Waiting For Maybe A Blue Wave

LESS THAN six months until the election, and most indications remain predicting a blue wave, to one degree or another. Considering the administration and Congress so far, its no wonder why. When you consider that Trump and MAGA are still blaming Biden for everything, and that they are trying to change the subject to a hypothetical arch of triumph near the reflecting pool on the Capitol mall, you realize that Trump and MAGA are doing everything humanly possible to avoid actually discussing Trump, and the performance pf him and his administration.They'll use anythingthat works, whatever it takes. A ball room, an arch, Trump's face added to Mt. Rushmore, anything, whatever works. Whatever succeeds in taking the nation's attention off of the infamous and mysterious Epstein files. "The Epstein files", as they are called, is evidently a massive collection of documented evidence and proof that Donald Trump is indeed a pedophile who acts on his impulses, and is guilty of sexually abusing and raping children. Even if normal, everyday MAGA folk would rather the Epstein file quietly go away, they aren't likely to, at least, not soon. The war against Iran, Turmp's war of choice, is not making anybody, Republicans included, happy, The United States, and we the American people are far from being done with this war of Trump's (our) choice, and we might not be done with it for a lot longer than we now think, as is the case with all wars. It may be that by early November, when election day rolls around, his war against Iran may have become something of an albatross around Trump's fleshy neck. When one further considers how strenuous opposition to Trump has been, remains, and that it seems destined to only increase, and that as of now less than forty percent of the American support either Trump or his various wars of choice,it begins to seem increasingly likely that all this will hurt Republicans and help Democrats in November. But, as always, who knows? Its hard to imagine Trump gaining any new support from here on out. Anybody not on board with him by now most likely never will be. Opposition to Trump, over sixty percent of America, is rock solid, angry, and enthusiastic. So far it shows no sign of being well organized, by anybody, but what relly matters is voter turnout for the midterms. The higher it is, the more it becomes possible for Democrats to take both the House and the Senate, although the Senate will still remain unlikely. There are several ky aspects of this administration, other than the Epstein files and Trump's obvious lifeling immorality and criminality, which engender disapproval from both sides of the isle. Attacking Iran is one of them. All of Trump's nonsense about Canada and Cuba is another. But working against Trump and the Republicans more than anything at the moment is inflation, for which Trump et al will get the blame, as is always the case, depsite their best attempts to deflect it. No president can do much about inflation, which comes in cycles, like most economic phenomena, and must run its course. This is, however, a perfect opportunity for Democrats to pin the blame on Republicans, who, after all, currently have control of all three branches of government, and most state governments. No decent person wants the American people to suffer economically. But if in the coming months they do indeed suffer in the pocketbook, whatever state the economy is in on election day will not be attributed to Democrats, and will be directly attributed to Trump and Republicans.

Preaching

I ATTENDED Presbyterian church this past Sunday,where my dear friend and fellow anti-Trumper, a lawyer turned minister, gave one of his characteristically excellent sermons. It seems a pity that there are usually no more than about ten people in the building when he "preaches", but, so be it.He's good enough to be heard by minions, however many that is.This is all well and good, but I have now missed my beloved Unitarian Universalist service several weeks in a row, and I am becoming rather eager to attend one. The sooner I decide about thsi coming Sunday, the more settled I'll be. I am leaning towards making the twenty mile drive to the UU service. I can certainly understand the need to organize religion. Otherwise, we're jsut a unch of individuals running around, each with our own version of reality, theologically. Scientifically, we can unite, and, ultimately, we must, for there is only one version of natural law. As far as we can tell so far, there is only one universe. Stay tuned. Can you imagine having only a single religion on Earth, a global religion, with all other religions being strictly prohibited? I think I can, and it aint pretty. Such a planetary religion would be well organized, perhaps, but stagnant, monolithic, decaying with age. Its difficult to actually imagine that, because, truth be told, we all have a little bit of Martin Luther in us. We all, ultimately, invent our own religions. We have no other choice. As Goethe said: "When I realized that everyone invents his own religion I decided to invent mine." As of now, this moment, I liek my pantheistic, Unitarian semi-Presbyterian Heinz fifty Seven approach, heavy on the Spinoza and Einstein, my religious role models, along with perhaps Jefferson. All religions have antecedents and lifespans. If and when humanity expands human habitat otuward from Earth and into outer space, it will almost certainly take its various religions with it.Perhaps our descendants will engender new religions, to fit their circumstances. One thing we know about Christianity: the Christian messiah appeared at the exact time when it was normal among Jews and throughout the Jewish culture to await and anticipate his arrival, and had been for awhile.This was certainly true of the Jews, and and, to some extent, of the Romans as well, who were as uaual open mnded on te matter, flexible, amenable to religious evolution, quite willing to embrace, to a certain extent, just bout any and every religious bandwagon that came rolling along the Appian Way. The old Roman Gods were losing their power and hold over the vast and varied Roman EMpire. The new Christian God, "the light", was spreading like contagion. Call religion whatever you want. Feel free. I know I do. I have many unflattering opinions about religion in general. So do many people, especially in the "west", where secularism and science are taking over. But it is equally important for everyone to never lose sight of the reality that for billions of human beings, at our current level of spiritual and intellectual evolution, religion plays, demonstrably, indisputably, an indispensable part. I can envisin, vaguely, a future human culture in which the traidtional, ancient, blood sacrificial religions, which evolved from ancient primitive cults, have evolved into a higher level of awareness of reality based on observable reality, which reveals to us a universe of incredible harmonious beauty, more than worthy of admiration and religious veneration.

