For the Love of Country



I am a self-exiled expatriate. It isn’t easy to leave that which you’ve loved, respected and honored for oh so many years. I continued to love and respect America even after maturing and learning of, then having to admit to, all of her faults, missteps, unconscionable acts and less than honorable transactions. After all, no country is perfect and achieving or inheriting the role of guardian of the free world is a daunting responsibility. Thus, for much of my life I found it easy to look past America’s faults and her less than stellar actions, and continued to love my democratic republic born of a constitution that grants freedom and equality to all, in a system based upon principles of justice, opportunity and fair play. But at some point it all began to unravel and my love of country became sorely tested.

As I think about it, it’s probably my own fault, my own shortcoming for loving my country in the first place. It may not be such a good idea to love your country; be proud of it and strive to be a good productive citizen, but don’t love it. Love is too often the product of idealized notions that are impossible to live up to or sustain over the long haul. Love, as they say, is blind. And that is why so many go through life blindly accepting that which should morally and ethically be rejected.

Where, one may ask, is my sense of forgiveness? If I truly loved my country, wouldn’t I be willing and able to forgive her for past transgressions? Shouldn’t I savor the many positive aspects of my country and acknowledge the good that has come to the world as a result of American initiatives? Maybe. And I think I could do that if I saw evidence that the once greatest nation on earth was progressing once again toward those attributes that we hold in high esteem, that the rest of the world envies us for and that made America so great.

But that is not what I see. I see arrogance and condescension resulting in unilateral incursions into other sovereign nations, nations much smaller and strategically weaker, whose threats to our security have proven to be fabricated, exaggerated and sadly often the result of our own nefarious initiatives. Remember that Saddam Hussein was armed and supported by the United States when it fit America’s aims. The Taliban, too, received American support when they were fighting the Soviet Union. Then there was Fidel Castro, the Shah of Iran, the Contras in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile, even Noriega in Panama, not to mention more than one worthless puppet in South Viet Nam.

The principles upon which America was built and flourished are praised and quoted by multitudes of proud American patriots who refuse to accept the fact that those principles are being trampled on, ignored, circumvented and usurped by those who wield the power granted to them by those very same proud patriots. Rather than demanding that America lives up to its guiding principles and constitutional guarantees, American patriots eagerly align themselves with the left or the right, Democrats or Republicans, and fight, not for America’s rights, but for the “rights” of the powerful and wealthy interest groups that spend more money to shape and warp their thoughts, win elections and control legislation; in essence, more to gain and maintain power, than to promote or protect the rights and principles that made America great.

Along the way, Americans have developed a rather unhealthy and detrimental arrogance. It is evident in their unwillingness to acknowledge the superiority of any other nation’s attributes despite overwhelming evidence of that superiority. These Americans refuse to even consider adopting that which they consider un- or non-American and therefore inferior. This can be seen in negative attitudes expressed toward mass transit, universal health care, more paid vacation time, to name a few. After all, they reason, this is the Land of Opportunity, of Free Enterprise, of Rugged Individualism where the sky is the limit and anyone who doesn’t agree that everything American is the greatest, or at least much better than it is anywhere else, should just leave. They are convinced that actors, athletes, investment bankers, talk show hosts, corporate executives are all worth the millions and billions that they are paid because that’s what America is all about. They fail to take into consideration that all of those mentioned above would still be doing exactly what they are doing even if they were limited to a fraction of what they are currently being paid. For you see, they would still be amongst the wealthiest Americans and they would still have their status and celebrity and enjoy the good life. If they were limited, say to one tenth of their current income, how many of them do you think would decide to turn their backs on their careers and start interviewing for jobs in retail, transportation, food service, teaching or child care? Capitalism would still be strong and viable without the vast gap between the haves and have nots. Can it continue to prosper though, without a strong middle class? We shall see.

