The Camp Of The Saints Is a Mean And Racist Diatribe But Given It's A Steve Bannon Favorite, Worth Knowing About

Some time ago I read that one of the books that influenced Steve Bannon, the White House chief strategist,  was The Camp of the Saints by Jean Raspail which came out in French in 1973.  It took me a while to track down a copy - which I got through interlibrary loan.  

It's a disgustingly racist novel about 1000 old ships that leave India for Europe with 'the Ganges horde' of nearly 1 million people, led by the giant 'turd-eater' who carries the monster child on his shoulders.  I did try hard to read this book to see if it would help me understand something about Bannon and others who supported Trump.  I wasn't able to finish it - it's really hard to read this stuff - before it was due back at the library.  But I think I got enough to get the gist.

I'd like to share some of the book with you for a number of reasons.

• The author, twisted as he may be, is insightful in his analysis of how things operated back then in French society.  
• The language and unrelenting disdain for other people (not only the darker people of the world, but also their white stooges who believe in helping the poor and making the world a better place) has to be read to truly get the level of racism and general misanthropy.  Just my saying it is racist  doesn't convey the point here. 
• The insight it gives us to many Trump supporters' way of seeing the world and what his campaign targeted
• The roadmap the book offers as a way to capture the 'gullible masses' which the author despises when  the techniques are used by the left, but sound very similar to what the right has been doing in the US for the last twenty or thirty years.  
• The book that supposedly helps shape Bannon's view of the world clarifies a lot of why Trump is doing some of what he does

I thought I could do this in a series of quotes, but that isn't going to work.  The quotes need some context and some commentary.  I may do a second post, though midway through writing this up I did find the whole book on-line, so you can skim through it yourself.

The Basic Plot

The armada of poor leaves Calcutta for Europe.  The book is mainly about how the French will respond if they land on French shores (which they do.)  Raspail eviscerates various aspects of French society - from the media announcers, academics, government officials, teachers, the clergy, and the French public and their children - as stooges of the poor refuse of the earth.  The French, in Raspail's eyes are no longer men, but rather patsies due to their disgusting humanitarian beliefs in equality and their lack of will to defend their own hard won gains and to defend the white race.  You can read the plot in more detail at Wikipedia.  

It's Not Just The Plot That Matters

But the plot isn't what stands out to me.  It's the language, the hate, the disdain, the world view.  Raspail's world is zero sum - either we get the world's limited resources or they do - and that humans are just brutish members of tribes with no hope for a better society.  

The heroes of this book remind me of the heroes of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, in that caring about anyone but yourself is considered foolish and weak.   This book then adds gallons of racism to Rand's cold libertarianism.  

Why We Need To Read Books Like This

As despicable as I find this book, the world views expressed in it do represent views held by many people in the world;  enough to pass Brexit and elect Trump.   Had these views not been so summarily dismissed as unacceptable and undiscussable, they might have been better debated.  The fears of the invading hordes that this book evokes might have been addressed rather than dismissed.  There are legitimate concerns and liberals left those with concerns to get answers from the likes of Raspail.  

Also reading about the process of social brainwashing that Raspail describes might have better helped us understand and address the Fox News and talk radio propaganda tools that set the stage for Trump.  

The World When The Book Was Published

The book came out in France in 1973, about five years after French students shut down universities with demands for sexual and other liberties and workers demanded higher pay and shorter work weeks.  During WW II, France was unable to rule its colonies adequately and their independence movements strengthened. By 1954 France was out of Indochina  By 1960 France was out of most of their other colonies, most notably those in Africa, and most painfully, Algeria, leaving many in France angry at this loss of economic and political dominance.   There was a tug between the old traditionalists and those clamoring for a modern world.  France’s cultural superiority in the world was  also being challenged by American culture as English became the new lingua franca.  The French did not look kindly on this American usurpation.  

“Georges Clemenceau, who had led France through the first world war, once said that 'America was the only country that had gone from barbarism to decadence without passing though civilization’” (from Americans in Paris) 

I'm guessing that some of Raspail's vituperation against the media stems from what this Wikipedia entry describes.

“De Gaulle's government was criticized within France, particularly for its heavy-handed style. While the written press and elections were free, the state had a monopoly on television and radio broadcasts (though there were private stations broadcasting from abroad; see ORTF) and the executive occasionally told public broadcasters the bias that they desired on news. In many respects, society was traditionalist and repressive.”

But 'traditionalist' didn’t mean in France what it might mean in the US.  From the same Wikipedia post:

“In the context of a population boom unseen in France since the 18th century, the government under prime minister Georges Pompidou oversaw a rapid transformation and expansion of the French economy. With dirigisme — a combination of capitalism and state-directed economy — the government intervened heavily in the economy, using indicative five-year plans as its main tool.”  

