plinyblogdotcom

Of the very few that can remember Selwin Budge, not one could truthfully say that he was not an ardent believer; the trait that one could, accurately fault the strange little man, was that he was insular and fearfully, indecisive. Unlike the case with most people, who acquire their culture and belief system by the happenstance of birth, Selwin’s birth parents were completely unknown; he was abandoned, as a newborn, wrapped in a  soiled red blanket, and deposited, under cover of night, at the employee’s entrance, of the local “Dunkin Donuts.”

Selwin, by good fortune, was discovered and taken in by a middle-aged, alcoholic woman, who had never married nor had children. The nurturing woman thereupon discovered purpose in her previously empty life, gave up alcohol, and cared for the abandoned child until her untimely death, at the time of Selwin’s 15^Th birthday. She had been able, through the influence of her second cousin, a City Councilman, and later, a Judge, sitting in the Family Court, to obtain a Birth Certificate, for the abandoned infant, giving him, her late father’s, name, “Selwin Budge.” Her father, who had been a Protestant Minister, of some obscure denomination, in Peoria, Illinois, had died in his early 50’s, of cirrhosis of the liver. Hannah his estranged,  only child, was not a follower of any religion but did keep, as mementos, his old Bible and some religious songbooks, bequeathed to her.

The abandoned child, was, thereafter, properly cared for by her, and attended primary school. Regrettably, his unusual appearance, (spectacled, cross-eyed, tiny and heavily freckled) apparently, was an impediment to any close friendships and caused him to be isolated, and from time to time, the victim of cruel pranks. His unhappy experience at school, led to his understandable, disinterest in socializing, and by default, to a curiosity and an interest, in the religious books, inherited by Hannah, his foster mother, and stored away, gathering dust, in the large clothes closet.

About the time of the early stages of Selwin’s learning to read, he began to question Hannah about the strangely worded religious books, but she was unable to answer even the simplest of his questions. However, it so happened, that a member of the Watchtower Society, was employed, as a Clerk, at the local grocery, and on a constant basis, seemed to be publically, proclaiming his religious faith. So, the eight-year old, Selwin, one day, asked him about the obscure verbiage in the religious books. The man was, initially, overjoyed to note that Selwin was interested in the subject, but, after some thought, stated, as follows, “You are too young to read the holy word, for now, just remember these words:” Believe in me (God) and ye shall be saved.”

Selwin was more puzzled than ever but was only too familiar, with the concept of “being saved,” from Hannah’s past relation to him, of his being found and saved by her, at the doorstep of a public business. In his nuanced set of preconceptions, “being saved” had personal, empirically specific and existential meaning, knowing, only too well, that he, a newborn, otherwise, would certainly, have died at the entrance to coffee shop. From that point on, and for the remainder of his life, Selwin ardently believed, that to be given the opportunity to live, one had to believe in the Deity.

As he grew older and progressed at school, the odd-looking and unpopular, Selwin, spent a great deal of his after school time at the local library. It was there, with the assistance of reference books, particularly the Encyclopedia Britannica, in researching the topics, “god” and “belief,” he discovered to his amazement and utter confusion, that there existed, in fact, many uncountable, modes of belief, each giving obeisance to a great number of differently envisioned Deities.

Lacking an authoritative foster mother or trusted and reliable social contemporaries, with whom he might share his concerns, he, thereupon embarked on a lifetime of perseveration, on the vital existential requirement to be “saved,” as he knew it, by the instructed, belief in god; but vastly, complicated by the many nuanced perceptions of the Deity and the numbers of different and exotic ways, to demonstrate that belief. Little Selwin Budge was, at all times in his lonely existence, constitutionally aware, from his own limited life experience, that to be saved is to be found, and fortuitously, given life. What was he to do? Which god, and how?

Selwin usefully remembered, the words of the past admonition of his, now deceased, foster mother, “Do the best you can.” He resolved that he would, for safety, elect to follow the practices of four great (“popular”) religions, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and Islam, and thereby permanently preserve, the future continuance of his fortuitous status, as having been saved.

As an adult, Selwin drove a taxi for a living, which afforded him the opportunity to observe the religious prayer rituals of such selected, four faiths: Sunday services and Communion (Christian), prayer, morning, afternoon and evening, and on Saturday (Judaism), chanting on holy days, gift giving, meditation and Yoga (Buddhism) and devotional prayers five times per day (Muslim). If Selwin was completely exhausted, considering the logistics and performance of all of the foregoing religious observances, added, of course, to his job, as a New York City cab driver, he nevertheless enjoyed the assurance of security in his continued, existence, to a degree, perhaps, no other human had ever experienced.

During the past week, the happy, overworked and secure, Selwin Budge, was suddenly and instantly, killed, by a flowerpot full of red geraniums, which fell from the thirteenth floor of an old apartment house, situated, just across the street from the Dunkin Donuts, of his rescue.

-p.

The following is a certified-as accurate, facsimile, of the Record of the meeting, of the SFA, (Small Furry Animals) sub-committee, one of numerous committees, officially appointed by the NORTHEAST FOREST CONSERVANCY. The latter, a legally constituted, not-for-profit Trust. The Trust, in turn, reports to, its corporate parent, the WESTERN HEMISPHERE GROUP, LTD., a fiduciary organization, engaged in watchdog services, in the protective oversight of the hemisphere’s forests, inclusive of its resident fauna and flora. An organizational infrastructure, identically structured and purposefully dedicated, also exists, respecting the Eastern Hemisphere. For logistical reasons, both hemispheric organizations have joint offices in Quito, Equator, in proximity to the Equator, the Planet’s Official Meridian Line.

