It's the ideology

Immediately following the Bastille Day incident, this meme

circulated on social media. Exactly who do they have in mind, I wonder?

An ideology isn't a religion, interestingly enough; it's "a system of ideas and ideals,

especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy."
Governance, position, influence ... I'm right and you're wrong.

If you've got a solution in mind, here's the root problem that has to be resolved.

Justifying the murder of innocents is based on a willingness to do harm to another, to reach your goal at the expense of another.

It's not a new idea.

Recent perpetrators include ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Boko Haram.  And governments.

In the early 90's, 857 cartons kept by the Iraqi secret police surfaced.  They contained detailed files describing genocide against the Kurds.  Time reported, 1 June 1992: 200,000 to 300,000 killed (late 80s).

The years before gave us the Rwandan genocide, the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia, the Holocaust under the Nazi Reich, the Armenian massacres by the Ottomans, the Nanking massacre, the Holodomor ....  In each case, the slaughter of innocents was directed by political leadership and justified by some rhetoric of superiority.

The colonial era cost the lives of more than half the population of Africa and the Americas with similar justification by perpetrators.

Centuries have passed, and they've not yet recovered. Ask a Mijikenda what it's like to be driven from your own lands. He can tell you now, but prior to the new constitution (2010) he'd be arrested and imprisoned for speaking ill of the government. Most of the 2000+ African tribes spent a century or more without any voice in their own governance while their  cultures were systematically destroyed, their resources were stolen and shipped off to foreign lands. And then, of course, there was three hundred years of slavery.

Untold millions have died in the name of our way, our rule, our empire.  What we see today is nothing new although the demographics of both perpetrators and victims have changed.  The world's population has tripled in my lifetime, and population densities have changed the geography and rhetoric of conflict.  The rationale, however, is unchanged since Herod ordered the execution of male babies in Bethlehem.  It's a power play risen from selfishness, perceived vulnerability, and perhaps opportunity for advancement.

Contributing to the problem, oppression, discrimination, disenfranchisement, and injustice have provoked an extraordinary degree of frustration and violence in communities, cultural groupings, and the world.  Add the two together, the power players and the oppressed, and the result is perhaps predictable.

It's the ideology, but go to the root.  It's not politics or religion, it's conquest for power and position, the climbing up over the bodies of others for personal gain.

The willingness and intent to do harm to another, to reach your goal at the expense of another ...

If you've got a solution in mind, that's the root problem that has to be addressed.

Different

The Angalamman Festival is celebrated each year in a town called Kaveripattinam in Tamil Nadu.

Devotees, numbering in tens of thousands, converge in this town the day after Maha Shivratri to

worship the deity Angalamman, meaning 'The Guardian God'. During the festival some of the

worshippers paint their faces that personifies Goddess Kali. Other indulge in the ritual of

piercing iron rods through their cheeks.

Just how different might we be in our varied cultures? There are bizarre differences, of course, and then there are all the similarities.  We care about each other, we care about our children and hope to see them healthy and safe and well equipped; we hope for peace and a good life for all.

Breathtaking pictures by National Geographic contributors and others give us a brief look into a different world. How might we relate across such a divide?

And ... how many places and people are there that would be just stunning to see and know?

Perhaps an interesting question for us all, is our view of 'the world' big enough?  Does it include these who might be so different from us? And if God so loved 'the world', does that suggest we might need to do anything differently? 

Is the fact that we're different a problem?

I suspect we'd be surprised how many things we have in common with these interesting folks.

Look both ways ...

At the border, to the north is wealth, to the south is poverty.  Why?

In the case of Nogales, the difference between the two sides of the border is the governance under which they live. Everything else is pretty much the same, isn't it.  On Mexico's side of the equation, there's a distinct favoritism and an elite structure that limits competition and keeps the common folks from making any particular economic progress.  To the north, entrepreneurship, competition, patent rights, monopoly law, and property rights open the door for many. Minimum wage used to help; now not so much.