 In short, there was plenty for the French to be upset about.  And Raspail seems to have taken his insight, twisted with a virulent racism, and created a fantasy apocalyptic novel.  And the boat people and other refugees coming to Europe lends some prescience to Raspail.  Though his tales are fantastical misrepresentations and omit key factors such as:  labor short Northern Europe, particularly Germany, had begun importing workers and many of the immigrants were from former European colonies.

OK, Let's Look At Some Of The Book

The chapters jump back and forth from views of the west and views of the armada of Indians.  It starts in the present with the arrival of the ships at Côte d' Azur.  We bounce around a bit and then we're at the Belgian consulate in Calcutta which had been cherry-picking Indian babies for adoption back home.  Until the masses of mothers bringing their babies in for adoption got too much and a huge mob is outside the consulate.  This is where we are first introduced to the leaders of the armada as it prepares to leave India.

The Turd-Eater and the Monster

"Way back, behind the backmost women in the crowd, a giant of a man stood stripped to the waist, holding something over his head and waving it like a flag. Untouchable pariah, this dealer in droppings, dung roller by trade, molder of manure briquettes, turd eater in time of famine, and holding high in his stinking hands a mass of human flesh. At the bottom, two stumps; then an enormous trunk, all hunched and twisted and bent out of shape; no neck, but a kind of extra stump, a third one in place of a head, and a bald little skull, with two holes for eyes and a hole for a mouth, but a mouth that was no mouth at all—no throat, no teeth—just a flap of skin over his gullet. The monster’s eyes were alive, and they stared straight ahead, high over the crowd, frozen forward in a relentless gaze—except, that is, when his pariah father would wave him bodily back and forth." (p. 9)

"Can a man spend his whole life grubbing for turds in all the slop pots along the Ganges, shaping them, rolling them between his fingers, day after day, and not know something about the true nature of man? He knew all there was to know. He just never knew that he knew, that’s all." (p. 10) 

These are the characters Raspail has created to lead the armada.  And Turd-Eater and Monster is what they are always called.  Reminds me a bit of Limbaugh's love for disdainful moniker's such as femi-Nazi as well as Trump's nicknames for his opponents.  Though Trump's 'crooked Hillary' and 'Lyin' Ted' were tame in comparison to Raspail.

The Western Media And Its Consumers

"To appreciate the West’s opinion of the refugee fleet—or, for that matter, of anything new and unfamiliar—one essential fact must be borne in mind: it really couldn’t give less of a damn. Incredible but true. The more it discovers about such things, the more fathomless its ignorance, feeble its interest, and vulgar its own self-concern. The more crass and tasteless, too, its sporadic outbursts, fewer and farther between. Oh yes, to be sure, it indulges in flights of sentiment now and again, but cinema style, like watching a film, or sitting in front of the TV screen, poised for the serial’s weekly installment. Always those spur-of-the-moment emotions or secondhand feelings, pandered by middlemen. Real-world drama, served in the comfort of home by that whore called Mass Media, only stirs up the void where Western opinion has long been submerged. Someone drools at a current event, and mistakes his drivel for meaningful thought. Still, let’s not be too quick to spit our scorn its way. Empty drivel indeed, but it shows nonetheless how reading the papers or watching the news can provoke at least the appearance of thinking. Like Pavlov’s dog, whose slobber revealed the mechanics of instinct. Opinion shakes up its sloth, nothing more. Does anyone really believe that the average Western man, coming home from his ofiice or factory job, and faced with the world’s great upheavals, can eke out much more than a moment’s pause in the monumental boredom of his daily routine?" (p. 20  - emphasis added)

There are many on both sides of the political divide who might characterize parts of the media this way - though probably in less scornful tones.  But this is clearly the message about the media that Trump fed his voters, though calling the media the 'enemy of the people' seems tame by comparison.   Liberals certainly believe the basic message when it's applied to Fox News and its audience.