A nation so fortunate to have been shaped by the wisdom of America’s visionary forefathers, plus having the opportunity to grow and develop under the relative protection of its insular ocean borders, prides itself on being non-aggressive. America proclaims that she does not seek to colonize. Technically that is true, but in the name of self-protection American military dominance and economic might have brought bullying pressure to bear on weaker nations, negatively influencing attitudes and insisting on acts of compliance that often have proven detrimental to peace and stability.

I had hoped that the election of President Obama would signal a change. In some
ways it did, but mostly, I’m afraid, it is all rhetoric. Healthcare reform is looking more and more like a watered-down, insurance-backed fiasco. The criminals in the financial sector have been baled out by the taxpayers and are back manning the coffers and stuffing their pockets. The over-stressed “volunteer” military seems committed to endless, unjustifiable and bad wars. A nation that is well situated to improve foreign relations, to mend its economic ills and progress toward greater overall prosperity, is failing to do so.



Consequently I find myself adjusting to life in my adopted country. It is not perfect and I certainly recognize some of its shortcomings. But its people are not arrogant. It strives to be more egalitarian than authoritarian. It has both wealthy and poor citizens. But the middle class is strong and vibrant, not being smothered. My fear now is that I just might fall in love with it.
A.N. Pavia
November 2009

Confused & Conflicted

CONFUSED & CONFLICTED

My Views on the Abortion Debate


Oh, yes, I am confused. I consider myself somewhat superior. That’s only because I can point to certain of my attributes in which I find justifiable rationale that support my superiority complex. Sadly however, I am under the impression that everyone else holds similarly inflated opinions of themselves. If I’m right about that, and no doubt I am, I don’t understand all of the antiabortion sentiment.

A trip to the mall, dinner at a favorite restaurant, a drive along any of our fine highways, an evening at the movies, all provide the inevitable encounter with other people; many, maybe most it seems to me, are living, walking testimonials in support of abortion. Though in some cases it seems justified, I do not advocate retroactively taking measures that would achieve what abortions could easily have accomplished years ago. Looking forward though, I am hopeful and reasonably optimistic for future generations. All we need is to apply a little more common sense to the issue.

Now lest you brand me a white supremacist, a Christian supremacist, a Hitler, a Muslim supremacist, a black supremacist or any other hate-group advocate, let me dash such thoughts. There are no superior groups. Every race, creed, religion, tribe, club, society has more than its share of undesirables. There is no avoiding it. Where there are people there are losers. Logically then, where there are fewer people there will be fewer losers. It’s a numbers thing. Mathematics are involved here, specifically probability.

All of this, I’m afraid, causes me to be baffled by the strong stands being taken against abortion. The strongest objections seem to be based on religious beliefs. It is claimed that God said, “Go forth and multiply.” If God did say that, I say, fine, we’ve done that and we’ve done a good job of it. And you must admit that we continue to multiply even while abortions are going on. Some also say that God said, “Let there be light.” Nonetheless, it’s dark about half of the time. So much for literal interpretations. And God is also credited with admonishing that, “Thou shalt not kill.” Well, I’m not advocating for forty days and forty nights of rain, bringing floods to kill off any and all who aren’t on my ark. No one is advocating mandatory abortions, only freedom of choice. If you don’t want an abortion because of religious beliefs, don’t have one. If I do, that’s my decision. It doesn’t concern you. If God doesn’t like it, let God and me deal with it. He doesn’t need your help. Have faith. Surely He is mighty enough to do His own work. After all, no one was around to help Him with that flood.

Restricting or eliminating abortion results in increased numbers of unwanted children being brought into an already unfriendly world. No one wants to be or should be unwanted. The consequences of being unwanted can be devastating. Personally, I’d rather deal with it as a fetus than as an abused or ignored foundling.

There are those who insist on promoting the crap-shoot consequences often attributed to abortions. What if, they say, an abortion denies us a genius, an Einstein, a Mozart? No individual, no matter how significant, how unique, is indispensable. As the Desiderata eloquently reassures us, “No doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.”

