2008 March 08, 07 Ala, 164 BE
Having read so much in "Disaster Capitalism" about the baneful influence of the libertarian economist Milton Friedman and his "Chicago school" of economics, I was interested in a discussion of Friedman's religious views by Christian preacher John Lofton. According to Lofton, before Friedman's death he grew curious about the great economist's belief in God and in a letter asked him, "Do you believe in God? And what, if anything, does God have to do with economics?" Friedman answered,
"I am an agnostic. I do not believe in God, but I am not an atheist, because I believe the statement, `There is a god' does not admit of being either confirmed or rejected. I do not believe God has anything to do with economics. But values do." (An Exchange: My Correspondence With Milton Friedman About God, Economics, Evolution And Values, http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=736)
The good pastor was not satisfied and wrote Friedman again, asking "What is the distinction you make between agnosticism and atheism? And where do these values you say you believe in come from?" Friedman responded,
"Agnosticism, `I do not know.' Atheism, `I know that there is no god.' I do not know where my values come from, but that does not mean I do not have them, (or that) I do not hold them as strongly as you hold your belief in God. They turn out -- not accidentally, I believe -- to be very much like those held by most other people whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim, atheist, agnostic, or abstract. Which leads me to believe that they are a product of the same evolutionary process that accounts for the rest of our customs as well as physical characterizations."
Lofton goes on to debate Friedman's agnosticism in terms of his own exclusivist quasi-fundamentalist agenda. Some of his arguments are admittedly quite good. He offers a couple of quotes from St. Paul that I am sure I will find useful when I return to the atheism debate later on. In spite of his agnosticism, a Baha'i would agree with Friedman more than Lofton. Yes, morality is evolutionary and contextual. Yes, there is little to choose between values as grown by the various traditions, even as Jesus said, "By their fruits ye shall know them." But, as Klein points out, the fruits of Friedman's economic ideas have proven very lucrative for a corporatist elite, but in terms of the economic benefit of the vast majority of humans, these are bitter fruits indeed.
Hmm, maybe God does have something to do with economics after all, not to mention with the values of freedom for individual and free enterprise that Friedman so ardently upholds in his economic theories.
To see and pay homage to One God is to be inspired by a sense of awe. This reverence teaches love of humanity as a transcendent unity in diversity. It accepts both individuals and collectivities, not as polar opposites but as harmonious aspects of one truth. God teaches us to desire and accept universal law and promote cosmopolitan patriotism.
When U.S. President Harry Truman was attending the inauguration ceremonies of the United Nations after the Second World War, he kept in his pocket these lines from Alfred, Lord Tennyson's 1837 poem, Locksley Hall,
"For I dip't into the future, far as human eye could see,
Saw the Vision of the world, and all the wonders that would be;
... Till the war-drum throbb'd no longer, and the battle-flags were furl'd
In the Parliament of man, the Federation of the world.
There the common sense of most shall hold a fretful realm in awe,
And the kindly earth shall slumber, lap't in universal law."
Inspiring as is the poet's vision it is not prophetic; or, at least not as much as that of the philosopher. We have gone over in detail on this blog the prescient sketch for a perpetual peace that philosopher Immanuel Kant drew up in the 1790's. Kant all but wrote the constitution for the Federation of the world some forty years before Locksley Hall.
Two hundred and twenty years of procrastination later, global warming, the threat of war and nuclear proliferation and a thousand other dangers are forcing many to stand up for a truly representative democracy, something like what Tennyson calls the "common sense of most" holding a "fretful realm in awe." The stunted democracy we are stuck with is designed to assure the reverse of common sense; instead it uses "elite sense," fractured shibboleths devised by the wealthy few, backed by force, to hold most in fretful fear.
As Naomi Klein points out, if there were anything like true democracy the poor majority of the human race would immediately vote to redistribute the world's wealth into their own hands. Safe to say, the proposition, "Be it resolved that 95 percent of the world's wealth shall be held in the hands of 5 percent of the population," would not pass in a democratic plebiscite. Yet that is exactly the way things are, and that is because our almost universal attitude is pure agnosticism, just like Friedman's. "Do not know, do not care," liberty like the animal's, "I do not know, so leave me free to follow my instincts as I please." Such ignorant apathy is the reverse of the wonder and mystic reverence that God inspires.
The old world order, inequity and greed backed by violence and terror, explains why we put off the new world order, why the election of a parliament of man remains anathema, even in the face of global warming and global climate destabilization, why the very idea of a global democratic government is never mentioned in the press or seriously entertained in any public forum that I am aware of. The booty is just too enticing, the plunder of world resources too tempting to allow ownership to pass into the hands of all. Once the masses taste the sweetness of their birthright and the meek inherit the earth, once most know the joy of justice and peace, "... the kindly earth shall slumber, lap't in universal law," there will be no going back. Love will be unleashed as soon as universal justice takes the reins, for God is love.
That is why God -- the Inspirer of awe and reverence -- has everything to do with economics, for our economic relations are the result of common faith, an attitude that will bring a new divine world order into reality. As the Universal House wrote in its Peace Message,
"Clearly, a common remedial effort is urgently required. It is primarily a matter of attitude. Will humanity continue in its waywardness, holding to outworn concepts and unworkable assumptions? Or will its leaders, regardless of ideology, step forth and, with a resolute will, consult together in a united search for appropriate solutions?"