Let's look at the media's consumers as Raspail sees them, beginning here with the intermediaries - the priests and the teachers.  First the clergy:

"Three thousand two hundred sixty-seven priests started frantically scribbling with an eye toward the following Sunday—ready-made sermon, delivered to the door, nothing to do with the gospel for the day, but who worries anymore about such minor details? (Among the cast of thousands we should note the presence of a certain married priest, Catholic and cuckold, wearing a pair of Christian horns, and aware of the fact—a situation so utterly new to the poor man, and muddling his mind into such disarray, that for over a month his Sunday sermons seemed to leave him at a loss. Durfort’s strong dose saved him from total silence. The therapy worked so well, in fact, that the antlered, oil- fingered gent forgot all about his sanctified horns and recovered that gift of thunderous fire and brimstone that made him the shepherd of the largest flock of masochists in the diocese. Perhaps we’ll see him again bye and bye ...)" (p. 27) 

And the teachers:

"At the very same moment thirty-two thousand seven hundred forty-two schoolteachers hit on the subject for the next day’s theme: “Describe the life of the poor, suffering souls on board the ships, and express your feelings toward their plight in detail, by imagining, for example, that one of the desperate families comes to your home and asks you to take them in.” Irresistible, really!"  (p. 27)

And the kids:

"And the dear little angel—all simple, childish soul and tender heart—will spread four pages’ worth of infantile pathos, enough to melt a concierge to tears, and his paper will be the best, the teacher will read it in class, and all his little friends will kick themselves for having been much too stingy with their whines and whimpers. That’s how we mold our men nowadays. Because even the tough, hardhearted little brat, the one with all he needs to succeed in this life, is forced to take part, since children abhor standing out from the crowd. So he’ll have to play along too, and work himself into a hypocritical sweat over the same philanthropic rubbish. And he’ll probably write just as brilliant a theme, clever child that he is, and he may even wind up believing what he writes, because youngsters like this are never really bad, just different, that’s all, just untapped potential. Then he’ll go home, like his classmate, both of them proud of their fine compositions."

And the parents, whom he identifies as Marcel and Josiane, which I take as a generic French worker husband and wife, sort of like Mr. and Mrs Joe Six Pack.  Remember, this all came out in 1973.

"And father, who knows what life is all about, will read the A-plus masterpiece, terrified (if he has the slightest imagination) at the notion of that foreign family of eight coming to live in his three rooms and kitchen, but he’ll sit back and keep his big mouth shut. Mustn’t frustrate the little angels, mustn’t shock them, mustn’t sully their innocent thoughts and risk turning them later into hopeless prigs. No, he’ll wallow, ensnared, in his gutless affection, and chuck his little angel on a cheek flushed with pleasure, telling himself that he’s really a dear, and besides, “out of the mouths of babes,” isn’t that what they say? ..."

Raspail describes Marcel further, a man who actually questions why the announcer is talking about helping the far away poor.  Marcel himself is living in a pretty basic apartment.  Shouldn't some of the help go to his family?

"Let’s give ear, in passing, to this discordant note. Good, canny common sense, a little uncouth and harsh—in other words, healthy— draws itself up to its dignified height and kicks up a fuss. Just a bit more effort and it could save the day. Marcel is no fugitive from the Ganges. He works, he wears shoes. He’s a hundred percent man, and make no mistake! With some prodding you could get him to admit that he’s part of a civilized country, that he’s proud of it too, and why not? Peekaboo, it’s our little white friend again, our foot-slogging soldier of the Western World, hero and victim of all its battles, whose sweat and flesh seep through all the joys of Western life. But he’s hardly the man he used to be. He only goes through the motions now. This volley won’t hit the mark. And there won’t be another. When the time comes, he’ll sit back and watch, as if none of it makes any difference to him. When he suddenly finds that it does, it will be too late. They’ll have made him believe it’s no skin off his nose, and that only the others—all the ones with money—will cough up and pay, in the name of equality, and brotherhood, and justice, or some such nonsense that no one dares question. And of course, in the name of the beast. But that’s something they won’t tell Marcel. Would he know what they meant?" (p. 27)

Sounds exactly like the voter that Trump targeted.  




Raspail's descriptions of people - politicians, newscasters - are so detailed  that I can't help but think he had real people in mind.  For example:

"Albert Durfort was full of the milk of human kindness. (Machefer would have used a rather more vulgar expression. He always said the professional do-gooders turned his stomach. A little too harsh, perhaps, for Durfort, not a bad sort, really.) Constant crusader, he would gallop through radioland to the rescue, looking for supposedly desperate causes, barely taking the time to change horses between two campaigns, always panting for breath as he came on the scene just in time to deliver the downtrodden victim, expose a scandal, and lash out at injustice. A Zorro of the airwaves. And the public adored it. So much so, in fact, that some—the most obtuse—saw each nightly editorial as a serial installment: Durfort on skid row, Durfort and the Arabs, Durfort vs. the racists, Durfort and the police, Durfort against brutality, Durfort for prison reform, Durfort and capital punishment, etc., etc. But no one, not even Durfort himself, could see that our Zorro was flogging dead horses, flying off to the rescue ‘of issues long since won. Something else, strange but true: he was looked on as the model of the free, objective thinker. He would have been shocked and surprised to learn that he was, in fact, a captive of fashion, bound by all the new taboos, conditioned by thirty years of intellectual terrorism; and that, if the owner and general manager of the station that employed him entrusted ten million good Frenchmen to his care each night, it certainly wasn’t to use his talents to tell them the opposite of what they supposed they believed in." (p. 26) (emphasis added) 

That's for a white French guy.  Note how the news model seems to fit Fox News and one could probably make a good argument that it fits well for some of the more centrist and liberal news outlets.  He also points out the contradiction between the professed concerns for the poor and the rich salaries the newsmen get.