The specific Sub-Committee, the SFA, is, by far, the busiest, of the many other such subcommittees, and convenes, each  Spring, after the completion of its  post-hibernation census, of its constituents (the resident small furry critters, such as chipmunks, squirrels, beavers, opossums, hedgehogs, badgers and weasels, but excluding rats and mice (whose adequate population, particularly in urban areas, is, for some reason, eternally, assured). By specific regulation, no predatory animals are afforded membership, nor included within the mandatory census (such as foxes, all feline species, coyotes and wolves), despite the existence of an eternally, debatable  point, as to whether they legally qualify as intended small, furry animals, the proper beneficiaries of the sub-committee’s altruism.

The procedural By-Laws of the sub-committee, call for a mandatory, initial roll call and determination of the presence of a quorum. That being satisfactorily accomplished, the second (and final) mandated requirement, is the public reading from the Small Critter Scroll, the honor of which, this meeting was awarded, this meeting, to Woody Chopowitz, the dedicated and industrious beaver representative, from Lake Mohegan, New York.

The extensive Scroll, in short, recounts the facts of the ignorant, immoral and self-serving assumption of humankind, that it has the inalienable right to trespass upon nature and her entire lands and fields, whose rightful ownership has eternally and rightfully belonged to its earlier (and present) occupants, the indigenous animal population.

The Scroll goes on to recite the ageless and essentially ludicrous history of man’s, continuous conflict and tragic warfare, regarding the asserted ownership of lands, by parties, neither of which, have ever actually possessed any color of right, to the ownership or possession of land. The assumption that the victors of war have thereby established their ownership of the land of the conquered people, has ever been delusional. Neither party has ever owned the land, which was, earlier and permanently, bequeathed by Nature to its children and natural residents, the animals of the plains and field.

After some pointed reference to the many eons of human trespass, the highly reverenced, Scroll concludes with a comic depiction of a frequently performed, meaningless ceremony, in which several, business dressed humans gather around a table, and with serious demeanor, politely take turns, penning their respective names to paper, then impressing an inked stamp, and thereafter smiling, in the mutual assumption that ownership of the designated real estate has, effectively, changed hands. As provided in the omniscient Scroll, nothing has occurred, by virtue of this  silly, terpsichorean demonstration, with the exception of an exchange of typewritten, signed and stamped papers, from one non-owner to another.

The meeting continued with negative written reports from the latest air and water pollution committee, just received by bee mail, the devastating findings of the trash and chemicals, by the representatives of the health and welfare group, the sad and frightening statistics, reported by the animal-homicide hunting committee and finally, a truly terrifying report from the all-important climate change special investigating committee.

A wise raccoon, loudly and disgustedly, announced to the assemblage, “not only have  humans, ignorantly,and egotistically, arrogated to themselves the ownership of the planet, they are now acting as if they have the right to destroy it.”

-p.

Dear Reader:

The continuing quarantine experience, it seems, has put us in an unorthodox mood, leading to the present alteration of our customary, contextual format. We have to date, published in excess of 500 posts, prose and poetry, on a wide variety of subjects, from societal, ethical and philosophical, to aesthetic and anthropological; we have attempted to limit our writing on politics, except in those instances when we felt irresistibly motivated to do otherwise. So, perhaps, we may be forgiven if we now hazard this admittedly, nuanced, but sincere, opinion and critique, informally expressed as personal correspondence.

We, at plinyblog, are well along, in the category of senior citizen, and admittedly, express ourselves from that perspective. It is apparently obvious, that times and folkways have radically and significantly, changed in recent decades. We have always been of the determined view, that, much of this change is due, in agreat measure, to an exponential increase in absentee, impersonal, electronic communication, and the resultant decline in the quality of interpersonal interaction; life has become faster and, considerably more efficient, but, as we are able to discern, qualitatively, not better.

We do not shrink from the expected potential criticism, of our, long -held and firm declaration, that digital interactive communication, is, impersonal, and therefore, emotionally, unsatisfactory; a statement certain to be vehemently denied by those who prefer to remain unfamiliar with the practice of natural, personal conversation and its satisfying and fulfilling, expression. The English vocabulary, the communicating medium of Shakespeare and Milton, as well as Churchill and Martin Luther King, has, for some, become, for some, a superfluity, and a “drag.” Just as, for many, the reading of the world’s great literature is wasted time, deemed better expended by “texting” and computer games.

It is our established view that intimately associated with the willing surrender of natural conversation, is the relative loss of inclination for empathy and sympathy for strangers. The self-imposed, limitation to a smaller, circle of communicating acquaintances, additionally, has ultimately led to the insularity and “tribalism” of much of our population. We have, in past writings, described the observable decline, from neighborly debatable, differences of opinion, to tribal, insular, warring groups, as, “the death of civic amity.” A wider and more encompassing network of communicants, conceivably, might have opened a door to the concept of the wide existence of alternate views.

We have, in the motivation for this writing, assumed that the leisure time, implicit in the experience of quarantine, incident to the COVID-9 pandemic, affords to many others, like ourselves, the opportunity to randomly ponder subjects, including the possibility of implicit negative features of our new electronic marvels, as well as their obvious convenience.