Keeping Our Brains Honest

THE LADY at the senior center who got caught stealing and got fired spooked me a bit. Not that I'm naive, or anything like that. I certainly shouldn't be, at seventy one years of age. My thinking is: if someone like her, a deeply religious Pentecostal, is doing something like this, then precisely what in hell or on Earth might the rest of of us be doing? I recall reading a stark stat. Your average American and probably average human in general will commit at least one felony during his or her lifetime, many of them unknowingly. Part of that is of course the sheer number of felonies on the books; tens of thousands, available for committing, in our litigious, legalistic American culture. Part of it is human nature. Cheating seems to be a somewhat basic human behavior, intended to provide the cheater a competitive advantage. To keep ourselves honest, we must rely on ourselves, and our received moral standards. One way or another, the criminals are going to get inside our fortress homes, despite all our locks, alarms, and guns. We lock our doors to keep the rest of us, each other, the honest people, honest. In smaller groups mutual monitoring helps keep all members honest. Both honesty and deceit are necessary, it seems, for human survival. And it seems that all of us, in one way or another, are mentally ill, just as arguably nobody experiences perfect physical health all the time. I suffer from paranoia, I think. But of course, we must be careful precisely waht we describe a "ill". Under Stalin, it was considered a mental illness to fail to embrace communism. We must avoid the trap of diagnosing so many types of behaviors as "mentally ill" that we all start taking pills at the slightest provocation which turn us into uniformly mentally stagnant zombies. The first time you look at a Picasso or Dali painting or hear Stravinsky's "The Rite of Spring", you might be tempted to ascribe to some sort of mental or "artistic illness", as many originally did, rather than, more properly, to artistic creativity and genius. One might wonder how great Beethoven would have been had he not been sick and depressed much of the time, or deaf, with the attendant isolation, depression, and anger. Not worth a plugged nickel, perhaps. The mind must be free to be creative. Sure, let's study technique, let's ahve our do's and don'ts. But above all, let's allow our shining, unique personalities emerge from wthin ourselves, radiate outward, and wash over each other in our unique individual vibrations of joy. I think it was Carl Sagan who said that considering the sheer number of brain cells we all have within our skulls, we should probably never be surprised by anything anyone ever says or does. We also do well to remember that all actons, large and small, engender responses. There isn't the slightest piece of real evidence that there exists anything which might remotely be called "free will". There is a great amount of evidence that every particle of matter and enerty in the universe obeys the laws of nature. Instead of thinking in terms of reward and punishment, praise and blame, it might help to think in terms of cause and effect. If every human being in the world embarked on a project to make better choices and decisions, perhaps the cumulative effect of billions of better decisions, better choices, better thinking, would transform the world, from its current largely undesirable state of affairs, to one much more closely reembling a utopian vision the sort of which most people imagine and desire. As Carl Sagan pointd out, humanity is not afflicted with a shortage of intelligence, but himan intelligence is a tool which can be used either destructively, or productively. We can destroy, but, thank heavens, we can create.