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Friday, March 07, 2008
More on Sherlock House
Fast 164 Report
By John Taylor; 2008 March 07, 06
I was dragged under by weather conditions, snow and the threat of snow, even before the fast. I had no energy or initiative, but at least no migraine attacks, yet. I was going through all the episodes in DVD of the television series "House, M.D." <http://www.fox.com/house/showinfo/> before the fast started. My listless funk lasted until the weather lifted a couple of days ago. Those were the first, most difficult few days of fasting, worsened by weather woes. That over with, yesterday I could go back to a fairly normal routine, except that vigorous ping pong sessions are replaced by long, sedate walks.
My new habit of watching House, M.D., is especially handy in the late afternoon period when the brain is dehydrated and virtually non-functional. One difference I noticed between John watching House before the fast, and now during the fast is flinching. Before the fast the doctors could be up to their hips in blood and guts and my reaction was, "I wonder if they will find the elusive diagnosis?" Now I have to avert my eyes and cover my ears if they so much as prick a patient's finger with a needle.
Somehow, the condition of fasting has sensitized me. I am more easily shocked and awed. That is probably why Naomi Klein's book about shock capitalism has grabbed me and will not let go. The bad guys are ratcheting up their agenda by means of disasters, and now as I fast I know what it is like to go into shock like a patient slipping down the slippery slope to termination.
I suppose I should not be surprised, since Baha'u'llah did say that the religion of God is like heaven and "fasting is its sun and obligatory prayer is its moon." Except that I did not expect the sensitization to the sun to be so literal, so intimate, so penetrating in its effect. My emotions feel not like standing in a desert with no water and a hot high noon sun above, more like sitting on the surface of the sun itself. I feel with God the pain of an entire universe, not joy, just pain, and it is hard to bear.
Just read some more about the lead character, Dr. House -- as always, a Wikipedia article is among the most informative sources. It seems that his name is a play on the inspiration for his character, Sherlock Holmes. Get it, homes, house? Hmm. A fictional doctor inspired by a fictional detective who in turn was inspired by a real doctor, a Scottish medico whose name was Joseph
"The team arrives at diagnoses using the Socratic method and differential diagnosis, with House guiding the deliberations. In medicine, differential diagnosis ... is the systematic method health care providers use to identify the disease causing a patient's symptoms. In other words, part of diagnosis is attempting to narrow down the list of possible diagnoses until one emerges as the best."
The Wikipedia article also points to a review of every episode by a real doctor, who of course sees mistakes that go right over my layman's head.
Here is an idea for a future television series: Mashriq, B.T. (Baha'i teacher) the story of a hotshot Auxiliary Board Member who encounters seekers with various obstructions to the faith and diagnoses them.
Actually, the family history of Sherlock Holmes goes further back, as William Osler's biographer points out,
“Holmes/Doyle/Bell had a common root, the `method of Zadig, as outlined in Voltaire's 1747 novelette, Zadig, or Destiny. Zadig, a reasonable man with an affinity for nature, reasons from apparently trivial details to give accurate descriptions of animals he has never seen. Joseph Bell considered Zadig's method the everyday foundation of medical teaching. In later years, Osler, using the method to the fullest in diagnosis, had his students look up Voltaire's text. Medical lore is rife, of course, with stories of cocky Zadigs being caught out. It was said that Joseph
Burned up by Oneness.
Last year a science magazine reported on research indicating that oneness is our only channel to compassion.
"The events in
The article goes on to summarize research suggesting that that our inaction to mass pain, as opposed to the pain of one person, reflects a fundamental human reaction, We can love one, not many. For example, they found out that donors in wealthy lands who gave money for one child in a poor or war torn place actually cut off their funding as soon as they were informed of others suffering in the same region as well. We instinctively lump anything more than one sufferer into a vast ocean of suffering humanity. What good does it do, we reason, to try to fill an ocean with a spoon?
I think the sensitization going on in the fast was designed to burn away such illusions, to open us up to more than one individual's pain and to turn our concern to all, or at least to larger numbers than just one.
I think fasting is also a cure to what some statistics indicate is the most common crippler of them all: depression. Fasting is a natural antidepressant, something far better than what comes out of a pill box. If you can confront the demons that rise up during the afternoon of the fast, mere depression seems like nothing afterwards.
Or something like that.
Here is the first paragraph of a science writer's reaction on her blog to a recent finding debunking artificial happiness meds. The entry is called "What the media misses about antidepressants"
"A new meta-analysis of research on modern antidepressants-- some of it unpublished by the drug companies-- suggests that the drugs have little advantage over placebos. Why then do so many people consider drugs like Prozac to be miracle drugs for depression-- many putting up with serious sexual side effects in order to take them? Are they simply being duped by a placebo effect or avoiding withdrawal symptoms? And how could drugs which are little different from placebo also produce suicidal or even homicidal thoughts in some patients?" <http://www.60secondscience.com/archive/psychology-neuroscience-news-articles/what-the-media-misses-about-an.php?sc=WR_20080304>
She goes on to speculate that the pills have not been debunked just because the whole population does not get rid of depression any more than they do to placebos. No, it is just that parts of the population can respond while the whole does not.
"A clinical trial could easily find that this drug has no advantage over placebo, depending on the proportion of people with each gene in the study. Another study of the same drug might find it to be a blockbuster-- while another found it dangerous. Same drug, different populations."