But in the end, as is so often the case, it comes down to the almighty dollar. Who pays for a woman’s abortion? There are those who grudgingly acknowledge the legal status of abortion, but staunchly object to paying for them with “taxpayer” dollars – as if abortions were a major factor contributing to the national debt or our skyrocketing health care costs. The fallacy of that objection is its failure to take into consideration the long term total costs. An abortion is less expensive and less of a financial burden on society than child welfare, education, incarceration and the other potential costs to society that result from unwanted and neglected children.

Not only should we favor free choice, we should enthusiastically support and pay for abortion. Granted I’d still be subjected to encounters with undesirables and losers, but there’d probably be fewer of them.

A.N. Pavia
November 2009

Just a Little Hate

Just a Little Hate


Eyes open
searching for that which has changed
Hope holding fast
though no progress yet gained
Leaving hate ever growing
becoming ingrained

Hoping
moping
doping
mostly misanthroping
Feeble endeavors
attempts at mere coping
You try to get out
but there’s no place to go
Traveling in circles
in hate’s undertow

Hate
it’s a verb
it’s a noun
an adjective of late
Describing what one will not tolerate
such as tastes that the palate won’t cultivate
All of which we adamantly say that we hate

We hate
the snow
the wind
the cold
the heat
broccoli, liver, any gristly meat
Neighbors
bosses
and cops – ‘til we need ‘um
Then of course there’s noise
maybe silence
and God forbid tedium



To hate is so easy
a natural state
Covers what we don’t know
can’t contemplate
If it’s different or foreign or just out of date
there are plenty of reasons to bring on a spate

Greeks and Slovaks
Russians Ukraine’s
haughtily flaunt their long strange-sounding names
So it’s okay to despise them
with the rest of those sots
the Rag Heads the Frogs
the Spades Krauts and Wops

We’ve got hate groups a plenty
committing hate crimes
which I’d never heard of
until recent times

We hate weeds
but not weed
In others it’s greed
But in ourselves it’s that goddamned
dependent need

So gather around
It is time we insist
that the nation compile an official hate list
All can contribute
yours won’t contradict
We’ve a capacity for hating
damn near limitless

A.N. Pavia May, 2009

ONLY IN AMERICA

The question concerns health care reform. The answer, if one exists, is indecipherable, lost in the milieu of information, misinformation, preconceived notions, fears, ignorance and, oh yes, POLITICS. Well, I too am possessed of information, no doubt some misinformation, a few preconceived notions, a bit of fear and more than enough ignorance. But fortunately, no politics.

On the surface it would seem that eliminating politics from the list would provide an advantage, one less factor to muddy the waters. But in fact, it has the opposite effect. Those influenced by the politics of the issue need not be overly concerned with the other factors. Rather, they can simply saddle up with the right (no reform will ever pass on Obama's watch) or the left (reform at any cost) and then, unfortunately, both sides can resort to the information, misinformation and preconceived notions enabling them to act on our fear and ignorance, in the end resulting in ineffective or detrimental legislation.

This much I can tell you. In the past year I've been able to reduce my auto insurance by 22 percent. My homeowner insurance was increased by a mere 7 percent. My Medicare supplemental premium payments, however, have gone up 190 percent. During that time, all of the influencing factors -- the is, my car and driving record, my house and my health status -- have not changed. Comparing these factors is probably an example of my ignorance; one who better understands these things may well tell me they are meaningless, an apples to oranges comparisons. Maybe. But when I project the 190 percent increase into the future, I'm stricken by that fear factor and regret that my family did not emigrate to Scandinavia when I was six. Then I'd be living amongst those lazy, overtaxed, underachieving, socially dependent folks who somehow happen to have better health care, less expensive health care, a higher standard of living, greater longevity and, most even say, a happier existence.

Nonetheless, as I see it, the American Dream is still alive and well here in "The Greatest Nation on Earth". That is, while dreaming of winning the lottery, the reality of our political arrogance drives us steadily down an ever-degrading world status, and keeps us naively supporting our unsustainable system.