In our view, it appears that, only in the unfortunate, “new normal,” of our American society, the national, citizen-wide, insularity, of the electronic mode of communication, and the hurried and thoughtless nature of a large, degraded, generally uninformed and inadequately literate society, that could possibly, have elected a Donald Trump to the Oval Office. We have sufficiently, described that former game show hosts, complete incapability, his inflated and neurotic ego, miscreant behavior, and regular mendacity, as well as our Nation’s resulting, damage and decline, both nationally and internationally. He was elected, largely due to the newly-voting, flat earth, low information, voters in our population, motivated by demagoguery and financed by certain large industrial, carbon polluting, psychopaths, who value profits above government regulations which protect the life and health of our citizens; and by irresponsible Americans, too diverted by their facile electronic entertainments, to vote.

With the recent advent of the novel, Coronavirus, this incapable, egotistic and ignorant President, found himself, completely confused and “lost at sea.” To make matters worse, in addition to Trump’s complete ignorance, lack of leadership ability and super-sized, neurotic ego, he, as an early act of his shameful Presidency, dismissed a capable agency, appointed, by the responsibly, foresighted, President Obama, to monitor worldwide outbreaks of epidemic disease.

Initially, this uninformed and delusional President, was responsible for a very costly delay in addressing this horrific epidemic, by denying its existence, in refutation of the Nation’s leading scientists; claiming, neurotically, and egocentrically, that it was a Democratic hoax to injure his Presidency. Thereafter, stating that was just another seasonal flu. When the deniability of the epidemic proved impossible by the arrival of horrific morbidity and mortality figures, he was forced to publically acknowledge the virulent pathology but, undoubtedly speaking to his adoring base, devalued the health precautions recommended by the medical experts, such as wearing face masks, distancing and quarantine. To his credit, the disastrous Chief Executive demonstrated the extent of his informed expertise and heartfelt empathy by recommending the ingestion of bathroom, anti-bacterial cleanser, to kill the offending virus.

We have often made reference to the cautious admonition of Thomas Jefferson, that to succeed, a democracy must have a literate and informed people. The statement has unfortunately morphed into a negative truism. Too many of our fellow citizens have rejected the stimulating benefits of true discussion, reading good literature, interest in the arts and humanities, drama, music and personal growth, of knowledge, and mature perception. We are a Nation of individual citizens, blessed with the unlimited, universal freedom to choose our direction and goals, individually and societally. The freedom to verbally exchange ideas, in tandem with responsible reading and thereby, advances the potential, afforded to homo sapiens, by the evolutionary gift of an advanced brain, capable of expanding our potential for understanding and wisdom, should not be undervalued and ungratefully, abandoned.

To opt to reduce the avenues of the existentially necessary exchange of ideas and observations is to shut off the flow of spontaneous creativity and lead to the stultification of new ideas, as well as the assessment of traditional ones. Free, and unabridged, inter-societal communication, is a vital stimulant to imagination and creativity, as well as an outlet for the satisfaction of emotionally needed, personal expression. Reading good literature enlarges one’s perspective of the universal and eternal challenges inherent in being a human being, living in society.

Each of us maintains the option to refresh and enhance our present style of interaction, return to the natural benefits of freely spoken interpersonal communication, and to its expressive exchange of ideas. This return would be conducent to personal growth and understanding, as would a return, as well, to the advantages of reading good literature, also required for the attainment of the biologically afforded potential, for the pursuit of wisdom and self- fulfillment.

Kindest regards to all, and wishes for continued good health,

-pliny.

Objectivity in its purest sense is the inarguable gold standard for the proper evaluation of life experience, the exercise of judgment, and the making of elective choices. However, as eternally, appears to be the case, in common with all gold standards, it is an aspirational goal, and not an accomplished reality. The earnest dedication to be objective, in man’s evaluative exercise of judgment, is morally and empirically, admirable, but, more often than not, unrealizable.

There appears to be, some measure of dissonance between the residual impact of our previously learned experience, and our expectations of an unaffected and objective learning, of new experience. This appears to be most observable in the process of societal interaction. Man’s psyche appears to be indolent, often preferring to make effortless judgments, based upon perceived similarities with past individuals, or with like factual situations, rather than the more challenging and appropriate, effort of the fresh analysis of new experience, or the “sizing up,” of newly met, people. This failing seems to be, notably applicable to a teacher’s evaluation of students, and, to somewhat of a lesser degree, in child-rearing.

A demonstrably abusive, and repugnant instance, of this reductive trait, is a nefarious practice, known as “profiling.” The perverse dynamic of this practice, is the reflexive, perception, and attribution, of dangerous or undesirable potential, to reductively selected, physiognomic traits, as well as race or ethnos. This unjust practice exceeds in ignorance and bigotry, the long-ago discredited, Lombrosoan Theory (“atavistic types”), and Europe’s past populist analysis, by cranial bumps.

We shall go so far as to declare. that any facile evaluation of individuals, colored by past experience with others, perceived to have resembling characteristics, is, ipso facto, erroneous, reductionist and quintessentially, neurotic; further, that decisional choices, based thereon, are irrational and meritless, as well as unfairly prejudicial.

An empirically related subject is the nuanced, evaluation of experience, grounded on a perceived, evaluation of its protagonist. An act by a person, esteemed to be a law-abiding and a good citizen, may accrue the unearned luxury, of being perceived differently, than the perception of the identical act, performed by a person, reputed to be of questionable character. Only the former will get the benefit of the doubt; the latter will, unfairly, be looked upon with suspicion. A sitting Judge will be open to consider a positive, moral interpretation of an equivocal act by a citizen, reputed to be upstanding, but infer otherwise, concerning an accused person, with an unknown, or poorly ascribed reputation. A parent may, more leniently interpret, the breaking of an expensive Chinese vase, by a well behaved child, (especially, one who earns good grades at school), than a less well behaved, one; the act, itself, being unequivocal, identical, the unjust evaluation, most regrettably, is not.