 Now let's look at an immigrant news man:

"The speaker was one Ben Suad, alias Clément Dio, one of the monster’s most faithful minions, concoctor in chief of the poisonous slops poured piping hot each Monday into the feeble, comatose brains of the six hundred thousand readers of his weekly rag, served up in its fancy sauces. Citizen of France, North African by blood, with an elegant crop of kinky hair and swarthy skin—doubtless passed down from a certain black harem slavegirl, sold to a brothel for French officers in Rabat (as he learned from the bill of sale in his family papers)—married to a Eurasian woman officially declared Chinese and author of several best-selling novels, Dio possessed a belligerent intellect that thrived on springs of racial hatred barely below the surface, and far more intense than anyone imagined. Like a spider deep in the midst of French public opinion, he had webbed it over so thick with fine gossamer strands that it scarcely clung to life. A cordial type all the same, given to great informative bursts if he chose, though always one-way, sincere enough to put his convictions on the line and draw the occasional fire of intelligent colleagues—of whom there were fewer and fewer, alas!, and whom people had all long since stopped reading. In those topsy-turvy days the Left sprawled out in abundance, while the rightist press, in a hopeless muddle, languished alone in its trenches, deserted. The home front, meanwhile, true to form, fraternized high and low, unabashed and unrestrained. Politically, Dio’s columns were something of a hash, whipped up with a proper dose of utopian pap. But most dangerous of all was his very special talent—unrivaled, in fact—for planting his mines through the waters of current French life, far and wide, just surface-deep, always finding those areas still intact, and larding them through with the deadly devices, spewed mass-produced from his prolific brain."

One last quote from early in the book - the mayor of New York talks to a consultant for the city after they hear the news of the armada.

"As consulting sociologist to the city of New York, he had seen it coming, predicted it to the letter. The proof was there, in his lucid reports, ignored one and all. There was really no solution. Black would be black, and white would be white. There was no changing either, except by a total mix, a blend into tan. They were enemies on sight, and their hatred and scorn only grew as they came to know each other better. Now they both felt the same utter loathing. ... And so the consulting sociologist would give his opinion and pocket his money. The city had paid him a handsome price for his monumental study of social upheaval, with its forecast of ultimate doom. “No hope, Doctor Hailer?” “No hope, Mr. Mayor. Unless you kill them all, that is, because you’ll never change them. How about that?” “Good God, man, hardly! Let’s just wait and see what happens, and try to do the best we can ..."  (p. 7)

The 'scientific' proof that is supposedly buried in the report is, of course, fake news created by the novelist.   The 'realistic' sociologist is Raspail's good guy in this scene, and the mayor who won't hear of killing off the blacks in New York is the fool.  But there is lots one could write about overpriced consultants whose expertise often supports what a government wants to do, or is ignored.




This is supposedly and influential book for Steve Bannon, still running loose in the Oval Office and helping Trump figure out what to do on things like the Paris Climate Agreement.

The American Apology T-Shirt

Back in 2003, during the W. administration, my son went to work in Denmark for a year.  As a way to  let Europeans know about his feelings for the then US president, he created the American Apology T-Shirt on CafePress.

On one side it said, "I'm sorry my president is an idiot.  I didn't vote for him" in the official languages of the United States [Nations] [thanks Kathy].  On the other side it said, "American Traveler International Apology Shirt" also in the various languages.

He'd made this for himself and sales were low.  He wasn't trying to make money, just get himself a few T-shirt.  But one day and anti-Muslim website posted a story about the t-shirt calling it traitorous and soon it was one of the top subjects on the internet for a few days.  Sales shot up.  And he wound up with $10,000 half of which went to Doctors Without Borders.

Well, lately there's been an uptick in sales again.  (And also some copy cat versions have shown up.)
In any case, travelers who wants to let the rest of the world know where they stand,   can go to CafePress.    (There are a lot of different versions and colors.  And all the profit this time goes to Doctors Without Borders.)

The Decline Of The US As A World Power

Trump  has pulled the US out of the Paris Climate Agreement.  Instead of this being a triumph for  the Climate Change Denial movement, I think it will be their last Hurrah.  The shift from carbon based energy has too much momentum.  The real impact will be the loss of power and prestige of the United States of America.

