Commentary on Current Events, Not Covered in the Books

September 27, 2007

On The "Jena 6" Case

(About 6 black youths beating one white youth unconscious)

From what I've been able to gather from news reports, this case began when a black student dared to sit under a tree on a high school campus even though, according to an unwritten code, the space under the tree was reserved for white students only. The black student's "offense" then prompted some white students to secretly hang rope nooses from the tree as a warning, and then the situation grew more heated.

This inflamed situation got so bad that it eventually came to the point when the six black students severely beat a white student, even kicking him when he was on the ground, and left his face bloodied and swollen. He apparently went to the hospital but was released. However, his father (who was interviewed on National Public Radio on 9-21-07) said that the beaten boy was bleeding from his ears for several days afterward and suffered a lot of pain.

The six black youths were arrested and initially charged with attempted murder, while the white boys who hung the rope nooses from the tree were not charged with any crime. They were only suspended from school for a bit.

All this eventually prompted large demonstrations by black people marching in support of the six black youths, pointing out that the criminal justice system is biased and unfair. As a result, charges against five of the black youths were dropped, and the charge against the one who already had a criminal record was reduced to second degree assault.

I have mixed feelings about this, and I think it's important to tell you why.

On one hand, the criminal justice system in America is indeed unfair and racially biased. My writings explain how and why racism against blacks (African-Americans) has deeply infected the whole political-economic-law enforcement-criminal justice system in America. After all, over the last 26 years since the Reaganites gained power there has been an erosion of affirmative action and housing programs; racial profiling; disproportionate targeting and unfair treatment by police; racially skewed charging and plea bargaining decisions of prosecutors; discriminatory sentencing practices; and terrible failure of judges, elected officials and other criminal justice policy-makers to redress the inequities.

Actually, racism has been a problem in America ever since white Europeans first began treating Native Americans (Indians) unfairly, and particularly since they began the slave trade and took Africans as prisoners and slaves to do all their dirty work. Thank God, Martin Luther King Jr. and many others tried to expose the racism, and they had some success. But, as I stated in my second book, this situation has grown steadily worse again in America ever since the policies initiated by then-president Richard Nixon began targeting black people. It worsened when then-president Ronald Reagan rendered the Civil Rights Commission ineffective and virtually opened the doors wide open for institutionalized racism once again. And it worsened even more when George W. Bush used racially charged code words in his campaigns to cater to and solicit the support of Southern white racists.

Of course, Bush and other Republicans would vehemently deny that and insist that they are not racists, and some of them might not be. But the fact is that many of them use coded words like "states' rights," a term which was originated by Southern white racists before the Civil War to defend slavery. And they say and do other things that appeal to white racists and are detrimental to black people, such as the things I mentioned above.

On the other hand, the public demonstrations in support of the Jena 6 should have been mainly about racial segregation and the hate crime of hanging rope nooses from the tree. After all, hanging a noose is not a harmless "prank," as white officials in Jena claimed. A noose is a symbol, just as harmful or threatening to blacks as the Nazi swastika is to Jews, because countless black people were lynched and killed with nooses hung by white people in the South. The noose is even a worse symbol than the confederate flag, which represents advocacy of racism, slavery and apartheid. Therefore, those who hung the nooses from the tree committed a vicious hate crime. Rather than being properly ashamed of their racist ancestry, the white students who hung those nooses choose to embrace and flaunt it, and some people have appropriately called them terrorists for it.

That is what started the whole thing, even though some white people in Jena, Louisiana would no doubt claim that it was really started by the black youth who dared to sit under the tree. They would be wrong, however. He was right to do that, and brave, just as Rosa Parks was for sitting at the front of the bus to defy racist traditions and demand her civil rights. In fact, Rosa Parks is the brave soul who spurred Martin Luther King Jr. to begin his work more seriously.

The original wrong in the Jena case was in the segregation/apartheid, and in the hanging up of rope nooses. The public demonstrations by black people in support of the Jena 6 were quite right to protest that, and they were quite right to protest the injustice and racial bias in the criminal justice system.

