Looking for Answers Amidst the Din

There has been a great deal of talk in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting.  I’ve been reluctant to chime in sooner because I think people have been too quick to do so and in the process, some pretty illogical utterances have been broadcast over the airwaves.  Worse are those who are taking the tragedy to advance a political cause which is as specious as it is manipulative and opportunistic.  I am speaking of guns and the laws which seek to limit the same.  As a teacher, my friends have asked me my thoughts on how to stop further school shootings.  I’m quick to admit that my current profession provides no insights.  While I have some thoughts on the issue, I’m at a loss to explain the unexplainable or to propose a strategy of defense against the indefensible.     

One of the first and most often attacked targets is, of course, guns.  In the interest of full disclosure, I am a gun owner and therefore, what I say on the subject should be understood in that light.  New gun laws and gun restrictions would not have prevented the events in Sandy Hook Elementary (the shooter stole the weapons he used) and so should not be considered as some special elixir for gun violence in schools.  The only thing such measures do is prevent law-abiding citizens from getting guns and making it a one-sided fight.  Connecticut has some of the toughest gun laws in the country and the cities with equally strong anti-gun measures are some of the most violent.   

However, there is one proposed suggestion about which I’m not sure – arming teachers.  I would feel comfortable carrying or using a gun should I be unfortunate enough to need to do so.  Yet, I’ve been teaching for eighteen years and there are a great many former colleagues that I would not want anywhere near a gun.  Moreover, one or two teachers or a principal with a gun cannot possibly cover the size and scale of many public schools today.  One would have to arm a certain percentage of the staff relevant to where their classes are to make it effective.  Additionally, it is not practical or economically viable for school districts to initiate such a program and the pre-requisite training and screening that would almost certainly go along with such a policy.   

Others have pointed to a culture of violence and that is certainly something that should be examined; however, it is beyond the scope of government – or should be.  Comedian George Carlin once said that he would rather his kids watch two people make love than kill each other but the way our culture has developed is to put greater restrictions on sexual content in programs and video games than that of violence.  Rabid anti-gun advocates are quick to move away from this conversation because it has the potential of derailing their attempts to take advantage of this situation.  However, the cultural elements must be considered.  To that end, consider this.  In a country with a long and uninterrupted history of gun ownership, such incidents are new – in the last 15 years.  Therefore, guns cannot be a major cause of this but something that has changed over the same time period.  To answer this concern, one must turn towards our culture and the traits that have altered and changed over this period. 

I do not profess to have all the answers though I am aware enough to know, based on past experiences and experiments, what will not work.  The anti-gun crowd is hoping that a wave of emotionalism will do where logic and evidence failed in the past.  Meanwhile, a handful of people are looking at what types of entertainment we are viewing and enjoying.  In the end, twenty-six people are dead and nothing we do will change that.  How we respond could prevent the next occasion but that is not guaranteed.  The level of anguish stems partly from our inability to answer questions.  Our answers lie within a disturbed young man who decided to end it all after his rampage.  Perhaps, our future lies in psychology and a better treatment and understanding of those in need.  It is a good place to start.

To Pose or Not to Pose...A Protest

Yoga teaches us to cure what need not be endured and endure what cannot be cured. 

               B.K.S. Iyengar

It might not be too surprising that a school district in California is one of the first ones to implement yoga as a form of exercise and physical education as a part of its curriculum.  There are other school districts around the country that hold yoga classes as part of their extracurricular activities.  However, it is the school district in Encinitas, California that is coming under fire for its program.  While the school district maintains that the yoga classes are part of a general wellness program, critics (including some parents) see it as an interjection of religion into schools. 