She then cites one doctor, himself cynical about the drug industry's corruptive influence, who still prescribes antidepressants because "the right drug in the right person can be lifesaving." Yes, but a placebo can be lifesaving as well. And so can a ritual, a belief, even an activity. Studies have found, for instance, that in children most of the trauma of a needle can be taken away simply by having them play a video game as they are being stuck; the kids barely notice a prick when they are involved in that kind of play. As a worried parent about the prodigious time this coming generation is wasting before screens, this is one case where I would advocate more of it, even in adults.
I watch Dr. House and his minions perform hair-raisingly invasive tests, like needles stuck directly into the eye or plunging without anesthesia a tube into a boy's bones and literally sucking out the marrow (oh, yes, it is the fast... shudder...) and I think, video games would be a good thing then, unlike most times. If plug-in drugs can reduce the need for chemicals by even 5 percent, there would surely be benefits.
The same might be true of religious rituals, especially prayer and meditation. If a person's culture does not have rituals, we should make them up. They help in a crisis like that. The placebo effect, doctors forget, is real. The medical system has got to stop ignoring it, start using the placebo as a cure in itself instead of just a control.
So in curing depressions, rituals and games, mixed right into life's otherwise boring routines, would no doubt have a tremendous placebo effect. If depression is such a great crippler, we should take it seriously and do all we can, no matter how unorthodox, to cure it, to wipe it out. And the Month of Ala is as good as any time to start.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Night of the Living Frankensteins
Book Review
By John Taylor; 2008 March 06, 05
Naomi Klein, "The Shock Doctrine: the rise of disaster capitalism," Knopf
I'm reading Naomi Klein's latest, "Shock Doctrine, The Rise of Disaster Capitalism." I did not want to touch this book. I already have one of her older books on my "to read" bookshelf, "No Logo," and every time I pick it up it depresses my spirits and I have to drop it. But when I came across Disaster Capitalism in the "New Arrivals" section it slipped into my hand and I had no choice but check it out of the library. I had heard some of the many interviews with Klein available on the Web, but resisted reading it.
Now that I have got 159 pages into this 600 page book -- in spite of being mentally impaired most of the day by the fast -- I realize that this is a very important book indeed. As she says in one interview, her history covers the same ground that the triumphalist documentary "
How it all started was that Stalin balked when the U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights used the word "political" when talking about discrimination and persecution. He refused to let them define as genocide anything to do with mass murder for political reasons. Not surprising, really, in view of the fact that Stalin himself would have been the first to be put on trial for genocide, had he let this pass. In terms of numbers, few in history killed more of his political enemies, real or imagined, than he did.
It took a while, but the far right cottoned on to this gaping loophole in international law dug out by a leftist mass murderer. They exploited it for a new, more sophisticated rightist brand of mass murder, not to say genocide. Interestingly, they worked out their torture techniques in
There followed, first in Chile, then Brazil and Argentina, the systematic murder and torture of an entire class, branded "leftists," that is, trade unionists, social welfare workers, anyone with an education or social conscience. Essentially the crime was, in Klein's words, not murder but armed robbery. Massive wealth and resources had been nationalized (or was about to be nationalized) by democrats and "developmentalists" was appropriated and handed out to corporate elites in the familiar process of "privatization." They practiced this technique first in the "Southern Cone" of
Klein does not mention this, but the shock and awe capitalists were doing the same thing that Stalin did when he exterminated the mythical "Kulak class," and Hitler did when he invaded
I find it significant that it is a woman who wrote this very significant book. Like Mary Shelley, author of Frankenstein, she can see better than any man the devil that is unleashed when men appropriate the means of reproduction of humanity, in this case our economic and libertarian values. In the first pages of the book, she points out exactly who her Frankenstein is. It is none other than the merging of the nationalist state with the modern corporation.
"A more accurate term for a system that erases the boundaries between Big Government and Big Business is not liberal, conservative or capitalist but corporatist. Its main characteristics are huge transfers of public wealth to private hands, often accompanied by exploding debt, an ever widening chasm between the dazzling rich and the disposable poor, and an aggressive nationalism that justifies bottomless spending on security. For those inside the bubble of extreme wealth created by such an arrangement, there can be no more profitable way to organize a society. But because of the obvious drawbacks for the vast majority of the population left outside the bubble, other features of the corporatist state tend to include aggressive surveillance (once again with government and large corporations trading favors and contracts), mass incarceration, shrinking civil liberties and often, though not always, torture." (The Shock Doctrine, p. 19)
Nor should the coincidence be surprising that Naomi Kline writes about how electroshock made a political regression into a dominant force in our world, and the fact that Mary Shelley was inspired by the electrical shock experiments of Galvani. Both Frankenstein monsters are vivified by lightning from the body parts of corpses cadged together into one being.
If you are interested in hearing more about this book, the best source of interviews I found is here:
<http://www.webmunism.com/vids/of/klein>
This includes the first five minutes of her film, "The Take," as well as an interview by what is left of David Frost, and another in-depth interview. The most interesting of all is a "debate" with Milton Friedman, edited as a tribute at his death. Although it has a clear bias for Friedman and he gets 90 percent of the airtime, even here Klein beats him decisively when she says, in response to his convoluted argument that the common good is best served by the free market's mediation of selfishness and hate for our fellow man, "Surely it is more economical just to say that good is good and bad is bad."
This review will probably be continued here, if the book continues to force itself upon me. Let me close for now with these words of the Master, which although they are addressed to Sunday school teachers, point to the only way to get over the "Night of the Corporatist Frankensteins."