This is the unjust phenomenon, whose intended expression, is the specifically intended theme, of this writing, i.e., that the evaluation of a particular act, may often be made, unfairly, as being based upon a (correct, or erroneous) previous partiality or negative appraisal of the actor. It is profoundly unjust, to entertain an undeserved partiality for an actor, responsible for a bad result, who previous to the errant act, bore a favorable reputation, in stark contrast to the treatment of another, subjectively perceived, to be of unpopular or of unknown persona. Surely, fairness requires the nature and quality of the act, itself, that needs consideration and evaluation, and not, inappropriately, the actor.

This regrettable inclination, to downplay the value of a useful act, by a perceived meritless person, in addition to being immoral and unjust, is objectionable, as well, for several practical reasons. First, if an act has significance at all, it is good and useful, or alternatively, wrong and useless, on its own, intrinsic and objective merits, and without irrelevant, inquiry as to the identity of the actor.  Second, there is little or no progress of societal growth, where advances are not evaluated, strictly, upon the basis of their own intrinsic value or usefulness. Third, if the act, or object, has value to society, it’s utility exists, entirely independent of the person of the creator; and may be of great value to society, notwithstanding any extant and irrelevant disdain for the innovator. Indeed, the innovator may, previously, have been prejudicially or erroneously, disparaged in reputation, and the innovative discovery may enhance his previous societal standing and reputation.

By contrast, with reference to detrimental, or wrongful acts, the same need to be, rationally, evaluated upon the extent of its particular harm or extent of danger posed to society, rather than any previous, prejudicial evaluation of the person of the perpetrator. This uniform process is consistent with society’s espoused principles of “American justice.” Severe and unjust treatment often is unjustly meted out, to persons (conceivably, on unjust racial or ethnically, bigoted, grounds) who are arbitrarily perceived, to be on the “outs,” with society, or with its empirical norms. For the sake of attaining a just society, the acts of such unfairly, perceived individuals, in common with all members of society, must be impartially, evaluated, on the specific act’s objective degree of wrong.

The convenient and effortless, knee-jerk reaction to the reductionist judgment of others, based upon stereotypical past resemblances, in accordance with the most fundamental concept of rational fairness and justice, must be restrained and replaced, to the degree, humanly achievable, with objective evaluation, free of societal, scuttle-but, and its, self-perpetuating, usually unfounded and anti societal, partiality.

-p.

 

Two iconic lions, tirelessly, dutifully and eternally, guard the entrance to New York Public Library, Fifth Avenue and 42^nd Street, in New York City. These marbleized statues, sculptured on May 23^rd, 1911, one hundred years ago, familiar to City residents and visitors, were named, “Patience” and Fortitude, (Ralph Waldo Emerson’s phrase) by Mayor Fiorello La Guardia, during America’s Great Depression, in the 1930s; constituting, the then Mayor said, the qualities, America needed, to get through that very challenging period.

Today, we give homage and special recognition to these familiar stone beasts, not alone because it is their centennial birthday, but, additionally, because their spirit of Patience and Fortitude, are again called upon, at an extremely challenging time; perhaps the most challenging, since the Second World War; the invasion of an unprecedented, lethal enemy, Coronavirus (COVID-19). The celebrity lions are now witness to a world pandemic, in which, as of this writing the known statistics are fearful. The total cases: 1,342, 821, deaths: 80,123, recovered: 232,232,73. The virus, COVID-19, apparently, is a new strain of Coronavirus, that has never, previously, been identified in humans, was first detected in Wuhan, Hubei Provence, China. Our cursory research indicates, that the class, Coronavirus includes a large group of viruses, that have the varying potential to cause illness, from the common cold to more serious diseases, including, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (“SARS”).

To amplify the lions’ empathically painful roar of dismay, and tragic disbelief is the Trump Administration’s ignorant, irresponsible, and complete, unpreparedness, for this virulent holocaust. The roar is amplified, even further, in learning of Trump’s, foolhardy dismissal, soon after taking office, of a foresighted, Obama entity, led by a Navy Admiral ranked, Doctor, and composed of experts, charged with the existential watchdog responsibility, to act as a monitor of disease outbreak, anywhere on the globe. By reason of the ignorance and egotism of Donald Trump (ever, a lethal combination), America was caught, completely, by surprise, and was unprepared to meet this virulent outbreak (now a “pandemic”). A great deal of precious time was, additionally, wasted by Trump’s, initial, petulant denial of the outbreak, followed by his public diminution of its importance (“it is like another, regular flu”), and later of his incomprehensible, utterance of gross misinformation.

The Nation is in quarantine, sporting protective masks and gloves, the economy is tanking, preventative masks and gloves are in short supply, hospitals are overcrowded, significant and necessary testing, is significantly challenged due to the dearth of testing kits, the unemployment figures are greatly increased, small businesses are on their last legs, the country is in a state of fear of disease and death. Still that travesty, tragically, cloaked with Presidential Authority, is downplaying the disease, by recommending the opening of business, despite the urgent requests of the scientific and medical world, that people remain in quarantine and separated. As worrisome as the presenting pandemic may, in fact, be, we have always posted the advice that the combination of ignorance and egotistic, unsupported confidence is eternally, lethal. Trump makes this dogmatic statement, inarguable.

While the Nation waits, impatiently (but hopefully), for the ultimate development of an effective vaccine, it bears its apprehensions and discomforts, with patience and fortitude, thanks to the support of the two, iconic, library lions, who have been witness to America’s ultimate triumph, through patience and fortitude, over many challenges.