However, I believe they were wrong to claim that the six black youths should be freed and escape any punishment. They deserved to be punished appropriately. They kicked a white youth into unconsciousness when he was on the ground. They committed criminal assault and battery with intent to do bodily harm.

If Martin Luther King , Jr. were still alive, he would no doubt remind the Jena 6 and all other black people that peaceful, non-violent protest is the ONLY productive way to protest prejudice and injustice. As he said, hate only begets more hate, and violence only begets more violence.

 

September 30, 2007

On Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad vs Bush

(Revised 12-4-2007)

In late September, 2007, Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, visited the U.S. He was interviewed on television and then spoke before a college audience and the United Nations general assembly. He drew scathing criticism from Americans, partly because he puts on a mask-like smile on his face, apparently to hide his feelings, and mainly because of his stated beliefs.

To his credit, Ahmadinejad did level some very valid criticism against the Bush Regime and against Israel. Much of that is very well deserved, as you can see on the pages on this site addressing Bush’s Record and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.

However, Ahmadinejad was not truthful about many things, and his denials were wide open to ridicule. For example, he denies that he would like to see Israel destroyed. He denies that the Nazis killed millions of Jews during the Second World War. And he even denies that there are any homosexuals in Iran, a denial that brought laughter from most Americans who heard it.

Unfortunately, none of these are laughing matters, and Ahmadinejad made a serious mistake because he underestimates his enemies and he grossly overestimated his ability to sway Western minds.

On September 30, 2007, the day after Ahmadinejad spoke at the U.N. and was soundly denounced by the American media, U.S. President George W. Bush announced that he would authorize "surgical air strikes" against Iran. He apparently wanted to destroy its nuclear facilities and weapons factories. He obviously felt that the time was right, since most Americans were very angered at Ahmadinejad.

Bush then increased his inflammatory rhetoric against Iran, claiming they have a nuclear weapons program that must be stopped. And even when on December 4, 2007, U.S. Intelligence Services broke ranks and released information from a report stating that Iran had in fact stopped their nuclear weapons program, Bush still insisted Iran is "dangerous." He claimed he had not known about the intelligence report before December 4, but it is very apparent that he had known about it. He had already been choosing his words carefully, using language saying the Iran was dangerous because it "had knowledge" of how to operate a nuclear weapons program. And he kept it up and said the report changed nothing in his mind.

Tragically, Bush has chosen to not only to continue, but to expand his vain folly. So in my view, Bush is not really all that much better than Ahmadinejad. Granted, it might be true that Ahmadinejad is a deceptive and hypocritical hatemonger and warmonger, as many Americans think. But he has very good reasons to hate Israel, America and England. They have brought a lot of suffering, death and destruction to Arabs and Muslims for nearly a century. And Bush has compounded it. In fact, Bush is now the biggest reason many Muslims hate America, and he has, through his arrogant, misguided folly, made a terrible situation (regarding Muslims) ten times worse since 2001. He has been a big part of the problem, and certainly not part of the solution.

Because Bush has listened to certain right-wing conservative "Christian authorities" who insist that Islam is evil and that a war by Christians against Islam was "prophesied," he has been led to believe that he is fighting a "holy war. " He thinks that all this is in fulfillment of prophecy. The trouble is, Bush is nearly as misguided and deluded as the Muslim extremists who also believe they are fighting a holy war ("jihad"). But Bush is far more dangerous because he has much more military power at his disposal, and he upholds traditional views held by many Jews and Christians even though they are wrong. The Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) were meant to be a family of religions, and they were all inspired by the same God who wants us all to love one another and treat each other as family.

The truth is that Bush and Ahmadinejad are, in a certain respect, just like Osama bin Laden, Ehud Olmert (Prime Minister of Isael), and all other leaders of nations or religious sects or groups who believe they must fight a "holy war" or "jihad" in order to rule. They are simply wrong about that, because no war is holy, and we should not kill anyone if we can help it. Killing is justifiable only if and when it is to save the lives of those who are in imminent danger of being murdered, or to save people from horrible and unbearable tyranny, persecution and oppression, and ONLY if absolutely necessary as a very last resort.