Back in December 2016 I wrote (in a post about change in general):

"My fear is that Trump will do a lot of damage both in the US and the world, before he leaves office. Things that will have to be undone before we can move on.  And while he won't kill people Hitler style, if he does slow down climate change action, the result will be turmoil and human suffering and death around the world.  Severe weather events will create havoc for farmers all over the world.  Rising temperatures mean that crops that grow at a certain latitude now, or with a certain level of rainfall, won't in twenty years or less.   This will disrupt food supplies and livelihoods everywhere."

But it appears that the US pulling out will not cause China and India and other significant players to pull out as well.

The rest of the world  (not to mention many US businesses)  understands that reducing carbon use is a long term common problem for all the peoples of the earth.  While some may lose bigger if we keep on the carbon path, no one will win.

But what will keep them united in the short term is their recognition that switching away from carbon based energy will be good for their economies as well.  They recognize that while the Koch brothers and their ilk who fund the climate change denial movement in the US exist, the world knows that most big businesses, including oil companies, and the US military, acknowledge that climate change is for real and they've already been planning to address it.  They're switching to other energy sources, preparing their facilities, and planning for the new energy economy.

The US pulling out slows things down for sure.  But it appears, not nearly as much as we thought a year ago.  The momentum toward a much more carbon free energy world is already too strong.

The real impact of the US pulling out of the Paris Agreement is that the US will be left behind.  And the rest of the world will realize that they can do things on their own without the US.

Other great world powers have gone this route.  Spain and Portugal are relatively modest nations today.  England is a shadow of what it once was.  All lost their power, in part, because they couldn't adjust their glorious self-images.

The US isn't finished as a nation.  It's just that other nations are discovering that we don't matter as much as we convinced them (and ourselves) that we do.  And we aren't all blind and backward either.  Our previous president was an enthusiastic supporter of the Paris Agreement.  More than half the voters cast their ballots for a candidate who would have kept us in the Paris Agreement.  But it is up to us to prove to the rest of the world that Trump is a short term aberration.

In many ways, we've grown too big for our own good. We believe our own propaganda about our greatness.  But, we've been in almost non-stop wars since WW II.   We've dominated the world power stage.  Letting the rest of the world get more equal casting won't be a bad thing.

Let's just hope I'm right that our withdrawal won't have nearly as much affect on humanity's fight against climate change as we once feared.

Most Beautiful Day Of The Year

Forget-me-nots

OK, some might argue that there were some great winter days, but today was by far the best summer day of the year.  The weekend was cloudy, rainy, some sun poking through the clouds.  Chilly - in the 40s, low 50s.

Yesterday was sunny and much warmer, getting near 60˚F.  But today it said 71˚F on our outdoor thermometer and sitting out on the deck felt decadent.  The leaves are all out.  Some flowers too.

Phlox

Narcissus 

Got up and attacked my to do list.  A couple of unexpected things came up, but got them taken care of too.  One item on the list was to cut the May Day (Choke Cherry) tree flowers so they don't send seeds throughout the yard and neighborhood.  I had discovered - because of the flowers - that we had one way in the back of the yard, on the other side of the fence even.  I cut off all the branches, then cut off all the flowers.  But then I discovered another one near the deck.  These are highly invasive trees that also make moose sick.  I've posted about them before - May Day Tree Invasion - Obvious While Blooming.  

Choke Cherry Flowers 

There were a lot of planes flying over.  The Anchorage Airport FB page explains why:

"Runway 15/33 Closure: The North/South runway will be closed for preventative maintenance with an estimated timeframe from May 8 - 28th, from approximately 8:00am to 7:00pm, Monday through Saturday. This will likely result in more aircraft departures to the East over mid-town Anchorage and more noise impact to the community during those times."

But it was still nice working and reading lazily out on the deck.  

Some Things I Want To Write About

Our political situation is getting grim.

Democracy works slowly.  I feel like I'm watching a car careening toward a cliff in very slow motion.  We know something has to be done.  Democratic wheels grind slowly though.  And with the added alignment of the House, Senate, and White House, they grind even more slowly.
We're watching disaster happen before our eyes yet it feels like there is nothing we can do about it.  In the short term, for most of us, that's probably true.  This car is going to go over the cliff.  There's going to be a lot of damage.

What we can do is:

• let the people with power (members of Congress, member of government agencies, people who have influence on members of Congress) know how we feel
• be models of good human action - take care of ourselves, do work that makes the world better, treat others with respect and decency
• prepare for the 2018 election.  

But much of our crisis is due to radically different views about how the world works, how people behave, how we 'know' what is good and bad.  It's stuff inside people's brains.