A Case For Sound Reason

A CASE FOR SOUND REASON


Two hundred thirty three years ago Thomas Paine’s Common Sense stirred the majority of New World colonists to fervently support the risky quest for independence. Later, however, his reliance on Reason to dispel the tenacious hold that organized religion had on men’s minds proved detrimental to his popularity, bringing him disrespect, financial difficulties and almost an early death. The lessons derived from the legacy left by Paine say volumes about man’s psyche; most emphatically that when establishing political, economic or social values, man is driven by emotion and preconceived dogma rather than guided by common sense or reason. As the economy falls precipitously toward dreaded depths, as more lives are spent fighting disastrous wars and as obscene wealth and corruption act to obliterate the once vibrant and indispensable middle class, driving more and more folks toward or into poverty, we continue to cling doggedly to our long-held beliefs and values, unwilling or unable to open our minds to new or different ideas. Common sense and reason seem to be nonviable options to the multitudes naively ensconced with a sheep-like mentality, a mentality that is leading us toward our own destruction.

The long-held notion that man needs heroes may or may not be true. If true, then it is time to reevaluate what constitutes a hero. For starters can we agree that mere celebrity status does not equate to heroic status? Then, without diminishing our respect and appreciation for the jobs they do, can we somehow get past the ridiculous notion that everyone in uniform is a hero? Accepting those two provisos would put us in a position to establish more realistic heroic standards. Armed with truer heroic standards, our sheep mentality would at least be leading us toward more favorable aspirations.

We are rapidly approaching the point at which sound reasoning will be a necessity if civilization is to prevail. Rather than paying lip service to the lessons of history, we must apply what those lessons are trying to teach, and those lessons go beyond merely those of Thomas Paine. Heading the list, of course, is our insane rationalization for war. Hindsight clearly reveals the disaster of our involvement in Viet Nam. And what reasonable mind can justify the Iraq fiasco? There may be legitimate justifications for declaring war but before we puff up our chests and head out to kick some ass, we damn well better consider not only the consequences of our actions but also our objectives; and equally important, determine ( again with sound reasoning ) if those consequences and objectives justify the insanity. One can make that determination legitimately only if he will be making that supreme sacrifice himself, or sending his children off to make the sacrifice, in support of the war. It is not acceptable to favor war if you’ll be relying on others to do the fighting and the sacrificing for you. It is deceptively easy to send others, those we’re comforted by labeling “volunteers”, off to fight and die while we remain at home where all is normal.



ALL IS NORMAL

A dog barks
The rabbit, stark still, stares as I pass
Chipmunks scurry, preparing for winter’s hibernation
Birds chirp, queuing restlessly at neighborhood feeders
All is normal.

Traffic rumbles, congests, honks, in constant motion
I hear a jet pass overhead, commercial not fighter
There is no gunfire, no mortar explosions
I see no rubble, no bombed-out cars
All is normal.

I pass quiet homes with neatly trimmed lawns
There’s a church, a school, a few busy shops
A roar from the ballpark announces a score
While the smells of coffee and pastry, urge me on
All is normal.

I read the headlines:
War rages on, death tolls mount
There’s more corruption, more scandal
But that’s not here… Here
All is normal.

Dare we apply reason and common sense to other issues threatening our well being? If so, we must be willing to understand and acknowledge what is and let go of our preconceived notions of what ought to be. Ayn Rand’s Relative Objectivism presents, on the surface, a temptingly convincing case for a laissez-faire approach to socio-economic policies. Similarly, Ronald Reagan’s concept of trickle-down economics carries a degree of theoretical credibility. But there are two factors that impact the efficacy of theoretical applications, and all too often these factors are ignored or not even recognized when considering policy changes. The first has to do with the established, already mature, environment into which change is being considered. That is, you must be cognizant of the fact that you are not starting from ground zero; political, social and economic conditions already exist that will act upon any changes or new applications implemented. The second factor, simply stated though full of complex consequences, is human nature. We tend to support that which we believe will benefit or at least not be detrimental to ourselves, rarely giving adequate consideration to what may actually be best in the long run. Is this not evident to some degree by the harm we inflict upon the environment in the name of economic progress? It follows then that for any problem-solving proposals dealing with social, economic or political issues one must consider the world (civilization and environment) as it exists today and then factor in the human character as it has portrayed itself throughout human history.