Life in Nogales, Mexico, 1999.  Little
has changed since then.

To be sure, there are wealthy people and poor people living on this planet. Some have mansions, others are homeless. Some have caviar for breakfast while others starve. Some avoid paying taxes, others die of curable diseases because they can’t afford medicine.

Agriculture in North Korea is inefficient and
vulnerable.  Half the country's population
 lives in extreme poverty.

North and South Korea are an interesting case.  One of the poorest and one of the wealthiest countries in the world; they come from the same history, geography, ancestry, language, and culture, yet the difference is stunning.  North of the border, famine kills people, and half the population lives in extreme poverty. Again the only difference between the two is governance.

The wealth of an honest man is different than the riches of an oppressor, or a usurper of rights.  Mubarak, for instance; he and his family were worth billions, all extracted from the Egyptian economy before he was driven from office.

We have governments and regulatory agencies that do or don't serve us well.  All of us.

That brings us back to our issue of inequality.  

In the U.S., inequality (the GAP) began accelerating in the 70's, and the wealthy have made extraordinary gains.  Note the household income chart here.  For the bottom economic half, gains are due to more household members in the workforce while wages have been stagnant.  Below the halfway mark, household income hasn't kept up with increases in cost of living.  Particularly, education and healthcare are less accessible.

For too many, there have been difficult choices between children's education, retirement savings, and owning a home.  Typically, households live payday to payday, and the only option for some is living in a high-density, high-turnover neighborhood, not the best place to raise children.

Both education and healthcare costs have been inflated by programmatics rather than by value.  The student loan initiative caused college costs to elevate well ahead of nominal inflation rates.  It was supposed to make it more available but has had a significant detrimental effect opposite to intent.  Health care costs have followed a similar path.

Inequality between countries is a result of governance, internal and international.  

Inequality inside a country is the result of preferential governance.  It's perhaps not intended to be abusive to the lower economic segment, but it's certainly as effective as if designed for that purpose.

A failed minimum wage policy gave us Walmart and an end to many local businesses. Originally intended to protect workers, the minimum wage has lagged behind cost of living increases until today, it is worth 20% less than in the 60's.  Households now can't survive on a minimum wage job, of course. Even two full-time minimum wage jobs don't get a family above the poverty line.  We pay for welfare and assistance programs for the underpaid workers, something their employers should be paying, but they don't.  

The wage policy and regulatory processes weren't intended to do harm, and early on, they helped significantly.  After years of inattention, however, it appears that they've detrimentally reshaped a large portion of our economy and culture.

College costs have increased about 800% since I enrolled at UT fifty years ago.  Household income has increased less than a twentieth of that for all but the wealthiest.  That means that every year, fewer regular folks can send their kids to college.  That didn't just happen, it was the result of governance and regulation.  It served the wealthy quite well, but we've seen an accelerating inequality that affects more and more of our citizens.  It's not an accident, and it's not something chosen by the less fortunate among us.

Poverty isn't something you choose.  It's done to you.  Do the research for yourself.

Today's troublesome issues:
Inequality
Discrimination
Oppression
Access
Education
Healthcare
Employment
Advancement
Fair treatment
Fair wages
Fair representation
Prejudice
Hatred
Injustice
Marginalization
Disenfranchisement
Religious extremism
Opportunity denied
Selfishness
Greed
Malice
and
Willingness to do harm to another


As if we didn't have enough to do. :)

Power depends on inequality

Supply-side economics proposes that tax decreases lead

to economic growth. Historical data, however, shows

no correlation between lower top marginal tax

rates and GDP growth rate.

There have been attempts at equal opportunity and mutual benefit, and at caring for those less fortunate.  Today in America, the wealthy have a great chance at a great education, a great career, and a great income, but the bottom 80% or so do not.  For fifty years, they've lost ground, and the gap has widened. Why might that be?  Was it deliberate?