A longer term project is to examine what goes on in the human brain and pursue understandings such as:

• Our understanding of human economics
• the Protestant Ethic and the nature of work
• why work is the basis upon which Americans believe wealth should be distributed?
• as science leads to more automation that replaces more human workers, what happens to the people displaced by machines?
• are there other moral and equitable ways to distribute wealth among human beings?
• Our understanding of human behavior
• why do people do what they do?
• the role of genes
• the role of the environment 
• the role of belief systems, different ideas of morality
• the roles of fear, of hope
• what affects how people behave collectively - in families, communities, in political bodies?
• Our understanding of government and its relationship with individuals and private organizations
• government as a concept
• government as actual human systems
• conditions where they work well
• conditions where they don't work well
• roles of governments and roles of private sector organizations
• Our understanding of how we know things, how to think, how to solve problems
• the roles of family, community, religion, schools, media, culture
• the roles of individual brains
• the role of emotions
• how people change their understanding of things

There are a number of collective projects that the people of the United States need to undertake.  (I'll limit myself at this point, but really, this is project the peoples of the world need to engage in.)

• We need to carry on with the fundamental tasks that allow us all to eat, have shelter, education, health care.  (And as I write this, I'm fully aware that all those needs are not being fulfilled for 'us all.')
• We need to work on alleviating the fear we have of each other - whether 'the other' is defined in terms of skin tone, gender, religious beliefs, occupation, birthplace, sexual orientation, or any defined outsider from the mental category in which we each see ourselves.  
• We need to understand ourselves and where our values come from and where our beliefs about how the world works come from.  (Is our knowledge based on what authorities in our lives tell us is so?  Is it based on our own experience?  Is it based on our feelings about things?  Is it based on any sort of rigorous testing of the world itself?)
• Then we need to compare how we know the world with how others know the world and figure out how to resolve differences.

As you can see, there's a lot to think about, talk about, and do.  A blog may not be the best medium to explore these things.  Or maybe I can figure out how to make it work on a blog.  In a sense I do touch on these things frequently.  But can I do it in a more organized way?  Or are blog posts by necessity too short to take on such complicated and interrelated questions?  

That's where my head is today as our house guest of the last few days headed for the airport and the sun has been out for one of the nicest days of the year so far.  

Being human.  That's a big challenge.  How do we do it while achieving a reasonable level of contentment and doing as little harm to others as possible?  

Rereading this, it sounds so heavy and dry.  But these are some of the fundamental issues that humans must engage to overcome our differences and to find alternative ways to live decently on this planet.  I'll use this as a first draft and guideline.  Maybe I can find ways to engage these topics that are lighter without sacrificing depth.  

Memorial Day Thoughts

My wife's uncle is buried in Arlington after a long distinguished military career.

My father and step-father were both WW II veterans.  And there are many men and women who have served valiantly to protect liberty for us and for others.

But we also have to get past our automatic assumption that people who fight in wars are a) heroes and b) fought to keep us free.  Many US interventions in the world have been to protect US business interests, not the least of which, in this case, is the arms industry.  Writing about Memorial Day and those who served in the military honestly and objectively is difficult in the US and in most countries.

As with most public issues in the US today - whether championed by the right or the left - there is plenty of room for reason and logic and dispassion.  With any group that is honored by a society, the military gives refuge to malcontents as well as true patriots.  It's true as well of religion, science, fire and police departments, teachers, doctors, and every other group with more than average status.

Let's remember, clear headedly, those who truly put their lives on the line for justice and freedom and dignity.  That includes those who died and those who survived.  That includes the three who stood up to bigotry on a Portland light-rail train, two of whom died.  Because the media tends to focus on violence, let's also remember that lots of other people have stood up to bigotry and not been killed or hurt.  Standing up for justice has a risk, but most of the time, you don't get killed.  Those who would stand up like that, should know of the countless times people intervene and no violence ensues.  

I've done a number of Memorial Day posts in the past that may be of interest to some.

Memorial Day 2010

What's the Difference Between Memorial Day and Veteran's Day?

Memorial Day Sees Hmong Vets Shut Out of US Veterans Cemeteries That Include POWs

Arlington National Cemetery to Visit Uncle Kermit  (not a Memorial Day post per se, but lots of photos of Arlington)

Dark Pun

Not much screen time today.  Houseguests and a wedding this afternoon.

But this Twitter exchange made me smile.  But I couldn't figure out how to embed just these two tweets (and not all the other responses, or I could get the response without the original.)  So this is a screenshot.

For my visually impaired readers whose computers can't read images, it's a tweet and response.

The Tweet:  Look, we all know that the statisticians are the true Jedi Knights of the science world.
Reply:  Maybe,  But many are of the opinion that statisticians are on the dork side of the force.