"...humanity must be inculcated into every fiber of his being and the universal principles be explained to him in as easy a manner as can be devised. Then the power of great faith will take possession of his heart. But if these supreme precautions are not taken in the earliest stages of the child's growth, it will be most difficult to curb later on his growing manifest appetites. For then he will live according to the requirements of the world of nature and uncontrolled self. Once the lower and sensual habits of nature take hold of him it will be very hard to reform him by any human agencies. Hence children must be brought under the control of the love of God and under spiritual influence from their earliest youth. The lower appetites of nature are like kings over man; one must defeat their forces; otherwise he will be defeated by them." (Star of the West, Vol. 7, No. 15)
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
p03pr
Global Ethic
By John Taylor; 2008 March 04, 03
Readers of my recent work will know well how much I admire Keith Ward's apology for religion, "Is Religion Dangerous?" Ward is a Christian with dogmatic commitments, and he waters his defense down more than a Baha'i would feel comfortable with, but nonetheless this is a clear, effective argument against the attacks of the New Atheists. I was especially grateful for his reminder of the great significance of the second Parliament of World Religions,
"The document Toward a Global Ethic, drafted by Hans Kung for the 1993 Parliament of World Religions and signed by representatives of all world religions present, is an attempt to spell out some of those commonalities. Commitment to four key issues is noted: to a culture of nonviolence and respect for human life; to a just economic order; to tolerance and truthfulness; and to equal rights and partnership between men and women.
"That, it seems to me, is a strong basis for cooperation between religions, in a new world in which many diverse faiths must live together in peace and in which they have opportunity to undertake programmes of common ethical action. Only if Christianity and Islam, as the two dominant world religions, do this at the highest level - and great efforts are being made to ensure it is done - will there be hope of avoiding that disastrous clash of cultures that would result from a polarisation of stereotyped and mutually hostile images of the `other.'
"Religion can create such images. But it also has the greatest power to overcome them. Religion may not be unequivocally good. But if it is dangerous at times, that is far outweighed by the fact that it is one of the last great hopes the world has for peace and a positive future." (Is Religion Dangerous?, p. 188)
Ward is right, if believers in God are ever to gain ground in our siege against the assault of anti-theism, we will have to take the initiative by deflating the insinuation that we are unwilling to reconcile our differences. Doing that will require that we come to grips with the ethical foundations of our convictions and with whatever else is common to all faiths. God created us, so it is not a big stretch to think that belief in Him can unite us all, no matter what the differences among our religious backgrounds, if only we have faith.
The text of this document, signed by the members of the many faiths represented at the 1993 Parliament of Religions, is available at:
<http://www.weltethos.org/dat-english/03-declaration.htm>
Baha'is will notice that the pdf version of the Declaration has as its headpiece a nine-pointed star. I do not yet have access to the book version of this declaration mentioned by Ward, "Towards a Global Ethic" by Hans Kung, but I was interested to discover and scan over a preliminary draft of the Declaration by Leonard Swidler Toward a Universal Declaration of a Global Ethic by Leonard Swidler,
<http://astro.temple.edu/~dialogue/Center/intro.htm>
This earlier version of the Declaration has the advantage of footnotes and attributions; I found the section on the Golden Rule especially illuminating, and not only because it contains a quote from Gleanings.
I have gone over the Declaration this morning, and it seems like a wonderful document. But it is only a start. For one thing, it is virtually unknown. It must be publicized, promulgated and be taught in every seminary, Sunday School and even in Public Schools, for ethical reconciliation is in the highest interest of all.
It is one thing to declare our commonalities but it is quite another to enact and enforce what they imply. The Declaration must be improved, strengthened and implemented. A standing world religious parliament needs to be instituted to legislate ways and means of putting these common ideals into action within religions themselves, as well as by actively mediating disputes and conflict among faith groups.
Although you would never know it by reading the press, this is gradually being done. The Wiki article, "Parliament of Religions," explains how subsequent Parliaments have carried on the process.
"More than 8,900 individuals attended the 2004 Parliament in
I was not there and did not commit, but it seems to me that the most simple and profound act that anybody can do is to put that epoch making document, the Universal Declaration of a Global Ethic, to good use. It was written for that. So take it to your local church, mosque, synagogue or LSA, and form study groups to discuss it in detail. Take it to your local newspaper and ask why there is so little publicity or discussion of this essential document in the media. Take it your local school and ask why they are not teaching it in history, in ethics and social studies classes. The Parliament's Mission Statement says it all, that we should come together to,
"Cultivate harmony between the world's religious and spiritual communities and foster their engagement with the world and its other guiding institutions in order to achieve a peaceful, just, and sustainable world". (in Wiki, Ib.)
Most of all, use the Declaration to gear up for the next Parliament of Religions, whose program is described in the same Wiki article:
"
Monday, March 03, 2008
Who is the most prolific of them all?
Loose Ends
By John Taylor; 2008 March 03, 02
The fast is upon us. Marie set the alarm an hour early this morning, so I ate early and am therefore spaced out of my mind earlier than usual as well. I am not even going to try to organize my thoughts this time. First, a disappointing discovery.