Trump, Visiting China

TRUMP'S VISIT TO CHINA is, for my money, a very good thing, irrespective of my personal opinion of Trump. Any harm he does can be undone, any good he manages to do benefits us all. The older I get the more I come to believe that communication is always beneficial, much better than no communication. A married couple yelling at each other, or two powerful, aggressive nations trying to preserve peach and prevent war, communications yields information, and communication facilitates better decisions and action. We humans can and should celebrate the unique beauty of the individual personality, which freedom of speech enhances, but we must always remain aware of the reality that any individual human, however intelligent and creative, is ultimately no more able to function properly without societal support than your average individual red ant. For Americans, rooting for president Trum, or any president to fail at anything is a no win proposition.While we may hope and work for his legislative an dpoicy agenda to be voted down and replaced by better ones, or at least a halfway decent one, whatever dealings Trump has internationaly on behalf of the United States, whatever actions he takes on our behalf, we must hope for their success, for our own sake. If trickle down economics suddenly, magically begins working well for the working class, although it never has before, all the better, bring it on. Truly, that would be amazing and miraculous to behold.That is precisely the situation we are in, like it or not. It is one thing to hope or work for the cancallation of Trump's ball room,it is quite another to hope that his visit to China fails to achieve positive results, only because it is the despicable Trump who is doing the visiting. Like it or not, everybody's fate is greatly influenced, impacted by in Trump's position, and those os us who despice him personally can root up one side and down the other for Trump to fail, but as long as he is president, his failures for the most part are indeed our failures. Opposing Trump's policies is not the same thing as hoping and working for their failure, for his failure. We must therefore hope that actions we disagree with do less harm and more good than we anticipate. Again,this is precisely the situation we are in, like it or not. His failures, to one extent or another, are our failures as a nation. In this vain, I hope, fore example, that Trump's cutting funds for education and medical research of all kinds helps the country, somehow, hard as it is to see how it possibly can. We can always restore this vital funding later, after Trump is gone, and we are going about the business of cleaning up the messes he has made and undoing what damage we can. If nothing else, surely we can restore our support, as a nation, for the arts and sciences, and education. Federal support for these is crucial for our future as a nation, as a culture. Critics of Trump point out the damage he has done and continues to do to the country in alienating America's traditional allies and hollowing out American culture from within, and in suberting and harming democratic processes. But at least he is visiting China, on behalf of us all, like it or not, and that's not all bad. All of these criticisms are perfectly valid and true, and must receive continued and constant attention. But when you consider how resiliently the United States has recovered from past harm, self inflicted or otherwise, you can almost begin to see the damage to America being done by Trump and MAGA as opportunity, the opportunity to weather the storm, and then, one fine day, to build back better.