"It is my job, however, to ensure that your personal ambitions are not entirely delusional and do not carry with them an unacceptable cost for everybody else."

War Machine is a new Netflix film about General Stanley McChrystal (called Gen. Glen McMahon in the film, but see note at the bottom.)  He's the general Obama fired after an incendiary 2010 Rolling Stone article, by Michael Hastings.

Whatever you think of War Machine , there's one scene that Americans can only dream about - Tilda Swinton plays a German legislator who questions the general in Berlin.  I've written out this brief (under 4 minutes) interrogation.  (I haven't been able to figure out if something like this actually happened.  The character Michael Hastings is sitting in the audience as well when this takes place, so perhaps it was in the book the movie is based on and comes from an actual event.)

German politician:  General, the US invaded Afghanistan because of the al-Qaeda attacks on September 11th.  This is correct sir?
General:  Yeah
German politician:  You have been speaking to us now for 45 minutes and yet in all of that time you have only mentioned al-Qaeda once.  Your own vice president has advocated a much smaller and simpler counterterrorism approach to incapacitate what is estimated to be  a little more than 100 al-Qaeda fighters that still remain in Afghanistan to refocus on what it was that started this war in the first place.
General:  Ah.
German politician:  Your analysis of the insurgency there  suggests to me there is no monolithic Taliban.  You are spread over the entire country.  You are fighting 1,000 separate battles with locals whose principal ideological position would seem to be simply that they don’t want foreign soldiers in their village.    And that, General, you must know, is a war you will never win.
General:  Ah. Uh, with all due respect, ma’am.  Uh I must beg to differ.  I firmly believe, having traveled to all corners of the country, having spoken with many people from many walks of life . . . that what these people want is the very same thing that you and I want.  Hmmm?  Freedom, security, stability, jobs.  Progress is being made.  Real Progress.  But challenges do remain.
German politician:  Yes, I understand all of that, General.  And . . .and , please let me say quite sincerely that I do not question the goodness of your intent.  I have been listening to you here this morning, and, uh. . . I believe you are a good man.  I do.  What I question is. . . your belief in your power to deliver these things that you describe.  I question your belief in the power of your ideals.
General:  Ah, well. . .

German politician:  I think what I am trying to say, and I apologize, General, if this is sounding impolite, but I question your sense of self. 

General:  I appreciate your commentary.  I do.  But I have a job to do.
German politician:  Yes, I understand, And I also have a job to do.  And I’m trying to do mine.  As an elected representative of the people of Germany, it is my job to ensure that the personal ambitions of those who serve those people are kept in check.  You have devoted your entire life, General, to the fighting of war.  And this situation in Afghanistan, for you, it is the culmination of all your years of training, all your years of ambition.  This is the great moment of your life.
General:  Well. . . .
German politician:  It’s understandable to me that you should have, therefore, a fetish for completion to make your moment glorious.  It is my job, however, to ensure that your personal ambitions are not entirely delusional and do not carry with them an unacceptable cost for everybody else.  (emphasis added.)

The closest we have to someone like this is Elizabeth Warren, though she isn't quite as calm and polite.  And how long do we have to wait for the rest of our Congress to get some backbone and remember who they serve?


I'd note that the Guardian didn't think much about the movie, saying the portrayal of General McChrystal was all wrong.  It had this comment about Tilda Swinton's performance:

"Tilda Swinton has an interesting, if slightly supercilious, cameo as a German politician who questions the general about his personal motivation."

A more positive NY Times review says that another of the characters seems to be Gen. Michael T. Flynn.

I'd note that perhaps the movie makers originally considered actually naming the main character   Gen. Stanley McChrystal.    I say this because when I googled the cast, I got google's quick answer (top in screenshot below) which listed Brad Pitt as "General Stanley McChrystal."  But when you go to the cast listed by IMDb (bottom in screenshot below) Brad Pitt is listed as playing Gen. Glen McMahon.

I can't find anything on line that explains this - whether they were going to use the general's real name and then changed their minds or whether google just messed it up or something else.  

I'd also note that Michael Hastings, the author of the Rolling Stone article and the book this movie comes from, died in a strange car crash in Los Angeles.  A long New York Magazine article examines  Hasting's life and career in an attempt to unearth the cause of the accident, from conspiracy to suicide to accident.  It doesn't declare a cause, but seems to lean towards Hastings being out of control in his life rather than someone tried to kill him.  

The Pope's Gift To Trump

Pope Francis gave President Trump a gift - his encyclical on the climate, which was released in June 2015. The Washington Post highlighted what they identified as "ten key excerpts."  The whole encyclical is 165 pages, so this is obviously a very abbreviated version.  I suspect it would be more likely that Trump would have just read these ten points, than the whole encyclical the Pope gave him.