-p.

There seems to be within the man,
A padlocked vault of vain resolve,
Of things unsaid, of half-done deeds-
The frozen fire of deep regret.

A withheld expression of response
The felt detour to better routes
A looked for liaison, unmet-
A silent grimace of distress.

An ardent feeling, not expressed,
Of standing up for what is right
A willing start of something new
The roadblock to a different way.

The frozen fire, that burns within,
When feelings remain inside hid
That silent consumer of the soul-
Burns even hotter, at repressed love.

(Leonard N. Shapiro, 2020)

-p.

For purposes of this writing, we request that the reader assume the following (fictional) state of facts. A family of four, parents and two children, are travelling, in route to an historic site, in upstate New York. The father, while driving, occasionally glances away from the windshield, to the rear view mirror, to observe traffic conditions behind them.

This weekend family excursion, this time, is a visit to a historic venue, Kingston, New York, the original Capital City of the State of New York. As the family approaches the destination, the father asks the children to turn off their electronic music and remove their ear buds. The children, the elder, a daughter, sixteen years of age and the younger, a son, fourteen, following the dual emission of some petulant and inarticulate mumbling, reluctantly, comply. The party has a discussion on the early American history of the area, its Dutch period, the later settlement of the colonial Americans, and the subsequent, legal establishment of the City of Kingston, as the Capital of New York State; prior to its being burnt down, during the Revolutionary War, by the British.

After a quick check-in, at the pre-arranged bed and breakfast, the parents, in order to placate the somewhat, blasé children, tactically, choose a pizza place for lunch, and are rewarded, following lunch, with favorable comments, on the quality of the pizza.

Following lunch, the family visits the Old Senate Building, the Trolley Museum, the Museum of Kingston, and then, stop for dinner at one of the restaurants in the historic, Stockade district, prior to returning to their reserved sleeping accommodations. The family has absorbed a great deal of information, including the fact that the present, City of Kingston, came into its prominence in the 19^th Century, due to the completion of the Delaware and Hudson Canal, which materially, expanded the City’s business potential.

After watching a bit of television, the children, and, as well, their Mother, (“I’m pooped!)  fatigued, from the busy afternoon of sightseeing, went to bed; the father, however, visibly, in a pensive state of mind, choosing to sit up for a little while longer.

With reference to the renewed subject of American History, the father is greatly troubled by a true dilemma. What does a parent tell the children about American history? The problem is raised by the conflict between his innate sense of ethics and truthfulness on the one hand, and on the other, a parental felt preference, not to disturb the children’s, a sense of pride in their citizenship, and assumptions of consistent, National rectitude and high moral principle.

The father vividly, recalled his school day teachings, of the xenophobic, concept of “Manifest Destiny,” as the purported implicit (or Divinely, directed) duty, to expand the geography of our country to the Pacific, the Thanksgiving myth, (the “Hallmark Cards,” depicted, trope) about the Colonists and the Indigenous Americans, sitting down to a brotherly meal of Turkey and cranberry sauce, despite the historic reality of the many, unprincipled and intentional breaches of Agreement, with the guileless Indians, by our Federal Government, the forced displacement of the vast number of Native Americans, living, peacefully, for a great many generations, in the fertile and rich. southeast portion of the continent, to the arid and windy areas like Oklahoma, (“a more suitable land for Indians”) the deaths and suffering on their marched and enforced displacement, “The Trail of Tears,” and the unforgiveable destruction of the invaluable, Native American culture, art and religion. The father perseverated, what do I tell my children?

He then ruminated on America’s shameful history of the enslavement of Black people, noting, with discomfort, the United States Supreme Court ruling, (Justice Taney) that a runaway black slave was (merely) a “chattel,” viz., agricultural equipment, and should be returned to “it’s owner.” The father mused over the great suffering and myriad of injustice, suffered by black Americans to date, despite Abolition and the Civil Rights Law. What do I tell my children, taught to enshrine the motto, “all men are created equal?”

Shall I tell them about the nationally divisive, tragedy, the Viet Nam War, falsely rationalized, upon the bogus governmentally, created threat, of an enemy Communist Bloc, including China, Korea and all of Southeast Asia, despite the historically demonstrated, truth that each of these Asian countries, mutually, have an antipathy for the other? How many lives lost, how many atrocities perpetrated, and how devastating it’s enduring effect on our country’s prior conception of its principled, morality?

What shall I tell my children about the 1940’s immoral and bigoted government mandate, imprisoning thousands of Japanese Americans, because America was at war with Japan, or the 1930’s ship containing hundreds of Jews, fleeing the death camps of Adolph Hitler, denied entry, and sent back to a sad fate, such rejection being based on a prevailing National feeling of anti-Semitism?

Shall I confirm to my children the continued existence of government approved homicide (capital punishment), with the approval of malicious groups, falsely advertising themselves as, “Right to Life,” whose asserted political-religious motive, is stated tactically, “the protection of the fetus” (but only until birth) dogmatically, rejecting the vital needs of the born and needy child?

Shall I discuss with my children, the challenges, and limitations, wrongfully imposed upon women, homosexuals, the disabled, upon immigrants seeking a normal life for their family, but, turned away, by a Nation, wholly consisting of immigrants and their progeny?

What shall I tell my children about our inept, totally ignorant, President  whose reprehensible laxity and negligent, failure to prepare for, and deal with, the World-wide pandemic, exacerbated its deadly impact;  about that immoral, mendacious, President; elected by America’s flat-earth, ignorant, reductionists, with the  financial support of sociopathic industrialists, whose anti-regulation stance,  demonstrates a  preference for profits, over human health and life (to the extent of the ultimate destruction of our planet)?