Granted, these wars were foreseen and prophesied, but that does NOT mean they were caused or sanctioned by God, and it does not mean they must continue. They were caused by egocentric, ethnocentric, spiritually blind men, and that was foreseen or prophesied. But they do not need to continue, and our Parent God wants his/her children to stop killing each other. The fact is that no one can "win" by killing their fellow human beings. It is a lose-lose situation.

We now must realize that those who judge, hate and try to destroy their enemies are misguided. That is why the Christ Jesus, like all other true servants of God, have advised us to love even our enemies. In fact, they advised us to live not by the sword; to not retaliate; to resist not evil (if we are tempted to judge); to overcome evil with good; and to overcome hate with love.

Easier said than done. I know. But it’s the right way. And it’s the only way that will save the world and unite us, and enable us to make peace.

 

November 3, 2007

On The America Competes Act and No Child Left Behind Act:

American Education Initiatives: Good Intentions, Unintended Consequences

The America Competes Act and initiative has broad bipartisan support because it was designed to increase funding and boost American efforts to increase education in "STEM" subjects: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. The rationale and belief was that this is necessary to compete with other countries that have been and are increasingly producing and graduating professionals in these fields at a rate higher than the U.S.

On the face of it, this seems like a good idea, and it is a good idea except for one important thing. It is to the detriment of the liberal arts, and particularly to the detriment of literature, history, civics, geography, art, and music, all of which are just as valuable to our civilization. In fact, many people would say they are even more valuable to the spiritual and cultural development of our civilization, and to increase funding for STEM subjects while decreasing funding for liberal arts is foolhardy, shortsighted, and careless.

Moreover, since the American Competes Act came on the heels of Bush’’s "No Child Left Behind Act," it compounds the problems caused by that foolhardy initiative. And let me tell you why I say that.

Bush’’s "No Child Left Behind" is an unfunded education "reform" initiative designed to make schools more accountable by imposing more standardized tests. It’’s part of the Republican demand to prove how much "bang for the buck" we’’re getting. But, the reality is that it wastes public schools' precious time and money, and it endangers many public schools and sets them up for failure.

"No Child Left Behind" threatens loss of funding if schools do not meet standardized testing requirements. But most educators find those requirements unrealistic and counterproductive, and they detract from real teaching and learning. In fact, they stifles incentive and destroy interest in wider and higher learning, because they are geared toward low-performing students to ensure that all students pass the standardized tests so their school is not punished.

While "No Child Left Behind" ostensibly creates "greater accountability," it actually forces attention on very narrowly defined academic achievement. Like "merit pay," it forces teachers to "teach to the test" and focus on test results, which is at the cost of wider and more comprehensive learning, and also at the cost of social and emotional character development.

You see, Bush’’s education initiative was originally predicated and modeled on a fraudulently touted Texas school program, and it never was a good idea. In fact, I suspect it was secretly designed to gradually undermine public education and make way for a privatized, profit-making education system. I suspect that is the hidden agenda of right-wing conservatives regarding education. That is why they have been pushing for "school choice," demanding taxpayer’’s money for private schools, and taking money away from public schools that desperately need it. I believe that is why early in his first term Bush cut $8 Billion from the promised funds for public education, and then imposed an education law and unfunded mandate that has created more costly bureaucracy and paper work for public schools.

Now things have been made worse. The 2007 American Competes Act decreases our ability to give students a comprehensive, broad education, because it focuses and rewards the STEM subjects at the cost of everything else –– particularly at the cost of the subjects that make our culture more creative, beautiful, entertaining, enriching, and enjoyable. Even worse, it runs headlong further toward an inequitable educational system in which only the children of the wealthy would be able to afford liberal arts education. And even as it has been, many students in many public schools cannot afford to participate in some music and arts programs because they are already underfunded.

We need to educate our children and young men and women with a broad, comprehensive liberal arts education that includes all areas of academic study, and we need to ensure that they are all funded fairly and equitably.