"Occupy Wall Street, the Arab Spring, the African uprisings, even the anti-austerity stance of new political parties in Spain and Greece, all have one thing in common: a recognition that the only way for a tiny group of people to become obscenely rich is for huge masses of others to be kept chronically poor." ~JASON HICKEL, JOE BREWER, AND MARTIN KIRK 03.12.15

Supply-side policies favoring the wealthy make them

wealthier at the expense of everyone else.  No
surprise. That's what we've done for
 four decades.

Is this perhaps a good time to reopen the discussion? It's called 'economic inequality' or the GAP, and it has spread through our financial system and trade agreements to the world. When 'too big' is part of the conversation, there are needed adjustments that are perhaps unlikely to be easy.

'Supply-side economics' or 'trickle down' are a known disaster for everyone except the wealthy.

Tax decreases on high income earners (top 10%) are not correlated with employment growth, however, tax decreases on lower income earners (bottom 90%) are correlated with employment growth.  No surprise.

So the continuing favoritism shown by each administration to large corporations and the financial industry is despite the evidence that such policies serve only the wealthy and do so at the expense of the common citizen.  Yes, that's what we see.  Government regulation appears to be available for purchase if you're wealthy enough.

Justification

"No God condones terror.  No grievance justifies the taking of innocent lives, or the oppression of those who are weaker or fewer in number."

Interesting remarks by the president at a prayer breakfast remind us that what we see in ISIS is not a uniquely Middle East horror.

"We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism -- terrorizing religious minorities like the Yezidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions."

"So how do we, as people of faith, reconcile these realities -- the profound good, the strength, the tenacity, the compassion and love that can flow from all of our faiths, operating alongside those who seek to hijack religion for their own murderous ends?"

He went on to paint reality as it is, "Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ."

He didn't mention the thousands of lynchings of black Americans.  He could have, though.  Blacks, well into the 20th century, understood their place wasn't necessarily a safe one.  Lynching (reported) continued into the mid-60's (or 80's). Hate crimes continue.  Orlando, Dallas, San Bernardino, Boston.

March 2014, a leader of the Traditional American Knights of the KKK told a reporter, “We are a Christian organization.”  "It's not a hateful thing to want to maintain White Supremacy," he explained.  On a Twitter feed, he claimed the Klan is “about love for God, race and nation.”  Imagine the confusion in the minds of children being raised in that culture.

It's worth remembering that such hatred and discrimination are destructive and murderous. Justification by religious rhetoric only compounds the depth of harm done.

Dealing with root issues is difficult.

In 1970, I was in a Navy school in Georgia.  My friend Freddie and I had Sunday free and were glad for the chance to get away, go to church, and eat lunch off base.  At the Baptist church in town, we were met by the deacons as we entered, "You'll want to go someplace else," the head deacon told us.  It hadn't occurred to Freddie or to me that him being black was an issue.  I don't hold a grudge, and I hope Freddie doesn't, but that particular knife wound in my heart still hurts a bit sometimes.

When I see hatred and selfishness played out under some religious veil today, well, it's difficult to respond graciously, as you might imagine.  "No God condones terror.  No grievance justifies the taking of innocent lives, or the oppression of those who are weaker or fewer in number." ⁽¹⁾

Liberty and justice for all, as we're reminded today ...
That's our declaration, our deeply-held conviction, perhaps our calling.

We are thankful for every life and inspired by every individual who courageously stands for justice.  It's no small service.

___________________________________________________
Consider: Terrorism has no religion as a perhaps starting point for further inquiry.
Or (ref), (ref) (ref), it is an ongoing discussion and objectivity is difficult for the fearful.

No big deal

Judge William Young sentencing the shoe bomber

Remember the fellow who got on a plane with a bomb built into his shoe and tried to light it?

His trial is over.

Prior to sentencing, the Judge asked the defendant if he had anything to say.  His response: after admitting his guilt to the court for the record, Reid also admitted his "allegiance to Osama bin Laden, to Islam, and to the religion of Allah," defiantly stating, "I think I will not apologize for my actions," and told the court "I am at war with your country."