Pentecostal Pilfering

The PENTECOSTAL LADY was indeed dismissed from the senior center, maybe a mutual thing. So I'm seventy one years old now and can still be surprised. I'm lucky. Some scientist once said that when you consider the sheer complexity of the human brain and mind, with billions of nerve cells and all, that we should probably never be surprised by anything that anybody ever does.The scientist, I think, was Carl Sagan, and I think he said it in his great book "Broca's Brain". Or maybe we should be surprised by everything that everybody does, or surprised that anybody ever does anything at all. "I'm Amazed I'm Alive", a friend of mine, a singer song writer, titled one of his songs. Since I am retired, live two blocks from the senior center, and go there for lunch five times a week, and pretty much know everyone there, indeed I was and still am surprised at the alleged, evident Pentecostal petty theft, even if, according to logic and common sense, I shouldn't be. Einstein once said that either everything is a miracle, or nothing is. Amazingly, I understand what Einstein meant by that, and I concur wholeheartedly. Why and how does anything exist at all, my father, a lawyer, once asked. Most of us probably ask this same question at one time or another. I certainly hope so. Thinking about the difference between "brain" and "Mind" is interesting, because they should be, must be, essentially the same thing. You begin to understand why some people consider it more valuable to spend their lives meditating in a cave than acdtiviely participating in society. But doesn't it sees as if you could accomplish more in your cave meditations by being well educated, by having studied and learned,and lived many years of life experiences, rather than just entering the cave young and stupid, open mind or not. The truth appears to be that there is no such thing as "free will", that every particle of matter and energy in the universe, ourselves included, obeys the laws of nature, is constrained by and to natural law, and that therefore the human mind, we us, are not the creative free thinking intelligent being we often fancy ourselves, but rather, mere collections of chemicals, obeying, like all matter and energy, the laws of nature. You arrive, don't you, at the conclusion that we must be both, bags of chemicals and creative, intelligent beings, creatures, entities, without the slighets knowledge of how we came into being,and thus limited to our notion of what we call "God". My best effort is to believe that the terms "God", "cosmos", and "universe" are synonimous, regardless of how they are defined in Webster's one millionth edition. Usually, we are surprised by what other people do, but not surprised by what we oursleves think and do. To me, all of my thoughts and actions seem understandable, or so I think. No matter what I do, I think I can, if aked, or if I choose to, explain the reaons for it to somebody else. Of course, I'm deceiving myself. Hell, I don't even know why I exist, let alone something picky like why I like watching "Gunsmoke" or eating tator tots. The fact that life is a complete mystery was a source of inspiration, wonder, and happy rumination for Einstein. He didn't let the fact that he failed to achieve his intended goals in science rain on his parade. For him, it is the process of wonder,thought, and exploration that motivated him, the process itself, rather than outcome. We all need to approve of ourselves, and to live so as to merit our self approval. We are our own ultimate judges. Maybe it wouldn't hurt to be a little less results oriented, and a little bit more amazed and joyful at the process itself.

Having Morals

THE KITCHEN CREW Cooks at the senior center are great, and folks jokingly beg them to never ever leave. However, just yesteday they fired the sixty year old lady who is a a Pentecostal Christian, dresses conservatively, and can be rather quiet. They fired her for allegedly, get this, stealing cash from the donation box, a brown wooden box up front where you pay, if you can, for your lunch.Each day when we seniros enter the building for lunch, we can stick a five or so in the donation box; its suggested, but nto mandatory. Soem of these eol people live on very modest income. The Pentecostal lady, hair in a bun, dressed for the nineteenth century, caught with her hand in teh cookie jar, so to speak. I shouldn't be shocked. My best guess, my intuition, is that petty theft and crime of all kinds is not much less prevelant within the religious community than anywhere else. We tend to have the idea that, to assume that religion improves people, without having the slightest bit of evidence that it actually does. They say that locking our doors doesn't keep out any crooks or prevent them from stealig from you, but that it does keep the rest of uw honest people honest. This I believe. I was taken to church as a young child, pre first grade, and I honestly cant remember whether I was asked whether I really wanted to go. I probably did. I was almost certainly given a choice, throughout my childhood, sixty five years ago. I do know that I stopped going at a very early young age, stopped going to Sunday school and church, at some point before fourth grade. One year, when I was about six or so, I was sent to "Vacation Bible School" as they called it. I had mixed emotions about it, mostly negative, and that didn't last long either. As I made my way through grade school, those explosive growth first through sixth grade years, I knew that I was not becoming religious, even as I was learning more and more about religion, including the Bible. I knew,just as I stillknow, that "religion" per se, was not, is not, for me. Now, at seventy one, I go to church, although I still haven't changed my view of religion; that it has both positive and negative aspects and qualities. But since I seemed to have found an organized religions perfectly suited to me, which still seems amazing to me, my general attitude towars organized religion needs to be, should become, so I believe, more tolerant, expansive, and inclusive than ever before. It wouldn't do well for me to gleefully eter a Uniterian Universalist church every Sunday, which is my intent, while simultaneously disparaging any other, or all other religious faiths and traditions. And if, for example, I happen by virtue of my inner nature to embrace Mark Twain's remark that "The Bible contains some noble poetry, clever fables, a vast quantity of obscenity, and no fewer than one thousand outright lies", well then, so be it. I take my bible to church every Sunday, or grab one already there. I ring the bell to signal church beginning. My attitude is "when in rome". I can certainly accept and respect the religiosity of every one else, while rejoicing in my own, as others seem to. I have no need to nor interest in converting anyone to anything, although I am always willing to teach what little I happen to know. Like everyone else, I make more mistakes before nine o'clock in the morning than....who knows who? Kant said: "I am in awe of two things; the starry heavens above me, an the moral law within me." Perhaps our greatest blessing of all is our awareness of both.