Most of these are sorely lacking from the public policy debates in the United States, and those that get into our discussions need a lot more thoughtfulness.

Enjoy and think about how we can get this issues considered more there.

1) Climate change has grave implications. “Each year sees the disappearance of thousands of plant and animal species which we will never know, which our children will never see, because they have been lost forever,” he writes.
2) Rich countries are destroying poor ones, and the earth is getting warmer. “The warming caused by huge consumption on the part of some rich countries has repercussions on the poorest areas of the world, especially Africa, where a rise in temperature, together with drought, has proved devastating for farming.”
3) Christians have misinterpreted Scripture and “must forcefully reject the notion that our being created in God’s image and given dominion over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures.”
4) The importance of access to safe drinkable water is “a basic and universal human right.”
5) Technocratic domination leads to the destruction of nature and the exploitation of people, and “by itself the market cannot guarantee integral human development and social inclusion.”
6) Population control does not address the problems of the poor. “In the face of the so-called culture of death, the family is the heart of the culture of life.” And, “Since everything is interrelated, concern for the protection of nature is also incompatible with the justification of abortion.”
7) Gender differences matter, and “valuing one’s own body in its femininity or masculinity is necessary if I am going to be able to recognize myself in an encounter with someone who is different.”
8) The international community has not acted enough: “recent World Summits on the environment have not lived up to expectations because, due to lack of political will, they were unable to reach truly meaningful and effective global agreements on the environment.” He writes, “the Church does not presume to settle scientific questions or to replace politics. But I am concerned to encourage an honest and open debate so that particular interests or ideologies will not prejudice the common good.”
9) Individuals must act. “An integral ecology is also made up of simple daily gestures which break with the logic of violence, exploitation and selfishness,” he writes. We should also consider taking public transit, car-pooling, planting trees, turning off the lights and recycling.
10) By the way, why are we here on Earth in the first place? “What kind of world do we want to leave to those who come after us, to children who are now growing up?” he writes.

"Yes, the lips pay, but notice how trumpet players usually have an exaggerated vein going up their forehead." The Costs Of Perfection

I recommend listening to the video while you read this.  (I realize that Coltrane isn't a mass consumption product, but some of my readers must know this music.)




The following comes from an LA Times commentary by The Doors original drummer,  John Densmore, on the price musicians pay to master their craft.  He's also in a documentary coming out on Coltrane.

"Coltrane was one of the first tenor players to switch from the old plastic, black mouthpieces that made Coleman Hawkins famous to the silver metal ones. The old plastic ones were bigger and usually produced a heavy vibrato sound, whereas the new metal ones were smaller and elicited a more narrow tone.
The space for air to come into the horn is smaller (like the trumpet), and the trap of metal mouthpieces is to produce a “cold,” or modern, sound. JC chose to use a No. 5 reed (the wooden piece under the mouthpiece that vibrates), to counteract that problem; No. 5s are very hard pieces of wood.
That forced John to dig deeper into his abdomen for more air, but it produced a warmer sound. Hard work, but he was reaching for something new.
It turned into a simply gorgeous sound, full of empathy, passion and every emotion in the human condition — from the rage over four girls killed in the bombing of a church in a song called “Alabama” to the gentle feeling of photosynthesis in “After the Rain.”
Coltrane is so in my blood. Every time I go outside after a storm, I “hear” that melody."

He acknowledges other occupations also take their toll.  He mentions Sandy Koufax's elbow and offered this tribute to construction workers.  But in the end, he thinks it's worth it.

You know what, though? It’s all worth it. If you have to contort muscles to produce whatever you’re working on, so be it. That’s why high-rise buildings should have a plaque outside on the wall listing all the workers who built those skyscrapers … all of them.
And hopefully readers of this will have a new understanding and respect for the toll musicians pay for the love of their craft.

I've often wondered if the toll many Olympic athletes have to pay, or the children in China who are identified early and plucked out of their families to train to become perfect gymnasts or dancers, is worth it.   Yes, virtuosity is thrilling both for the performer and the audience, but is it worth giving up so much that encompasses being human?  I suspect the answer is different for different people.  We give up some things and gain others.   Many people have developed no skill at all and still live lives of pain, so why not go for it?  Or would we be better off in balance with nature and follow the Greeks' advice on the golden mean?  I think true artists push themselves in their pursuits of perfection.  It's what they have to do.

In any case, think about the people who built that skyscraper, who sewed your pants, worked on your microwave and your cell phone.  And enjoy the music, since it cost the musicians a great deal.

The title quote also comes from the article.