This morning while browsing the Web I came across a blog that is more prolific, at least as far as frequency of posting goes, than the Badi' Blog. It is called Baha'i Views, "Pithy excerpts, personal learning, and mentions of `Baha'i' online," and can be found at <http://bahaiviews.blogspot.com/> Here is a little chart on how much more prolific this site is than mine:
Number of posts so far this year (2008):
Baha'i Views: 285 Badi' Blog: 55
Number of postings in March:
Baha'i Views: 5 Badi' Blog: 2
Postings in February:
Baha'i Views: 129 Badi' Blog: 24
January Output:
Baha'i Views: 155 Badi' Blog: 29
No matter how hard I write, I do not see me ever putting out more than one essay a day. In January, as you see, I succeeded in that goal every day of the month, except a couple. But even that was not good enough to come anywhere near Baha'i Views. Worse still, many of the links and articles on Baha'i Views are extremely useful, and I do not think I will be able to ignore what goes on there. For example, one link on Baha'i Views points to a well designed "Baha'i sign in the middle of rural
<http://www.flickr.com/photos/sdbrown/2141432509/>
Nor can I complain that my work is ignored at Baha'i Views. I did a search for "Badi" and found that some time ago it had excerpted my comments on "why I am a Baha'i," along with other favorable comment.
I know; I am comparing apples and oranges here. As far as number of words the Badi' blog is still almost certainly the most prolific Baha'i blog. But what kind of a distinction is that? I talk more? I know, before anybody sends me the Master's NY talk telling us that the distinction we Baha'is should be striving for is spiritual, I know. It is just that no matter how advanced the internet gets I do not see blogs ever getting a meter for spirituality the way they have meters for the number of hits.
Here is a link to "Project ForkenSwift EV: first electric test drive." These fellows were half way through a garage project to convert a car to electric, and this records the spontaneous reactions of passersby when they hear a silent electric vehicle drive by:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDERyAILOak>
I have always been of the opinion that that there is no need for any big technological advances, that you could just stick ordinary car batteries in any car and it would be as good or better for 90 percent of the uses people put cars to. The supposed need for gasoline is a big crock. The success of these tinkerers tends to back that argument.
In technical issues, as in anything else, it is best to stick to principle. This is from the recent BIC statement on poverty:
"The essential merit of a principle-based process is that it guides individuals and institutions away from a focus on isolated, short-term concerns to consider problems from a systemic and long-term perspective. For any decision to garner support and deliver results, the decision-making process itself must have integrity: it must involve those directly affected by the decisions and it must be governed by transparent, agreed-upon ethical standards."
As soon as you depart from the principle, you get bogged down in trivialities. If we want a better transportation system, we need to educate specialists in transportation, not cars or trains but the whole transport system, from locality to world transit. Only that way will real solutions start to come within our grasp. If we are not properly educated and informed, our words are generated by our own lower desires and interests. Such consultation is worse than useless. When consultation fails, the only thing to do is break it off and go pray, and come back another time.
Here is a post made back in January by science Catherine Brahic, online environment reporter for New Scientist Magazine, on the idea that climate deniers have adopted the same techniques of denial that slavery advocates used in the 19th Century. It is called "The rhetoric of climate and slavery,"
<http://www.newscientist.com/blog/environment/2008/01/rhetoric-of-climate-and-slavery.html>
"Davidson claims that historical hindsight shows how preposterous the claims made in favour of slavery were. He suggests they bear striking resemblance to claims made against taking any action on climate change by contemporary members of Congress. The implication is that some years down the line, in a century or two perhaps, the comments of climate "deniers" will seem just as shocking as those of the slave owners of the 1800s."
She cites two examples of slavery advocates' argumentation. The first tries to argue that there are only very uncertain benefits from outlawing slavery:
"...the course of [the abolitionists] whose precipitate and ignorant zeal would overturn the fundamental institutions of society, uproar its peace and endanger its security, in pursuit of a distant and shadowy good, of which they themselves have formed no definite conception." (in: Simms 1852, p. 98)
Another slaver argued that the cost of change would be too high:
"Their [the slaves'] value, at $400, average, (and they are now worth more than that,) would amount to upwards of 900 millions. The value of their annual increase, alone is 24 millions of dollars; so that to free them in 100 years, without the expense of taking them from the country, would require an annual appropriation of between 33 and 34 millions of dollars. The thing is physically impossible." (James Henry Hammond, senator of South Carolina, 1836)
This comparison provoked a great deal of comment, mostly negative. For me, whether it is fair or not, the most important thing to be learned is not to forget historical lessons from past debates, especially the part about getting beyond debate and getting down to positive action, even in the face of uncertainty and possible high cost.
Several years ago, just after 9-11, somebody asked Doug Martin, then on the UHJ, during a rare speaking tour by a member of that body, what the UHJ is doing to usher in the Lesser Peace. Here is somebody's notes on his answer.
"The world needs "unity." We are the community of unity and this is becoming increasingly recognized. We are not seen as a lobby group. We are seen as the elected representatives of a large cross-section of humanity. Our opinion is valued and now being sought by heads of state and other leaders in the world. It's minor at present, but it gives us a chance to develop what and who we need to be as this role may increase... We are going about our business (building up our communities) while the politics of the world is failing. We are the example of steadiness and calm.
"Consider, during this time of uncertainty and fear ... about what will happen to
Sunday, March 02, 2008
p39 Synchronizing Spirit
Mashriq Making
By John Taylor; 2008 March 02, 01
Consider, if you will, the following interview with John Grayzel in World Order Magazine. Here he mentions the fact that much of what we are learning about world-based solutions is routinely wasted due to lack of planning and organization on an international level. Here is what he says,
"What I bring from my past professional background is an awareness of the enormous amount of knowledge that has been generated by people who are solving problems around the world. But frequently the knowledge is not captured. Rather tragically it is lost, and learning is repeated over and over again.