In the interest of disclosure, I am a fan of yoga and on occasion, have participated in Bikram Yoga – the variety done in a very hot room.  I’m familiar, if not competent, with the moves and poses done in a typical yoga class and, insofar as my experiences are normal, know the extent to which such a class would be or could be construed as religious.  Yoga originated as part of a spiritual exercise designed to highlight the importance of aligning the mind, body and spirit towards a unified purpose and transcend what the person, alone, can achieve.  It stems from Hinduism and emerged a couple of hundred years prior to the life of Jesus.  While the practice arose out of a spiritual context, the modern “wellness” movement does not play that angle up too much as its participants vary in their religious affiliation.  However, one could say that the particular religion is not important because yoga can be used to highlight any religious training that seeks to unite the earthly with the divine.  In short, in my limited experience, there does not seem to be a concerted effort to push one faith over another in the course of a typical yoga class. 

With that said, our attention returns to California.  The Encinitas United School District Superintendent Timothy Baird answered charges of the appropriateness of yoga, saying, “It’s physical.  It’s strength-building.  It increases flexibility but also deals with stress reduction and focusing.”  In short, the school district is seeing the practice more from a point of physical and mental amelioration.  One of the district’s yoga teachers emphasized that her and others like her work hard to keep the language and the direction of the class ecumenical.  However, some parents are not convinced and have pulled their students out of the class.  They object to certain postures and phrasing that would elicit questions that run contrary to their faith. 

Based on my previous experiences, classes such as these cater their presentation of yoga to be applicable to any personal conviction.  Indeed, all faiths have, as a component of its practice, a meditation-like function and insofar as that is true, students and adults of all faiths can apply the meaning they wish.  Parents should see this not as indoctrination, which is not the intention of the class but rather a search for well-being and right mindfulness on the part of the student.  Some school officials are seeing some benefit from students able to work stress out of the goal-oriented and success-oriented model of public schools.   

On the whole, if we can encourage greater physical fitness and a greater mental awareness, away from the hectic, pell-mell environment that competitive education can sometimes engender, I say let’s have it.  The religious concerns and the threats of lawsuits based on the establishment clause of the First Amendment are capricious.  I understand the concerns of interjecting religion into a school curriculum and the dangers it poses.  While there are many who practice the art of yoga as a religious devotion throughout the world, many more do so simply as a way to better tap into what they are capable of if they venture beyond themselves.   

 

Do As I Say, Not As I Do

…let us remember it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy…but rather because only a more civil and honest discourse can help us face up to the challenges of our nation, in a way that would make (the victims) proud.
            President Barack Obama at a speech in Tucson, Arizona, 12 January 2011

Last year, Teamsters president Jimmy Hoffa, during an address to union members declared, “President Obama, this is your army.  We are ready to march.  Let’s take these sons of bitches out.”  The “sons of bitches” in question were Republicans.  It appears that various union supporters in Michigan have taken this order to heart as it fights (literally) against the recently passed “right-to-work” legislation, which was signed into law by Governor Richard Snyder.  In the aftermath, the Republicans and other right-to-work supporters have been subjected to violence and the threat of more violence.    

As I come from a “union” state, I’m familiar with the rather heavy-handed approach they often use to make their points.  However, in the aftermath of the Michigan legislature’s actions over the last week, the unions in that bastion of unionism have ratcheted it up a notch in their protest.  At the head of this charge was Democratic State Representative Douglas Geiss, who declared that, “there will be blood.  There will be repercussions.”  It is difficult to know where to go from there when the opposition is actually declaring the need for bloodshed.  The hyperbole of the arguments used by union mouthpieces suggests a complete lack of logic and reason and the death throes of an institution.  The fact is, as columnist Charles Krauthammer made perfectly clear, the idea of “right-to-work” is a choice between high wages and high unemployment verses lower unemployment and a wider tax base – the latter something Michigan desperately needs. 

Outside the capital, union mobs increased the tension and the violence against anyone who dares propose a different course than the engrained path of unionism seen and upheld in Michigan for over a century.  The organization, Americans for Progress, attempted to put up a tent as part of a demonstration in favor of the legislation.  As they were nearly finished, a union mob descended upon them.  As the crowd worked themselves up, they began cursing and screaming at the people within and around the tent.  Soon, pushing and shoving ensued as AFP advocates were punched and knocked down while the union mob tore down the tent.  Various threats are easily heard on the tape.  It is not clear where the police were during the incident. 