Here's what the Judge Young had to say:

"Mr. Richard C. Reid, hearken now to the sentence the Court imposes upon you.

On counts 1, 5 and 6 the Court sentences you to life in prison in the custody of the United States Attorney General. On counts 2, 3, 4 and 7, the Court sentences you to 20 years in prison on each count, the sentence on each count to run consecutively. (That's 80 years.)

On count 8 the Court sentences you to the mandatory 30 years, again to be served consecutively to the 80 years just imposed. The Court imposes upon you for each of the eight counts a fine of $250,000, that's an aggregate fine of $2 million. The Court accepts the government's recommendation with respect to restitution and orders restitution in the amount of $298.17 to Andre Bousquet and $5,784 to American Airlines.

The Court imposes upon you an $800 special assessment. The Court imposes upon you, five years supervised release simply because the law requires it. But the life sentences are real life sentences so I need go no further.

This is the sentence that is provided for by our statutes. It is a fair and just sentence. It is a righteous sentence.

Now, let me explain this to you. We are not afraid of you or any of your terrorist co-conspirators, Mr. Reid. We are Americans. We have been through the fire before. There is too much war talk here and I say that to everyone with the utmost respect. Here in this court, we deal with individuals as individuals and care for individuals as individuals. As human beings, we reach out for justice.

You are not an enemy combatant. You are a terrorist. You are not a soldier in any war. You are a terrorist. To give you that reference, to call you a soldier, gives you far too much stature. Whether the officers of government do it, or your attorney does it, or if you think you are a soldier, you are not-----, you are a terrorist. And we do not negotiate with terrorists. We do not meet with terrorists. We do not sign documents with terrorists. We hunt them down one by one and bring them to justice.

So war talk is way out of line in this court. You are a big fellow. But you are not that big. You're no warrior. I've known warriors. You are a terrorist. A species of criminal that is guilty of multiple attempted murders. In a very real sense, State Trooper Santiago had it right when you first were taken off that plane and into custody and you wondered where the press and the TV crews were, and he said:

'You're no big deal.'

You are no big deal.

What your able counsel and what the equally able United States attorneys have grappled with and what I have, as honestly as I know how, tried to grapple with, is why you did something so horrific. What was it that led you here to this courtroom today?

I have listened respectfully to what you have to say. And I ask you to search your heart and ask yourself what sort of unfathomable hate led you to do what you are guilty, and admit you are guilty, of doing? And, I have an answer for you. It may not satisfy you, but as I search this entire record, it comes as close to understanding as I know.

It seems to me, you hate the one thing that to us is most precious. You hate our freedom. Our individual freedom. Our individual freedom to live as we choose, to come and go as we choose, to believe or not believe as we individually choose. Here, in this society, the very wind carries freedom. It carries it everywhere from sea to shining sea. It is because we prize individual freedom so much that you are here in this beautiful courtroom, so that everyone can see, truly see, that justice is administered fairly, individually, and discretely. It is for freedom's sake that your lawyers are striving so vigorously on your behalf, have filed appeals, will go on in their representation of you before other judges.

We Americans are all about freedom. Because we all know that the way we treat you, Mr. Reid, is the measure of our own liberties. Make no mistake though. It is yet true that we will bear any burden; pay any price, to preserve our freedoms. Look around this courtroom. Mark it well. The world is not going to long remember what you or I say here. The day after tomorrow, it will be forgotten, but this, however, will long endure.

Here in this courtroom and courtrooms all across America , the American people will gather to see that justice, individual justice, justice, not war, individual justice, is in fact being done. The very President of the United States through his officers, will have to come into courtrooms and lay out evidence on which specific matters can be judged and juries of citizens will gather to sit and judge that evidence democratically, to mold and shape and refine our sense of justice.

See that flag, Mr. Reid? That's the flag of the United States of America . That flag will fly there long after this is all forgotten. That flag stands for freedom. And it always will.

Mr. Custody Officer. Stand him down." 

______________________________________

Not bad, sir. Not bad at all.