"Individuals have solved almost all types of world problems many times over. It is the world that has not solved its problems, due, I would say, to a lack of unity. The solving has been done one by one by individuals, and the actions have not coalesced into something unified.
"It is like a flower that sprouts, blooms, and dies but does not produce seeds for the next generation. Similarly, the academic world is filled with immense amounts of information and repositories of knowledge that are never translated into action. There is a real shortage of bridges between knowledge and the real world.
"I hope that in its second phase of existence the Baha'i Chair can serve as a venue where individuals will begin to share and work together on crafting common understandings and common approaches to solving some of the major problems that face humanity." (John A. Grayzel, re Maryland Baha'i Chair, World Order. 2006, Vol. 38, No.1, p. 19)
I checked out the website of the Maryland Baha'i Chair, but found little to indicate that this second phase has got going yet. In any case, the waste of learning is what troubles me. I think we are being overwhelmed with solutions as well as problems because it was all prophesied of old; the time of the end was predicted to be a flood. A flood is too much water. Water is a good thing, necessary for life, but too much overwhelms our ability to deal with it. We need institutional change to be able to channel the massive influx and turn it to good ends. Until we create new bodies, the institutions we have will wander around like monsters, doing more harm than good.
This brings me to Mary Shelley.
Mary Shelley is now regarded as the author of the first work of science fiction; her Frankenstein is also studied as a major example of early feminist fiction. A couple of months ago I wrote the following fragment about her creation.
==========
The Corporation as Frankenstein Monster
I caught a snippet from a CBC Radio interview the other day with a literature professor who was saying that when Mary Shelley wrote her novel "Frankenstein," they immediately compared her monster constructed from dead body parts and vivified by lightning, to the just-invented limited share corporation. Like the monster, a corporation is a non-human entity endowed with all the abilities, interests, rights and privileges of a human being. Like the monster, a corporation does not die, nor does it have a history, parents, a childhood or ancestors. It just is. Like the God of Moses, it defines itself by saying "I am what I am." Little wonder that Frankenstein's monster still evokes horror.
Actually, now that I think of it, the Frankenstein monster was more human than a corporation. At least it has feelings; it is tormented by what it is. It deeply regrets the fact that its "father" is so horrified at what he did that he withdrew and became, in effect, an absentee father. The monster wanders the earth in anguish. At one point it creates a bride for itself, but then it thinks, "What happens if we have children and start breeding?" This thought horrifies it. Mary Shelley has the monster chop up its bride before she can be brought to life.
Modern corporations have no such compunctions. They breed like rabbits. And their spawn is just as immortal and untouchable as the non-human creatures from which they came. The film "The Corporation" gives an example of a company that broke just about every moral and legal rule in the book, yet the American government still drew back from disbanding it. It was decided that to kill one corporate Frankenstein, no matter how evil, would have set a bad precedent for ideological reasons. A government that stands for unfettered capitalism would not dare hold corporations accountable for their actions in the same way that a human being is. It can and does execute humans who murder other human beings, but these ideologues dare not dip their hands in the virtual blood of an artificial entity.
==========
That was as far as I could take this chain of thought at the time, but now I think I can relate corporate Frankensteins to what Christians call the "body of the Church," to what a Baha'i might call the "body of the Mashriq." I am thinking of the following statement of the Master:
"
The word "Mashriq" means east, as in the place where the sun rises. So the Master says that our prayers and ability to unify has always dawned from the Manifestations, as symbolized in houses of worship, be they mosque, church, synagogue, Mashriq, or whatever. Just as institutions like hospitals arose from early Christianity, many other service institutes will grow out of the Mashriqs. An old folk’s home has already been built as an auxiliary to the Wilmette Mashriq.
Maybe one day we will refer to the Baha'i Faith as the Mashriq, in the same way that Christians use "the church" as a synonym for institutional structure of their Faith. One of Baha'u'llah's longest and most difficult tablets is the Suriy-i-Haykal, the Surih of the
What does all this have to do with Frankenstein and corporations? Here is my line of reasoning. Mary Shelley was married to Percy Shelley, the author of "The Necessity of Atheism," which got the young poet booted out of
The service institutions born out of the Mashriq may one day make the corporation a more natural being, give it a mother, as it were, instead of a father only. Institutions, following the Baha'i principle that even religion is an appliance, a tool for good to be cast off and disbanded as soon as it ceases to benefit or becomes an end in itself, will change their DNA. No longer will they be immortal gods, concerned only for their own limited, temporary interests. There will be a world corporate constitution, just as there will be a worker's bill of rights. God only, as symbolized by the Mashriq, the church, or whatever, will be an end in Himself, all else will serve, all else, save His children, will be cast on the fire when they cease to serve God and mankind. And the heart of it all is the Mashriq, because it is like a clock that sets and synchronizes our spiritual reflexes.
"Thou hast asked about places of worship and the underlying reason therefor. The wisdom in raising up such buildings is that at a given hour, the people should know it is time to meet, and all should gather together, and, harmoniously attuned one to another, engage in prayer; with the result that out of this coming together, unity and affection shall grow and flourish in the human heart." (Abdu'l-Baha, Selections, 94-95)
Truly, if we are to avoid a flood of superficial knowledge, we need to study more profoundly, deepen deeper, and then apply it in living, loving institutes.