It is easy to characterize these actions and words as those from a desperate and baseless group.  However, in Michigan, unions have wielded considerable power and enjoy unbridled support from the likes of no less than the president of the United States.  Mr. Obama’s support of these crowds, who in the last two years have perpetrated one violent encounter after another against their opponents, is particularly perplexing when one considers his own words.  After the attacks in Arizona that killed and maimed, most notably Rep. Gabby Giffords, the president was quick to suggest that there must be more civil discourse without the inflammatory and provocative.  He has as often chastised Republicans for their “rancor” but has uttered no condemnation of union aggressiveness.   

One of the things that supposedly holds our democracy apart from the squalors of dictatorship and totalitarianism is the rule of law and the belief in the democratic process.  Whatever is passed and not approved of by the people can be addressed in the following elections.  The tactics of mob violence and intimidation are the tools of bullies and fanatics.   President Obama said our discourse should provide a better place for our children.  Surely, he and the Democratic leadership can begin the process by disowning the methods of their own supporters.

The One Truly Philosophical Problem

There are some topics that are hard to discuss – not so much because the topic is difficult but the readers have no frame of reference.  For example, how can an American audience relate to the selling of children into prostitution because it brings money in for the family?  How can an American audience relate to the killing of government opposition in order to quell dissatisfaction?  Even more difficult is suicide as protest.  Sadly, Americans have plenty experience with suicide but only as it relates to mental illness – not as a form of protest from one of “sound mind and body.”  There was an interesting article in Foreign Policy on the psychological components of a suicide protestor, highlighting differences between sanguinary and communicative objectives but it is fair to also consider the effectiveness of the tactic.

My article is not a moral argument but more a practical one.  The two main types of suicide as protest (as also highlighted in the article) are suicide bombers (sanguinary) and suicide by self-immolation (communicative).  While both profess to do the same thing (attempt to alter a present condition through self-sacrifice), they are radically different in their approaches and in how others perceive the acts. 

The suicide bomber is largely seen negatively from a western mind-set because the protest involves the death of others (typically, innocents) and the motives are not always pure.  Studies done on the subject show that seldom are these “martyrs” ideologues.  Though these acts are not approved of, they are effective.  Suicide bombings have changed the course of European governments and have compelled them to accept what was generally considered antithetical to their beliefs.  Examples include Spain’s quick withdrawal from Iraq after the Madrid bombings and the condemnation over cartoons depicting Muhammad negatively instead of defense of free speech.  It would be one thing if these governments presented an argument that defined their policies separate from the bombings, especially in the case of Spain, but more typically, the hope is that by deferring they can avoid the possibility of bombings in their country. 

Never mind that we are talking about European countries and other western democracies responding to the actions and beliefs of a few, but ultimately, it might not matter.  Consider the recent violence between Israelis and Hamas.  The Palestinians fire rockets from schools, hospitals and other civilian centers.  They admit this in press conferences.  When Israel responds, world news outlets characterize the measure as brutal and criminal.  When Palestinian and Hamas leadership say they “must” fire from these locations, no one challenges their near-complete lack of rationale nor challenges their assertion that in the same breath, they blame the Israelis for killing their civilians.  This is in conjunction with suicide bombers sent into Israel but the actions are the same.  The use of sacrifice to make and implement a point but on a much larger scale than an individual bomber.  The sacrifices are working as Palestinians are gaining in international support. 

