California joins Oregon, Washington, New Mexico, and Vermont. Montana has legislation that protects physicians from liability when providing assistance at the patient’s request. The mariner suspects age has a lot to do with one’s opinion about euthanasia in ways that may surprise us. Replies are welcome on the mariner’s website.

Ancient Mariner

 

Weekend News

Occasionally, weekend news shows fill empty air time with meaningful coverage. On Saturday, two pundit panels actually discussed topics using first hand information and intellectual value. The first is about Donald and whether the religious right will support him (Tony Perkins from Family Research Council is interviewed). The second, perhaps more substantive, is about the county clerk (Kim Davis) who was jailed for contempt of court. Her attorney, Matthew Staver, is interviewed.

Several video clips were run of Donald that implied he wasn’t too religious. One clip showed Donald being very uncomfortable when asked if he had ever asked God for forgiveness; Donald hemmed and hawed finally saying he doesn’t ask for forgiveness, he tries to make it right. Another clip from 1999 showed Donald clearly supporting pro-choice; today he supports pro-life. The questions posed to Tony Perkins wondered whether the religious right would support Donald.

Perkins’ answers dodged the heart of the questions. Instead, he took the position that evangelicals were so frustrated with failed politics and politicians who refuse to take action that they are attracted to anyone who demonstrates a different approach to leadership – even if the politician’s record is less than perfect. Perkins said that religious conservatives understand that a person’s heart can change over time. In the end, however, Perkins had to acknowledge that Donald’s dismal religious commitment likely will be his downfall with evangelicals voting in the primaries. The mariner felt that Tony Perkins, both a republican leader and an evangelical leader, was caught in the middle trying to defend a republican candidate and evangelical principles at the same time. Due to good interviewing, Perkins finally had to sacrifice Donald.

The refusal of Kim Davis to issue government marriage licenses to homosexuals raises conflicts on several levels. One level is the interpretation of the first Amendment as a genuine separation of church and state not to be in conflict – the position Thomas Jefferson took (see mariner’s post “Church or State?” for a review of secularism versus religious opinion). In his interview, Matthew Staver avoided this interpretation. Instead, he talked about the legal shutdown caused because Davis cannot be fired and will not quit – which is legal regardless of the contempt of court citation.

This level of argument is not broad enough to revisit the historical trends that have allowed government to perform what the church calls sacraments but which are performed by the state without religious opinion. Precedent for recognizing civil marriage was justified early in the 1800s because a couples’ relationship with the state changes due to race, different tax law, divorce settlement, child ownership, citizenship, abuse and many other legal acts managed by government. The government also manages equal rights.

Tony Perkins also was asked about this issue and took the point of view that there are many occasions where the state grants leniency through local law and regulations when there is a conflict in roles, that is, the line of separation between church and state is smudged. The mariner believes “smudging” does not resolve the oil and water relationship between religion and secularism.

The Founding Fathers knew from personal experience that there are many religions – some demanding both civil authority and religious authority, some with different definitions of God, some preferring different opinions from others about polygamy, race, etc. – but there can only be one government guaranteeing freedom for all religions to have their religious opinions and at the same time assure equal justice for all citizens. The Founding Fathers chose a government run by the people, by all the people. One nation, one set of laws, thereby bestowing liberty for all people in their opinions about religion and bestowing equal liberty for all through democracy. One person, one vote. Religious opinion does not work this way hence the separation of church and state as expressed in the Bill of Rights.

It has been a good weekend for meaningful news.

Ancient Mariner

 

Church or State?

The mariner thought he understood the legal and philosophical intent of the separation of church and state. However, when he reads the news of the day, confusion seems to reign over the subject and affects everything from getting married, to pro-choice or pro-life, to the rights of execution and euthanasia – not to mention many other conflicts between citizenry and the Constitution of the United States. Consequently, the mariner is confused as well.

For the benefit of the reader as well as the mariner, he will go back to the beginning. As a legal basis, the Constitution of the US, written in 1787 and the Bill of Rights, written in 1788, says exactly:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Denis Diderot was a French philosopher, art critic, and writer. He was a prominent figure during the Enlightenment and is best known for serving as co-founder, chief editor, and contributor to the Encyclopédie. Diderot was a partisan of a strict separation of church and state, saying in 1747, “the distance between the throne and the altar can never be too great“.

In English, the exact term is an offshoot of the phrase, “wall of separation between church and state”, as written in Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. In that letter, referencing the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Jefferson writes:

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State.

Jefferson was describing to the Baptists that the United States Bill of Rights prevents the establishment of a national church, and in so doing, they did not have to fear government interference in their manner of worship. The Bill of Rights was one of the earliest examples in the world of complete religious freedom. [Wikipedia – church and state]

For our purposes, make note of the phrase, “…that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions…” meaning that the government will not interpret or reinforce religious definition and will limit government action to matters of governance. The inverse of this, applying the intent to religion, means that there is freedom for any religion to practice and believe as they choose but religious opinion will not apply to matters of governance.

On the surface, the separation appears to be clear and distinct. Why, 277 years later, is the citizenry having so much difficulty?

At this point, the reader must tolerate the mariner’s meandering. To state the conflict succinctly, the confusion is caused by secularism. Secularism excludes religious opinion. This seems to be in concert with the 1st Amendment and Jefferson’s letter. But this is simpler said than understood. If we can travel back to the time of the Mayflower landing at Plymouth Rock (1620), we would be in the midst of the Reformation (1517-1685). The established church still was the law of the land in most intra-human activities. In fact, the Pilgrims combined religious opinion and governance into one authority. The political leader also was the interpreter of the faith.

Ever so slowly, it became clear that there must be some separation so that government could govern without having to judge every opinion raised by the common folk. There had to be rules applied to situations that were stolid and did not change with every change in opinion. This slow, evolutionary process continues today. We are not finished with the separation of church and state.

The role of government, with its authority to govern without opinion, has expanded to include virtually all elements of intra-human activity. One can get married in a government agency – without opinion, mind you. But one may also be influenced by opinions of faith. The religious element takes umbrage that the government can perform the same ‘action’ as the religion but without the religious opinion.

The mariner now understands why there is conflict. For the conclusion, we must wait for the movie version – perhaps released in 2150.

Ancient Mariner