That is why the Mashriq unifies study of the Word with dawn prayers in an atmosphere of silence and reverence, for as the saying goes, still waters run deep. Only this can stop the flood of outer solutions that are found and forgotten, and build knowledge that is married to service. The Mashriq channels knowledge into institutionalized, lasting bodies of change.
In her memoir, the daughter of Howard Colby Ives tells this anecdote about why we need to study fervently, with all our might,
"Which brings to mind the story told me of a newly declared believer, radiant and eager to serve. He wrote Abdu'l-Baha asking what he should do. Abdu'l-Baha told him to study the Teachings. Eighteen years later the man wrote again to the Master saying that for several hours each day for the eighteen years he had studied the Teachings and what should he do now? Promptly Abdu'l-Baha wrote and told him to go and study the Teachings. This was an East Indian Baha'i where, now, the Faith is truly roaring." Muriel Ives Barrow Newhall, Mother's Stories, Self-Published,
It is no coincidence that
Saturday, March 01, 2008
Last Outday
Reader response, House MD, Last Day of Ayyam-i-Ha
In quick response to yesterday's thoughts about Blackwater and the Praetorian Guard, John Bryden writes:
"John, the `strikes' amongst Turkish soldiers that you mention might refer to the Janissary Revolts. See Wikipedia article: `Janissary Revolts'. A somewhat similar pattern can be seen in the accession to power of the Mamluks in
That is a good point. I have purchased an audiobook on Islamic history and I might be able to make a half-way informed comment on this in coming weeks, assuming I can get over my iMac network problems, which are blocking off my iPod downloads. We must always be aware of our bias as English speakers, and mine as a lover of the immortal prose of Gibbon and Shakespeare. What is not a literary masterpiece tends to fall below my radar.
In one of the kindest responses to our engagement with the anti-theists, a reader wrote,
"I thoroughly enjoyed this article, to the point of some near guffaws! I may study it to see how to answer the anti-theists and maybe even the hyper-theists just a little more directly and boldly. At the same time, the fiery way you present your arguments might ignite a little fury among them, so I may use them a little less directly-- nah! On the other hand, I may just cut and paste."
As you may have noticed, I have run out of steam on the atheist question -- for one thing the atheist library books' due dates hit and I had to return most of the material that was infuriating me. Not having that stimulus, I have slipped into a tranquil, non-argumentative state of mind. Shameful, I know. It would help if those who are interested in this would send me quotes, suggestions, questions or other goads.
Over the past couple of days I have been watching on DVD the third season of the medical television series "House, M.D." It is interesting how much more sophisticated medical melodrama has become than in my own early days when I so ardently admired the saintly Dr. Leonard Gillespie in the Dr. Kildare series. For one thing, now you pretty much have to be a physician to understand the flurry of technical terms and strange conditions being bandied about. I guess they figure that if you really cared to find out what they are talking about, a search engine is only a few clicks away from answering every question that pops into your head.
But morally speaking, House is pretty much the reverse of Dr. Kildare; he is brusque, caustic and even offensive. The reason this has been the most popular drama series for the past few years, it seems to me, is that it poses the old question, "How do you balance the need for technical expertise and the equally important need for moral leadership based on human relations skills and spiritual uplift? How do you fit in a temperamental genius, who messes everything up except for the fact that his diagnosis is correct when everybody else's is wrong? Somehow a consultation has to work around our flaws and foibles and make the spark that will expose the truth. Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher Emperor, understood the principle involved:
"Penetrate inwards into men's leading principles, and you will see what judges you are afraid of, and what kind of judges they are of themselves." (Meditations, 9:18)
This question, what kind of judge you are, is what prayer and mediation change. They make new ground rules. That is why consultation cannot take place without spiritual preconditioning; the oven must be pre-warmed, so to speak, before you put in the roast of nitty-gritty consultation. Only that will make the abrasive personality smoother, and the less insightful or inspired brighter and more receptive. Safe to say that in real problem solving situations a mental powerhouse like House is rare; usually it is the synergistic combination of many minds working together that arrive at the right answer.
It is also well to remember that the subject matter of television drama, be it medical or the ubiquitous police show, is too technical to be worthy of the gaze of so many viewers. We should pay attention to things we can change. And most of what we can change is ethical rather than technical; few of us are medical specialists, but all are acute judges of what is right and wrong. The dream that a Baha'i had of the Master says it all: she saw rescuers saving victims from a flood and wondered where the Master was. She found Him working on a machine to lower the flood waters. Strictly speaking, most public consultation and even entertainment should be concerned with just that, with prevention, with stifling flames before they catch fire, rather than mere slinging water on blazing infernos, thrilling as that may be to watch.
Another recent response from a reader came from Ivan,
"Excellent post Badi, I have just added Baha'i to my list of Google alerts, and look what came across my PC, your fascinating comments on your blog.
"I reluctantly joined a Ruhi class a few months ago and that is bringing a lot of seekers and friends together. People I have never met before. I feel the questions you pose are being asked everywhere. I have a child who comes to our junior youth group, and when I asked his parents if they agreed for him to come they said. Oh that’s a great idea, were pagan actually but we're happy for our child to learn some virtues. In other words the darkness of people being uninterested in a new Faith is being dispelled in a most unpredictable way, almost like the new dawn.