On the other hand, we see a recent uptick in self-immolation by Buddhist priests, a resurgence of an old tactic from the Viet Nam War era.  The most famous of these suicide protests was done by Vietnamese monk Thích Quẚng Dức in protest of the Ngo Dinh Diem government in the South in 1963.  These measures, most recently seen in Burma and Tibet, are universally admired and register with people because of the self-sacrifice, without other casualties, against a repressive regime.  There is also something to the pain and suffering that goes into the sacrifice, separate from the instantaneous and otherwise painless sacrifice of suicide bombers.  There is also a widely held belief that the sacrifice is being done by one much more aware and dedicated to their cause.  However, they are the least effective.  Neither the South Vietnamese government nor the more modern Burmese government was shaken by the protests and it was not what brought down these regimes.  Tibet activists have made little headway against China though they have gained world-wide support. 

What we hate, we respond to and what we appreciate, we ignore.  Part of this is due to China’s prominence in world affairs, as opposed to many Middle Eastern countries who largely play little economic role internationally.  With each suicide bomber, we witness the death and destruction and, for some, there is a permanent change in the perception of Islam as a faith of extremism.  To make matters worse, we validate and value that perception by how we respond.  We back away from time-honored liberties and rights while twisting our world view to accept the paradigm of terrorists.  In doing so, we also give no help to those who seek to right the ship and take back the core of Arab and Islamic values. 

Valhalla, I'm Coming...Maybe

The United Nations, based on a series of economic indicators from 2007, has recently released the list of the top countries to live in for 2012.  The top twenty countries are: 

1.      Norway

2.      Australia

3.      Iceland

4.      Canada

5.      Ireland

6.      Netherlands

7.      Sweden

8.      France

9.      Switzerland

10.  Japan

11.  Luxembourg

12.  Finland

13.  United States

14.  Austria

15.  Spain

16.  Denmark

17.  Belgium

18.  Italy

19.  Liechtenstein

20.  New Zealand 

I must admit to being intrigued by Scandinavia in general and Norway in particular.  Add to that Iceland and Sweden, also in the top ten, and it would make one heck of a road trip.  I think the United States deserve to be higher on the list (surely we can do better than France) but the list does highlight what many people believe to be true – the great white North is an attractive place.   

So, what draws me to the region?   A couple of things actually and at the top of the list are the history, mythology and culture.  Since I was a boy, I’ve been fascinated by the Vikings and their story of how they shaped the people, food and culture of the region is appealing.  For example, did you know that the Icelandic parliament, the Althing, is the oldest parliament in the world?  It was established in 930 and its sits outside the national capital, Reykjavik, which has geothermal heated sidewalks.  Norway was the birthplace of skiing – a sport that I’ve managed to do as worse as any other human being alive.  I was in the country as part of a military exercise and we had to be on skis.  This had to provide our Norwegian compatriots hours of fun.  On a side note, have you ever wondered who the first guy was that thought it was a good idea to put sticks of wood under his feet and go flying down a slick, snow-covered mountain side?  I bet he was made fun of for years.   

In Finland, they are known as the birthplace of saunas and its world championship of wife carrying.  I’m a bit more accustomed to saunas and thank God for them.  As for the wife-carrying, I’m not sure about that one but I’m not going to let it dampen my enthusiasm for Scandinavia.  Denmark is the home of Legos but I never played with those as a child (or as an adult) so I can’t say that is an attraction but there is a great crime show out of Denmark called The Eagle.  It is also the home of philosopher Soren Kierkegaard who influenced so many others and to walk in his steps would be wonderful.  Also as a child, I just assume that every woman in Sweden looked like Ingrid Bergman who transfixed me when I watched Casablanca.  As an adult, I know that is not possibly true but if it is only 50% true, it would be worth the visit.   

Of all these interesting and enticing facts, it can be blistering cold, the sun remains in the sky all day long during the summer (and not at all in the winter), the governments are wont to dabble in anti-Semitism and their taxes are extraordinary high.  Still, I am beginning to create an itinerary in my head.  Will I ever live there?  I checked with my aforementioned wonderful wife, who shook her head “no” without verbalizing her disinterest.  I can still dream, can’t I?