Saving Democracy

THE AMERICAN POLITICAL SYSTEM is sick as a dog, rotten to the core, all cliches aside, and must be drastically reformed and overhauled if democracy in these United States is to be salvaged. As of now, American democracy appears to be collapsing inward towards the center, congealing, coalsscing within the wealth and purchased political power of the ultra wealthy plutocracy,our wealthy powerful elite "corporate masters", as gore Vidal termed our rulers. The fact that big wealthy corporations own the country and the political system is evidenced by the simple fact that virtually every important political office in freedom's land is bought and paid for by its occupant-owner. Hence, what we have in these United States is government by the wealthy, by the wealthy, and for the wealthy.As Congressman Davy Crockett famouosly said "It is my firm belief that Congress ought to at least occasionally legislate for the poor." Laws limiting political campaign contributions, public funding of political campaigns, regulating political advertising,including bringing back the "Fairness Doctrine", would be instrumental in ending or reducing the corruption. It almost begins to seem as if nobody wants to end it, certainly those who benefit from it. Now that SCOTUS has ruled that gerrymandering is legal, we can expect a veritabel avalanche of it. A nation broken into political enclaves, each enclave doing its very best to preclude the opposition party from having any real participation in governining. In every one fo the fifty nifty, the party in power seems poised to gerrymander and rig elections. Any real resistance to this has either been silenced, or ignored. We seem destined to possess fifty equally corrupt political systems, all adding up to national corruption of gigantic proportions. As we seemingly slide inexorably towards this this undesirable state of affairs, the problem is, or certainly seems to be, that nobody cares. As often happens in these United States of Avoidance, the corruption grows, unchecked, uncontested. Politics at the state level is being bought and paid for by the wealthy elite few. Wherever you live in the U.S., if the other party is perpetually in power,you and your party officially have no voice, no vote, no power. Since the SCOTUS strangely says that money is free speech,we the teeming masses of the wretched poor must, so it seems, fight tooth and nail to invent and install a democracy where it isn't, or at least, isn't always present. We the people must demolish once and for all the absurd, outdated notion that is is some sort of sacred human right to us private money to influence the political process. Without proper,effective constraints on the use of personal wealth for political gain,inevitably super wealthy individuals or groups will use money to keep corrupting our sacred American democracy, such as it is. If and when the people generally lose faith and interest in popular government of, by, and for the people, those who seek to use their personal wealth to purchase political power to estabilish a capitalistic corporate dictatorship in America, which, in any event, is, in our current political environment, far more likely, and far less desirable to the working poor than a socialist democracy, will succeed in completing the work of fully, formally establishing a corporate dictatorship in the United States.Humans are by nature inclined to exploit and dominate one another, even as they simultaneously otherwise cooperate. Democratic government, in order to endure, must be constantly sustained and strengthened by the strongest potential force in human affairs; the will of the people.