If these two factors were more seriously considered during policy-making processes, different and more beneficial proposals may often result. The concept, for example, of lowering taxes to stimulate the economy may have some merit. However, in the real world today, with the astronomical chasm between rich and poor, tax reductions in the United States have not produced the positive results anticipated. Why? Because those living from paycheck to paycheck, along with those in even more dire economic straits, do not gain enough additional buying power through tax cuts to significantly impact the economy; nor do tax cuts provide enough for them to overcome their economic plight. These are, in fact, the folks who would provide the economic stimulus if only they had discretionary income to spend. As for the very wealthy, they already have the wherewithal to make significant purchases and invest in job-creating enterprises without the added stimulus of a tax cut. A tax cut to them is all too often nothing more than another means of increasing their already obscene wealth. We pay lip service in support of a strong and vibrant middle class, yet policies that would actually benefit and solidify that middle class are put down as socialistic. It follows then, quite logically as we’ve all been taught, that any proposal labeled socialistic should be doomed as un-American regardless of its merits. This attitude dominates even amongst staunch Americans who rely on, and defend their justifiable right to receive, their Social Security checks regardless of their actual contribution to the program. And then we have human nature to consider. Cognizance of the human factor quite possibly would have prevented the financial disaster we’re faced with today. It would have enabled, maybe even required, us to acknowledge man’s inherent greed, a greed which precipitated this dishonesty and corruption. And let us not overlook the arrogance and hubris that seems to emanate from the power of wealth.

What will it take in this complex, interconnected global community to get people to recognize the limits and possible flaws in their preconceived and personally unchallenged convictions? Whatever that is, there are no indications that it will happen in the foreseeable future. Our beliefs, be they political, social or religious are too seldom subjected to the scrutiny of reason or fact-finding. “True Facts” such as: The earth is flat. The universe is 6000 years old. Raising taxes on the wealthy adversely impacts economic stimulation. Transfer payments or welfare are economically detrimental, stripping the poor of the drive to succeed on their own. The “you fill in the blank” war was necessary to preserve our freedom and democratic way of life. The white race is the superior race. The democratic republic of the United States, though not perfect, is the best form of government ever devised. Healthcare in the U.S. is the best in the world. The list is endless and, at one time or another, too many people believed or still believe these “true facts”.

Religious fervor, driven by an irrational fear of death and life thereafter, leaves no room in man’s mind for reason. To believe that a Supreme Being created man and gave him the ability to reason, then demands that man suspend his reasoning ability in order to believe in Him, seems ludicrous. In religious terms it borders on blasphemy. Despite the
efforts of Thomas Paine, Bertrand Russell, Albert Einstein, Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris to name just a few, not to mention the satirical humor from the likes of Mark Twain, George Carlin and Bill Maher, the powers of superstition and religious indoctrination, acting on that overpowering fear of death, keep too many of us clinging to a faith that defies reason and will sooner or later lead us ironically to our own demise. But then, isn’t that the ultimate objective of those who buy into Revelations and the belief in Armageddon and the fanciful delusion of the Rapture?

But all is not hopeless, for today we are blessed with a mushrooming glut of information – not always reliable or accurate information, but nonetheless plenty of it. Be it via radio, television, printed publications or the internet, one can always find “facts” that substantiate his own point of view. All of this should point out the necessity of questioning that which we read and hear, of challenging our beliefs and opinions and finally of relying on reason when making decisions that will impact our future well-being. But that may be asking too much. It is by far easier, exceedingly more natural and certainly more comforting to cling to that which we “know”. And so I write, not with the expectation of publishing, which would add to that mind-boggling glut of information, nor do I write to influence others. I write for posterity; to be on record so that one day when there is no one left to make any difference, when we’ve inflicted all the damage our planet can sustain, I will be able to say, “I told you so!”