"The Utube project you mentioned sounds great. I'm working on the idea for one of my oil paintings called `Vahid's Feast.' It took me almost a year to paint and we took over three hundred photos along the way. A friend who is a video buff is working on it, as we speak. To see the finished painting go to the history page of www.BahaiFaithArt.com. Warmest Regards."
I checked out Ivan's website, and was impressed with his paintings of the early days of the Faith. For twelve bucks you can get them in postcard format, and since they are presumably accurate in portraying contemporary dress, they would be excellent for teaching Baha'i classes. Silvie has been drawing how she imagines the heroes of the Iron Age of the Faith; it is charming how she adds in characters to comment on the action, such as a prickly cactus and two brothers, one whose turban is stuffed with various items like a Swiss Army Knife, called Justin Case, and one with a clock on his turban, called Justin Time. This was apparently inspired by three of her classmates named Justin Cook, Justin Sutton and Justin Friday, respectively. Are names contagious, or what? One reader sent this little prayer to me a while ago, and it sums up what I am aiming for in our almost-daily Baha'i class:
"Teach them, by Thy Name, the All-Knowing, the wonders of Thy wisdom, that they may cleave steadfastly to Thy Faith and walk in the ways of Thy pleasure." (Baha'i World Faith, pp. 148-150)
On a random note, here is a link to the Dilbert random lyrics music video. The name says it all. Amazing that you can string together random words and come up with a song that is better than most pop music,
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TiH9dbAsAp0
Several other friends have sent me nice comments on the Badi' Blog lately, but as mentioned a sort of iron curtain has gone down between my Mac computer and the rest of our LAN, so for the time being I cannot easily access these messages.
David Pogue in his "Circuits" tech column for the New York Times wrote this week about the dangers of the Internet to children and youth. His argument is that it is overblown. His advice is,
"But if you live in terror of what the Internet will do to your children, I encourage you to watch this excellent hour long PBS "Frontline" documentary,"
"It's free, and it's online in its entirety. The show surveys the current kids-online situation -- thoroughly, open-mindedly and frankly. Turns out I had it relatively easy writing about the dangers to children under age 12; this documentary focuses on teenagers, 90 percent of whom are online every single day. They are absolutely immersed in chat, Facebook, MySpace and the rest of the Web; it's part of their ordinary social fabric to an extent that previous generations can't even imagine."
I think he has hit on the nub of the matter here, especially where he says that the real problem is not stalkers but bullies. With every technical advance the importance of backbiting becomes more intense, as was prophesied of old. But the problem on top of the problem is the very existence of a youth culture. As soon as a distinctive youth culture of any kind grows separate from traditional culture, you are looking at a corrupted, not to say a dying, society. That is why our diet is so terrible; we eat what is cheapest and most delicious, not what has sustained our bodies for centuries. Culture is culture, just as truth is truth, and if older generations are not directly and intimately connected with the new one about to replace them, then we are all in deep trouble. Now the problem is compounded by technology, much of which cuts off not only young from old but those present from those absent. This explains why the Bible depicted our present crisis as a flood of knowledge. The difference between watering and over-watering a plant only wisdom can determine. And there is no flood of wisdom. Where this flood of social gadgets will lead, nobody can say. Consider this news item,
“A coroner has criticised online chatrooms after a man was goaded into committing suicide while dozens of users watched live on the internet. Kevin Whitrick, who hanged himself with an electrical cord, is believed to be the first person in
It is the last day of Ayyam-i-Ha, the days of Ha; my thought for this moment is based on the last paragraph of the Iqan. Baha'u'llah cites two powerful points to remember about the value of "remembrance,"
"We conclude Our argument with His words -exalted is He - `And whoso shall withdraw from the remembrance of the Merciful, We will chain a Satan unto him, and he shall be his fast companion.' `And whoso turneth away from My remembrance, truly his shall be a life of misery.' Thus hath it been revealed aforetime, were ye to comprehend. Revealed by the `Ba' and the `Ha'. Peace be upon him that inclineth his ear unto the melody of the Mystic Bird calling from the Sadratu'l-Muntaha! Glorified be our Lord, the Most High!" (Kitab-i-Iqan, 257)
By remembrance I suppose He means worship and our regular reading of Holy Writ. These days of Ha are, then, days of the Father, the Godhead, and the other nineteen months are outside of the calendar, they transcend. Our cheer transcends, for now it is meant to remind us of our true patrimony, and glory in that. Put the two letters "Ba" and "Ha" together and you get "Baha," and in that sense we are all "Abdu'l-Baha," servants of Baha, the Son returned in the Glory of the Father.
Ignore the prime duty of remembrance of our patrimony, and the self will be made miserable by a satan permanently chained to the back. May the upcoming time of restraint help burn off the chains binding us to our persistent self; may the sun of the fast kill our satan like a hantavirus exposed to UV light. Here is a prayer of Baha'u'llah that seems appropriate for the last day of Ayyam-i-Ha,
"And were I to glorify Thee, O my God, so long as the glory of Thy majesty endureth and the influence of Thy sovereignty and power will last, such a glorification could never be compared with any of the praises which Thou, as a token of Thy grace, hast taught me, and wherewith Thou hast bidden me to extol Thy virtues. If such be the excellence of each one of the praises which Thou hast taught me, how immeasurably greater must be the excellence of the station of the One Who hath known Thee, Who hath entered Thy Presence, and pursued steadfastly the path of Thy Cause!" (Baha'u'llah, Prayers and Meditations, 299)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)