Choosing

MY SENIOR YEAR in high school, 1972-73, enthusiastically following the lead of our clique leader, the class president, I supported the reelection of Richard M. Nixon. "Reelect the President" I believe was our slogan, which I take credit for. Quite clever, I thought at the time. Now, mot so much. If nothing else, I can proudly say, or hide behind, that the worst mistake of my political life I made when I was seventeen years old. I felt betrayed by "Watergate", and became a firm, lifelong Democrat.On the other hand, I was twenty five in 1980 whenI voted for John Anderson instead of Carter, and lived to regret it. At the time, Anderson, a Republican, seemed more progressive to me than the safely ensconced centrist Jimmy Carter. Reagan's victory devastated me. It still does. Now Ronald Reagan appears well on his way or safely ensconced among the ranks of America's most beloved presidents, almost Rushmore ready, and yet to this day I still despise him, for his conservatism.This reminds me of the way both of my parents despised and repeaedly voted against my hero Franklin D. Roosevelt, for his liberalism, indeed, for his outright socialism. The generational political opposition of my parents and me had no bearing on our mutually loving relationship, nor should it ever, with anyone. I am embarking on a project which might become my tendency; to offer the following line to anyone and everyone, far and wide: politics is not important, friendship is. In a democracy, or a purported one, personal political opinions are precisely as numerous as rectums, and in many cases are no more pleasant to contemplate at length and share. Just as we humans are far more likely to tolerate bad, ineffective, or oppressive government than to alter and reform it,we are more incinded to toleratedeny, or ignore political corruption than to combat and reform it. I played tennis most of my life, but I never cheated, nor even considered cheating, because I knew in advance that doing so would make the game meaningless for me. I suspect that tennis players who get into the habit of cheatingusually don't continue ennis as a hobby for very long. To elect my favorite political candidate through gerrymandering, cheating,voter fraud, whichever or whatever, would be for me more hollow than, say, your average statement from Donald Trump, and that's goin' some, as they say. My best guess, and my best hope, is that there will eventually emerge from within the great state of Tennessee, and every other state,a growing belief that winning elections or anything else by cheating or rigging the rules aint worth, as Sam Rayburn once said of the Vice Presidency, "a bucket fo warm spit". Winning anthing by rigging the system is pure hollowness,as anyone who tries or does it full well knows. You want to defeat your foes at his best, not beause the system has been rigged against him. Itmay bethat Republicans are not being careful enough about what they are wishing for, and are seeking, with apparent success, to implement in Tennessee and all across the solid conservtive south, one party rule. We Americans are known for being choosy, for wanting and expecting real choices. Voting Republican is one thing. Having no real alternative is quite another. Americans deprived of real choices tend to become restless and angry. Surely to goodness even Republicans want to vote Republican for a better reason than having no other choice.

Building Democracy

IN STATES controlled by Republicans,Republicans are doing everything in their power to make sure that the system is rigged to elect as many Republicans as possible to the U.S. House of Representatives. They are redrawing congressional voting districts, gerrymadering them into truly salamanderian shapes, to achieve political dominance. Democrats are of course doing the exact same thing in states they control.but they seem to control fewer states, and appear to have less to gain by playing this game. But is they don't play it at all if they sit on the sidelines in this sordid activety proclaiming that they are morally superior to such nefarious behavior, they risk falling behnd, being left in the dust, eventual extinction. It is not pleasant trying to imagine an America with only one major political party. We need and must have at least two, and arguably more. It is equally hard to imagine the American people being happy long term with only one major party. So diverse and divisive are we by nature that a single political party could never adequately represent all Americans. But are two enough? A two party system has the advantage of legislative efficiency. There is automatically and always a distinct majority and minority, on every issue, aiding clarity. And yet, European democracies all have more than two parties, anywhere to a handful to an unlimited number. And yet, their democracies seem to function at least as efficiently and effectively as the American version. They compensate for the potential with shifting coalitions, depending on the issue. The added flexibility enhances efficiency and effectiveness. The Democratic party in the U.S., for example, could probabyy be vroken down into five or six smaller parties. It is a big tent which includes both socialists and capitalists, moderates and far left wingers. It is possible to find true Democrats whose viewpoint seems to have little in common with other Democrats. It is hard to find any two Democrats exactly alike, and the moderates and the socialists do indeed seem better suited to different parties. The Republicans,meanwhile, still have some moderate conservatives to balance out the far right wing, the fascists, the folks with full body tattoos, flying confederate flags on their porches, pick ups, and trailors, They like the Third Reich red n black swastika too, but seem to be a bit more discreet about breaking it out for all to see. Whereas as recently as the nineteen seventies party differences were minimized as both parties moved towards and clustered in the political center,we now seem to have opened up a considerable gap between them, as many of their adherents have fled outward, towards the extremist fringes of their party,far left and far right. This polarization of political opinion has the advantage of offering everyone a celar, distinct choice. But unless a large, strong moderate political community thrives,polarization invites conflict and instability. It might behoove us all to seek more balance, and less extremism, in our personal political portfolios. This involves nothing more than the willingness of the individual to open the mind to greater diversity of thought, to "think outside the box", as they say. First, we must build and maintain a fair democracy, without any political party abusing democracy to gain an advantage.To build such parties, parties concerned about real democracy, they must be joined and led by people whose proirity is truly democracy,and not personal or political gain or party advantage. In other words, moral people.