The father, uncomfortably perseverates, looking back through America’s rear view mirror, shall I repeat the old school day euphemisms and half-truths, baptizing the occasions of our Nation’s contemptible past acts, or, at the risk of incurring their disillusionment, concerning National rectitude, tell them the candid history?

The fiction having faithfully served its intended purpose, let us remove the uncomfortable dilemma, from the troubled brow of our fictional, protagonist, and permit him to proceed to his well -deserved sleep. We will express our views on the sensitive question, and the theme of this mini-essay: What to tell our children?

We come down hard on the alternative of telling children, the entire truth, but with a caution, or suggestion as to how to do so. The morality of truth, itself, may exceed all others in the need to preserve trust and integrity within the family, and, essentially, the successful continuance of society. Truth reinforces universal respect for parent, citizen and governing body, as well as the vital ingredient of emotional security.

A basic ingredient in all of the past acts of sundry mischief, committed in the name of our Nation, one way or another, was related to the hazmat of prevarication: the lie that dark skin represents inferiority, that xenophobic growth is an acceptable means to evil ends, that there are essential, and basic differences between national or ethnic diversity, that women are not intellectually equal to men, that Jews are evil moneylenders, that the disabled and handicapped are to be disrespected because they may be less productive, that women, who require an abortion are homicidal, that educational and aesthetical accomplishments, are less important to a Nation’s development, than guns and military prowess, that the poor and disadvantaged are personally, responsible for their troubles, that government programs of assistance to the needy, and oversight, for purposes of the health and life of citizens, is somehow a form of social or political wrong.

Our children can be educated to oppose these ignorant tropes and reductionist trash, and be taught to understand that the shameful past events (looking through our country’s rear mirror) were caused by inadequate education and ignorant perspective; that the “Nation” as such, is not responsible for these acts of shameful history, but that it was shameful people, in power. who committed these reprehensible and shameful acts.  A Nation, made up of people is as responsible, moral and apathetic as its expression through its elected agents; fundamentally by the voting population.

Looking forward, now, through the front windshield, the Nation can be improved by our offspring who strive for an ample education and a wise perspective, so that the Nation will not repeat its mistakes, nor err in the future by ignorance, lack of apathy and hypocrisy. It is up to them, our children and our future citizens to continue to monitor our nation, and its consistent and truthful acts of morality and standing in the World.

-p.

Background

We have lamented the fact that the inventory of our English -American language, has an ample supply of words, relating to commerce (invoices and bill heads), and yet, there has, eternally, existed a shortfall, in the language of sentiment (“feeling words”). This limitation in potential, for the meaningful expression of emotion and emphasis, has, unhappily, been further challenged by the popular elective use of electronic communication.
A recent conversation with one of the loyal followers of this blog space prompted this poem’s re-publication –p.

WHEN WORDS FAIL
Can one describe a chocolate’s taste
Or find soft words for a baby’s smile
Can words tell honey’s sweet bouquet
Or express relief and rest a while
Can one recount a rainbow’s arch
With words that bring to view its sight
Or portray the shadows of the Moon
And thus, it’s real pale cold light

Are there apt words that sob relief
When the lost toddler is tearfully found
That describe the lilac’s inebriate scent
The Ocean’s waves full basso pound

Is there a word for the brush of lips
On newborn’s cool and silken brow
The splatting sound as dripping rain,
Strikes the verdant leaves and boughs

Can one describe a roses’ red
The weathered hue of old windmills
Tell me, please, where such words go
With so many heartfelt thoughts to fill

One need not fret nor search in vain
When it seems, words do not serve
The sentiment’s so well conveyed,
Most times, a small tear will do.

Leonard N, Shapiro (2019)

During this period of health-related, inhibition of personal contact, it might be timely and useful, to examine the topic of societal interaction, as it occurs, in the normal setting. We have elected to focus on the thought-provoking, subjects of the ability to accurately and fully express thoughts, and the arguably, related, topic, the varied capacity for overt expression of love and affection.

It would appear, that the degree of individual skill, in accurately expressing intended thoughts and information, is demonstrably variable. Too often, there is a marked difference between a speaker’s own perception and implicit assumptions, and that of his actual statement, as heard. Some individuals are fortunate in their ability to clearly, accurately, and fully express their intended message, but too many are not. Thus a party to a conversation, may be well aware of what he intends to say, and wrongfully, assume that he has expressed, that intention; however, from the listener’s experience, the intended thought was neither expressed nor heard. The most understanding and attentively willing listener, cannot apprehend a non-expressed, intended message of a speaker. In the special case of a party who is familiar with the nuanced speech of a challenged speaker, it may be less problematic to convey his intended message.

A problem also is seen in the case of a listener, whose fixed, rigid assumptions, about the world in general, or the particular subject of the conversation, prevent him from hearing the speaker’s words, nor apprehending his point of view, because he sifts the speaker’s words through his subjective filter, to accord with his intransigent views.

A third, unfortunate roadblock, to meaningful communication and, sad to say, a veritable parody of its dynamic, is the occasion of two parties to a conversation, each, so absorbed in his own personal thoughts and issues, as not to hear the other’s words. While, in reality, thoughts are mutually expressed, they are independent of any subject other than each party’s, self-absorbed and persevered thought. In reality, the parties have not spoken to each other. The sole “benefit” of such an interaction may be the possible sense of relief, derived from the verbal, venting of one’s private thoughts. Such feeling of relief, at the conclusion of the “non-conversation,” may well be, mutually, rewarded by the (hilarious) retrospective comment, “Good talk.”