Remember what the very wise have said.

"I must study politics and war that my sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. My sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history, naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, and music."

–– John Adams

"If I were not a physicist, I would probably be a musician. I often think in music. I live my daydreams in music. I see my life in terms of music."

–– Albert Eienstein

"Joy, sorrow, tears, lamentation, laughter -- to all these music gives voice, but in such a way that we are transported from the world of unrest to a world of peace, and see reality in a new way, as if we were sitting by a mountain lake and contemplating hills and woods and clouds in the tranquil and fathomless water."

–– Albert Schweitzer

"When I hear music, I fear no danger. I am invulnerable. I see no foe. I am related to the earliest times, and to the latest."

–– Henry David Thoreau

I focus on music because it is dear to my heart. And I quote those who were speaking of classical music, because it soothes the soul. But any good music with beautiful melody and engaging rhythm is highly valuable to our culture and civilization. We all know that. We just need to keep that in mind when it comes to funding our educational system, and fund music, art, literature, history, civics, and geography just as much as we fund the STEM subjects.

Finally I’ll just say that Americans have been sold on the idea that victory in competition is everything, and that we must be "Number One." But that is not what’s most important. Creativity is the thing that is most valuable and enriching, and the satisfaction and enjoyment it brings is far longer lasting.

Let us nourish the soul of all, not feed the individual or national ego.

 

December 30, 2007

On Political Assassinations

(Revised 1-5-2008)

The tragic death of Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan prompts me to make some general observations regarding political assassinations, because while misguided murderous partisans come from all extremes and from the right and left, most seem to serve the same purpose for the same special interests.

Consider, for example, the intent of those who killed John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Jr., and the moderate Israeli President Rabin. They and countless other good, conscientious, liberal, progressive leaders, including Bhutto, who served in the best interests of the people as a whole have been assassinated by right-wing zealots who use deadly force to try to control and rule. And even though they usually kill in the name of God and Country (in the name of their extreme religious sectarian beliefs and/or their extreme political ideology), they actually serve evil. They in fact commit premeditated murder, and some of them even commit mass murder, and they do it with malice and hate in their deadened hearts.

Unfortunately, whether evil is deceptive and masquerades as good in the public eye, or whether evil is cowardly and sneaky in its murderous ways, it has been and still is very powerful in its ability to kill and destroy those who would deny it power to rule over the people. In fact, that is the main problem in the world today.

Benazir Bhutto tried to deny many different brutal forces the power to rule over her people. She wanted to give her people democratic freedom and equality. She was against al Queda, she was against General Musharif, and she was against the Bush Regime, all of whom want to rule and don’t mind people being killed so they can do so. She is dead because she dared tell the truth.

By the way, her father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, was also assassinated for the same reasons, and he also knew his life might be taken by those who do not want a free democracy. Before his death, he wrote a book, If I Am Assassinated, which can help us to understand America's hypocritical role in creating conditions that led to both of those tragic deaths.

And also by the way, I fully discussed American Neo-Imperialism in full chapters my first and fourth books, because Americans must at long last face the truth about it, and ensure that their government makes amends and ceases trying to rule the world for the benefit of American corporations and the wealthy few who seek to increase their wealth, power and domain. Their "globalization" movement must be recognized for what it is, and it must be reformed and regulated so that it is not exploitive and not detrimental to so many people of the world. (I discussed that fully in my second and fifth books.)

Those who profit and benefit from it will want to denigrate me, and some will even want to see me dead. But one of the reasons I am supposed to write anonymously is so that it will not be so easy for right-wing zealots to assassinate or "crucify" me. That is why the prophets Isaiah and Jesus revealed the way for me and foretold that I would deliver my work and not speak in public. Of course, they also knew and said that would mean my work would be rejected by my generation.

Nevertheless, the Spirit of truth will ultimately prevail, and we shall overcome. It is but a matter of time, because the promised and needed truth has now been written.

© 2007 - 2008 Joseph J. Adamson