Attending a Very Small Church

YESTERDAY, SUNDAY, I attended a Presbyterian church service, at the quaint little country brick church I have referenced before,the one nearly two hundred years old. I wonder whether there are any ghosts of congregants past watching over us. It would be a great place for ghosts to hang out, what with the old wood work in the floors and pews, the stained glass windows,the whole nineteenth century look of the place. The interior has been carefully, purposefully maintained in its 19h century look for decades. As the decades have gone by, generations of people have evidently all noticed and loved the perfect, quaint, rustic decor, and have over and over again through the decades, resolved not to touch it, not to change it even the tiniest amount. And so, two hundred years after its construction and founding as a formally registered Presbyterian congregation, ti remains as quaint and rustic as ever.We could all rent some nineteenth century clothing from a costume shop or something, all dress up accordingly, and look for all the world like a genuine Civil War era church congregation, in our little brick and wooden church down in the valley, in the woods. The minister, a friend of mine, delivers a progressive sounding sermon, with love and happiness rather than fire and brimstone, and I always leave the service uplifted and happy, ready for a big lunch. Isn't that what religion's all about, or should be? The only problem with going to church there is that it makes it nearly impossible to attend the Uniterian Universalist house of cosmic reverence some miles away, because in order to get there on time, I would have to leave the first church post haste,and drive like a maniac to the second, which I am unwilling to do. This past sunday, if my memory is accurate, there were nine people in the building, including the minister, organist, and "liturgist", who together constitute our version of "the clergy". I always hope for double digits in attendance; no go for this week. Better luck next time. Suddenly, the year two thousand and twenty eight is right around the corner, which'll be the two hundreth anniversary of the church. It must have been built by some of the earliest settlers in the region; avid, fervant Presbyterians who, above all else, above the need even for houses and stores and bars, knew in their hearts that they needed and would have to build a church, first. Of course, in nineteenth century American frontier culture, a single primitive building could and often did serve as church, school, and in many cases temporarly sleeping quarters for new arrivals in the community, while they got their log cabin built. My European friends seem amazed and amused at how recent our history is here in the American frontier 'west". For us, for me (and I am 71 years old) the late nineteenth century, when my grandparents were born, seems like a remote time deep in history; for my ninety two year old friend from Germany,it seems like nothing, like recent history, like just yesterday. She was a teenager in 1945 Germany, remembers Hitler, and warns us about Trump. I consider myself part Unitarian, part Presbyterian (a very small part), and, overwhemlingly, a pantheist, like Spinoza and Einstein. The Unitarian emphasis on the unity of all human religiosity impresses me, and inspires me to feel comfortable in churches of various denominations. I am inclined towards believing that once one has declared one's self a "panthieist", all things are possible, religiously. Our Presbyterian church has about a dozen actual members. I am not one of them. I have no intention of ever joining somebody else's church, but rather, remaining contentedly within mine,and visiting other churches for spiritual and mental growth. Goethe's admonition remains more vital to me than ever: "When I realized that everyone invents his own religion, I decided to invent mine;"