Our fourth, and final, example of a “non-conversation” is the matter of the individual, who refrains from discussion with another party, particularly, on a contentious subject, upon his assumption, right or wrong, that he “knows” what the other is apt to say. This travesty in interpersonal interaction, we have disparagingly labeled, “solitaire interaction.”

We have noted that it is preferable, in the few moments, prior to a conversation, that one have his thoughts sorted out, in order to construe a clear idea of what he intends to convey. It is equally necessary, to pay thoughtful attention to a speaker’s exact words, in full, prior to the conception of a reply. Clear and non-ambiguous conversation, is emotionally satisfying, fulfilling, and, avoids misunderstandings, and conceivable dispute.

We earnestly consider, the topic of lovemaking, and expressions of affection, in general, (albeit more sensitive and personally, nuanced) as being a dynamic, analogous to conversation, but completely uncharted. In conversation, we have at minimum, a shared language, with uniformly accepted, and objectively documented rules. While the factor of persona does play a noticeable role in the dynamics of conversation, it is of considerably more significance in this entirely subjective context.

The expression of affection, on all levels is, fundamentally, a form of communication, whose grammar is ultimately, dependent upon a combination of two emotional vocabularies. The parties to an affectionate relationship, are wise to consider the joint experience as, independently mutual, with each party, possessing a separate, personal and nuanced reaction to the specific words used or actions displayed.

In this acutely more sensitive area of communication, one must understand that, for various reasons, some people are naturally and comfortably demonstrable and others, contrariwise, subtler or even, repressed, in their expression of, or response to, words or acts, of affection. It is not unlike the divide, between individuals who have the natural skill to express their thoughts, and those who do not; there are some people who are, naturally, warm and cuddly, while others are less demonstrative, or as “cuddly as a cactus.” In the situation of a recently, introduced person, one is unaware of the other’s responsive expectations or comfort zone, and need be flexible in their expectations as to response.

Unlike conversational communication, which, does, on occasion, manifest nuanced style, the expression of love and affection, often, is normally affected by certain contextual phenomena. These include setting, acts, tone, emphasis, timing, and, nuanced, sometimes unknown, expectations. In a settled relationship or marriage, each partner is, or should become aware of, the specific perception and context of the other’s emotional syntax lest he suffer the effects of the ignominious crime of “resisting caress.”

In the context of the communication of affection often, non-verbal communication is the most articulate, candid, and expressive message, and, as well, one least likely to be misunderstood. A soft and loving tone, a tender look or gentle touch, have their own grammar, and inarguably, are the sincerest, and most articulate form of communication. There are no words as truly articulate as a tender touch or a soft smile. There are many people who instinctively find it somewhat difficult, to express their love in the form of words, or overtly, like “cuddling,” but do so, in their loving and attentive acts and gestures. These spontaneous evidences of feeling, albeit, non-verbal, articulate tenderness and love, in their perceived effect, which, conceivably, may not attainable with vocabulary, nor even, romantic poetry.

* ADDENDUM: No educational, other expertise is asserted, regarding the above writing, which, for what it is worth, is based solely, upon our observation and experience.

-p.

Plato, quoted the prosecuted Socrates, who famously said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.” Socrates’ spurious offense viz., empirical thought, and analysis, we trust, is no longer prosecutable. Indeed, modern thought holds, inarguably, to be fully human, is to apply man’s precious facility of thought, to the responsible aspiration of the elevation of his life and improvement of his understanding. Yet, of late, it appears that so much of value has been threatened or destroyed, not the least of which, has been our respect for truth; leading to the forfeiture of our previously, established role, as global leader.

Accordingly, it seems appropriate, perhaps existentially urgent, to employ available wisdom, and exercise the flexibility, necessary to objectively, examine ourselves as an organic National society. With the apparent collapse of social amity, and resulting divisiveness and clash of intra- national tribalism, an apparent decline in respect, for learning and for human advancement, aesthetic and scientific, the intransigent, racial and gender injustice, the casual and irresponsible, denial of global damage, it seems that a truly candid comparison between our avowed, democratic-republican aspirations, and the world of empirical, reality would, on the advice of the wrongly prosecuted, Socrates, be worth examining.

A re-visit to the times and the prevailing thoughts of the Founders of our Republican Democracy, fosters an appreciation and understanding, that the conceptual, political enterprise, was unique and experimental. No longer, as in the case in England and Europe, was there to be privileged birth, and resultant class differences; the radical Founders loudly, and historically, proclaimed, that “all men were created equal.” Basic freedoms, like speech, religion, the press, ownership of property, and the pursuit of happiness, were now, to be protected, by Constitutional mandate, from interference by the government. The three separate branches of government, Executive, Legislative and Judicial, were given the power, respectively, to check abuses of authority, by the other.

Relevant to the (soon to be stated) principal theme of this writing, it is of relevant interest, to cite Benjamin Franklin’s, prescient admonition: “It is a Republic if you can keep it.” Another such guarded reservation was made by Thomas Jefferson, who declared that an educated and informed citizenry, is necessary if a democracy is to succeed. It is not as well known, that Jefferson also, pessimistically, stated, “It would just be a matter of time, before the American system of government, degenerates into an elective despotism.” The future, unhappily, proved to confirm the latter statement.

The undesirable outcomes of the Founder’s optimistic and creative, venture have, in large part, been delineated in the second paragraph of this mini-essay. The undeniably fundamental reason, for such undesirable outcomes, and others listed hereinafter, is that the new Nation, in fact, did not mature into a society, largely composed of educated and informed citizens. This anticipated failing, we believe was, the etiology of Jefferson’s, less known, prescient foreboding, “I will be just a matter of time before the American system of government, degenerates into an elective despotism.” Clearly, the fact that serious reservations, about the nature of the average American voter, were undeniably evidenced, in the Founders’ creation of the (undemocratic) Electoral College.

We trust that it is not overly presumptuous, to observe, in this modest blogspace,  the deeply distressing observation, that the idealistic dream of America’s founders has, instead, morphed into a nightmare. The outcomes, tragically, reveal the realization of the pessimistic predictions of Jefferson, and the sage admonition of Benjamin Franklin. We do not, in fact, have a generally literate and informed society, and, so, have not been able to sufficiently, realize and keep the envisioned, republican democracy.

The short-lived hope and optimism, created by the election and re-election of the wise, intellectually gifted, and capable, President Barack Obama, gave this essayist, hope that the American Society, in general, had the nascent, capability of manifesting good judgment, and was on the mend. We, however, experienced but a brief hiatus from the usual, groundhog day repetitive Presidential rule, in sync with the populist, flat-earth, and semi-literate, citizen mentality.

The President that succeeded this, unusual avatar of character and capability, was a former glitzy host of a sub-standard television game show, and a despised real estate gonif, lacking any useful education or capability, whose international acts, quickly rendered the United States, formerly, the respected and undisputed moral leader of the free world, into an embarrassment, and an incoherent enigma. This President, previously assessed by experts, to lack any capability, whatsoever, for executive rule, has broken every societal standard of professional morality and decency, with impunity. It is not possible in the space of a mini-essay, to recount all of the acts of gross professional negligence, as well as the intentionally wrongful acts, of this detestable, egotistical miscreant; inarguably, preeminent, among which, is his regular mendacity. Pursuant to the Constitution, America is blessed with such a leader, for a full term of four years, such frustrating endurance, constituting the basic impetus of this writing.

There is far too much Trump horror to relate, (in addition to those set forth, above, in the second paragraph), including the illegal profiteering from his position, his admitted, immoral assignations, with, and pay-offs to prostitutes, his “winking” encouragement of the White Nationalists, his unconstitutional attacks on the free press, his attempted assertion of despotic power…we just cannot, as a practical matter, include all of his acts of miscreant, ignorant and arrogant behavior. In any event, they would be merely redundant, and unnecessary, to the demonstration that the elevation of such an individual to the Oval office, for a period of four years was a sheer, unmitigated disaster.

We do feel the necessity to include Trump’s egotistic and ignorant behavior relative to the current pandemic. Early in Office, he had irrationally, dismissed Obama’s, responsibly created, government group of expert health officials, whose assigned task was to act as an early warning system as to any worldwide disease break-out, led by a physician, who is a Navy Admiral. This prudently foresighted and responsible, Obama, entity, was egotistically and irresponsibly dismissed by Trump, ironically, not very long before the unforeseen, advent of COVID-19. It was completely unforeseen and we were caught unprepared, because the medical watchdog group had been irresponsibly, and egotistically, dismissed.

Moreover, vital action regarding the epidemic was delayed by Trump, first by his groundless denials, thereafter by a course of his ignorant down-playing of the problem, as an “ordinary seasonal flu”, and still further, by unqualified and egotistically confident, attempts at the serial contradiction of the advice of the Nation’s leading medical experts. Trump, in our opinion, is indisputably guilty of mass negligent homicide, for the many thousands of deaths caused by his irrational delay and egotistical ignorance. The epidemic has ballooned, with his inaction, to pandemic proportions, due to his ignorant denials and unpreparedness. Now, in the midst of the millions of infected, dead, and dying, this buffoon-president is, advising people to drink bathroom disinfectant and stand in the sun, as medically curative therapy.

It is our view that the Founder’s, optimistically envisioned National State, has, demonstrably, been less successful than envisioned;  America needs to reach this painful and regrettable consensus, and start afresh. Realistically, given the unpredictable nature of our citizenry, we need to establish an (alternate mode) of government, still maintaining citizen rights, but granting assurance, in the event that the enigmatic population elects a President, who reveals himself to be incapable, and morally, unprincipled, the Nation will not have to endure his unsatisfactory rule for years, in frustration, while the Nation suffers a dangerous decline in power and prestige.

The American system of governance does not work, as stated, because it requires for its success, a Jeffersonian described citizen, (sufficiently literate and informed). Such absence, exposes the Nation to the election of a head of State, as at present, who is profoundly undesirable and injurious to the Nation and its citizens. As long as we perpetuate the failed system, we will continue, groundhog day style, to experience undesirable and perilous outcomes. The famous philosopher and author, Ralph Waldo Emerson, wisely and famously, said: “Foolish repetition is the hobgoblin of small minds.” It would appear to be hobgoblin foolishness, to continue to reprise the same governmental system, which is capable, (due to the uncertain nature of the citizenry), of producing other, Trump-like despotic, incompetents as President, who remain in Office for an insufferable term of years.

Our long-standing preference for improvement of the electoral system, is the two-party, Parliamentary system of governance, one, while, similarly protective of the freedoms of its citizens, provides for a change of Executive, by a “Vote of Confidence” at any time appropriate, by the duly elected House of Commons.

Instead of inflexible hobgoblin-like repetition of the vulnerable features of our governmental structure, America needs to establish a new and improved mechanics of governance, particularly regarding its mode of selection of a Chief Executive.

We have, respectfully, suggested the two-party Parliamentary System.

-p.