Sharing

IT WAS ONE OF THOSE "leaked" government reports of the usual sort, but indications are that these United States,as always acting ostensibly on behalf of the American people but in actuality acting on behalf of America's corporate owners and masters, has issued what amounts to an ultimatum to the African country of Uganda, threatening to end all Amercan medical and financial assistance for fighting AIDS, unless said U.S. receives in return Uganda's mineral rights to its copper, nickel, and cobalt. For the U.S. to seek access to these metals is understandable. To seek it in this manner is, quite arguably, unconscionable,indeed, nefarious, perfidious. The problem with this leaked report is that it seems to have a certain basis in reality, rather than merely being another internet lie. Bottom line: if you are a decent person or country, you cannot and do not tie emergency medical assistance to industrial mineral resources as a bargaining chip, no matter how devilishly tempting it might be. Surely not. Or do you, do we, should we? Are we? We the people sure as hell ought to know, and should find out, poste haste. I for one intend to find out...surely, not my America. Trump's America? Who knows? Life saving plague stopping modern miracle medicines and vaccines for diseases like AIDS and all the rest, should be available to everybody, regardless of abilitiy to pay, surely we can all agree, at a reasonably low cost. Yes, we want productivity and proper payment from everyone, but, we want everyone in the world vaccinated for everything, every year, no matter what, full stop. We can iron out the financial details and discuss the efficacy of vaccines with our ant-vaxxer comrades while vaccinating at a feverish pace, pun intended. It is all well and good that the U.S. wants and needs mineral resources form other countries, at times, for various worthwhile purposes, and vice versa. And yes, let's make deals, in a civilized, cooperative manner. But let's not go full Trump, the low life dishonest low life approach of extortaion and deceit, which if of course what Don teh Con is all about, and always has been, in plain sight. Let's make the arrangements cooperatively, for the benefit of as many people as possible, not jsut the billionaires and corporations. On this fragile planet we humans will of necessity do more sharing in the future, of everything, at all levels, for our survival. Consider, for instance, American capitalism. The more money we distribute, by any means, among America's poorest people, the more economic growth we have, including and especially among the millionaires and billionaires. An economic system, a nation's economy, is inevitably a pyramed, a pyrmaid best build long, broad, and low, an close to the ground, with the top being close enough to the ground to be seen from the ground...With food,clothing,shelter, and health, lettuce all help each other, and share. When all of our basic needs are met sustainably, for all of us, we can knock ourselves out competing for luxuries, frivolities and non essential goods and services in the great sacred totally normal and natural Adam Smithian free market level playing field of economics and life, or whatever. Nobody should have to fight and struggle constantly to simply live. Surely we can have some basic socialism for the poor. Lord knows we have had, and still have, through our economic and taxation system, plenty of socialism for the wealthy.

Gerrymandering Part II

THIS WHOLE GERRYMANDERING thing in Florida is beyond disgusting, just as it is always disgusting, no matter who is doing it, no matter which party. Currently, it appears to be primarily if not excusively Republicans of the MAGA kind doing the dirty deed, led by Trump, and the primary, immediate impetus seems to be coming from the widespread right wing desire to keep Trump and MAGA politicians in power, indefinitely, perhaps eternally. Stipulated here is that this behavior anybody is capable of,just like anybody is capable of lying, cheating, stealing, or killing. Democrats gerrymander too. Over the circuitous course of American politica history, who's to say who or which party has been the most guilty of it? Its as if,in a democracy organized by voting districts,its going to happen. We must stop it in the U.S., or at least try to, instead of placidly accepting it as some sort of inevitable, unavoidable,necessary evil. What the Republicans are trying to do and successfully doing in Florida isnothing other than outright subversion of democracy, and we all,if we are good citizens,must rise up and stop it. We must fight to unrig our democracy,our alleged democracy. Everybody talks about the big corrupting money in American politics,and of course,that is the main problem,and must be dealt with first. America's poor majority must organize,and take our democracy back from the billionaires, and aare perhaps are finally being heard, auspiciously, more often of late. The ruling plutocracy can be dismantled, removed from power, maybe as easily as enacting a few basic new laws. It wouls start, ofcourse, with public cammpaign financing,and strict limits on campaign contributions. One we make it impossible to actually blatanly purchase political offices, we are beginnning to build an actual democracy. But not until. Many people argue that our two party system is best, because it quickly, effectively gives us a clear majority and a minnority, on all issues at all times, instead of a collection of many different fragmented small parties witth differing points ofview, no clear majority, and a permenantly fragmented societed, paralyzed in inaction. However, in countries where such a fragmented situation exists, thyy have learned the art ofcompromise and temporary, shifting party party allliances, dependant on ths issues of the day. In any political system in which money is not regulated and is allowed to flow freely throughout the political system, the political system becomes and remains utterly corrupted,bought and paid for by the wealthiest of the wealthy elite. Rich versus poor is the main American divide. This is reality, not "class warfare", as the rich like to call it. Or, OK, call it class warfare. The poor and working poor classes can either accept the currrent situation, or they can try to do something about it,to change it. This our wealthy elite masters call "class warfare." Billionaires organize to keep their wealth and power, and attack the poor for organizeing to gain some of it, some semblance of equality. The Marxist theory of history can be attacked, criticized, demonized all day long. It remains fundamentally valid, as a partial explanation of history which, in concert with other theories and paradigms, helps us understand human history, and ourselves. Recent history has seen the rebirth of democracy, dead since ancient Greece and Rome. Today, it is a dwindling flame, attacked by forces intent on putting it out. MAGA is anti-democratic,and must be opposed, and ultimately defeated.