As I have not been around DI of late, I thought I'd pop in just momentarily to reiterate my adoration (no, that's not too strong a word) of Jon Stewart. His show recently won an Emmy and in a poll conducted by Time Magazine over the summer, he was once again named the most trusted journalist in America.
Some find that appalling, that a comedian doing "fake news" would be trusted - but not only do I not find it a surprise, I find it emblematic of what is great about our country. Yep, strangely enough, I believe that beyond all of the nonsense foisted upon us by the fear-mongers and the naysayers and the hand-wringers, above the greed and corruption, the re-emergence of public racism and class-ism that has knocked the very wind out of us over this last year - we, as a culture, have maintained one vital component of our identity as a nation.
We still have a senses of humor. Most importantly, we can still poke fun at ourselves.
Stewart takes on the rightwing nutjobs with LMAO-level attacks, but he just as willingly puts Obama and the Democratic congressfolk smack in their liberal places. He brilliantly points out the hypocrisy by putting videos back-to-back in which politicians completely contradict themselves. He forces us to see the political blustering for what it is, and gives voice to sanity in the midst of complete crazy. He makes sure we never forget our humanity.
Last week, he took on the absurdly ridiculous overreaction to the elementary school in New Jersey in which children sang a song about the new President during Black History Month. As he points out, no one complained about it at the time. And Stewart's lampooning of the way the rightwing media turned this non-story into something murky and evil became especially potent when he pulled out video of school children in New Orleans singing a song in which they THANK THE LORD for Bush and FEMA!!! Good grief. The twinkle in Stewart's eyes as he reads the lyrics that group of kids sang is priceless.
Carry on -
Because the citizens keep losing out to the political clout of banks, insurance companies and other well-monied industries, it's especially good to see the People of the United States win one against the telecoms. The FCC came down strongly in favor of net neutrality today. This is an incredibly important day for those of us who believe in grassroots politics and the fair and free exchange of ideas. For those not clear on the stakes, I refer you to my earlier report on the importance of net neutrality
based on Tim Wu's explanation at the 2007 National Conference on Media Reform in Memphis.
Today, the FCC announced two new guiding principles regarding use of the Internet:
- Broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications; and
- Providers of broadband Internet access must be transparent about their network management practices.
This is how I propose we move forward: To date, the Federal Communications Commission has addressed these issues by announcing four Internet principles that guide our case-by-case enforcement of the communications laws. These principles can be summarized as: Network operators cannot prevent users from accessing the lawful Internet content, applications, and services of their choice, nor can they prohibit users from attaching non-harmful devices to the network.
The principles were initially articulated by Chairman Michael Powell in 2004 as the “Four Freedoms,” and later endorsed in a unanimous 2005 policy statement issued by the Commission under Chairman Kevin Martin and with the forceful support of Commissioner Michael Copps, who of course remains on the Commission today. In the years since 2005, the Internet has continued to evolve and the FCC has issued a number of important bipartisan decisions involving openness. Today, I propose that the FCC adopt the existing principles as Commission rules, along with two additional principles that reflect the evolution of the Internet and that are essential to ensuring its continued openness.
Fifth Principle of Non-Discrimination
The fifth principle is one of non-discrimination -- stating that broadband providers cannot discriminate against particular Internet content or applications.
It is refreshing to hear someone from time to time call something by what it actually is. Frank Schaeffer is a former evangelical christian whose father was one of the most influential in the budding fundamentalist movement back int he Sixties and Seventies. Schaeffer recounts his life in the memoir Crazy For God.
This is a man was was there, involved, part of it. Doubtless many who did not snap out of it along the way think he's a traitor, that he's been possessed by Satan, that he is evil. Yet that still doesn't answer the criticisms he brings to the subject.
A recent poll in New Jersey has revealed that one in three right wing voters believe Obama is the Anti-Christ. I will let the video take it from there.
LaLa Land. That's about as accurate as one can be. What the fundamentalist movement has created of itself is a situation in which absolutely nothing can penetrate the wall of doublespeak and obfuscation they have built around themselves. They are a community living within a tautology, and they cannot allow themselves to see it.
I agree with Schaeffer that it is time to encircle them and move on. But this is a democracy, wherein all voices have at least a theoretical right to be heard. We do not have a pat, rigorous response politically to the introduction of absurdisms into the public discourse. We waffle, we try to be polite (which they do not) we try to be reasonable (which they take advantage of and disrespect) we try to, ironically, turn the other cheek in the face of their fallacious onslaught of nonsense.
As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar....and sometimes an idiot is just an idiot.
Today I took my two daughters to a movie. The theater was located in a large suburban shopping mall in Southwest St. Louis County, "Crestwood Plaza." I had not been to this mall for several years, and I was shocked at what I saw. Approximately 40% of the stores have been shuttered and the entire place was like a ghost town. A lonely security guard told me that the stores have been rapidly failing over the past two years. That comports with my recollection. Two years ago, this mall was a packed and thriving shopping area located in a solidly middle-class community. Crestwood Plaza is not an isolated story; shopping malls are failing all across America.
[I've posted a gallery of today's images many of these shuttered stores along with this post. If you don't see that gallery, click the title to this post to go to the permalink, where you will see those thumbnails.]
I sometimes get snarkish when someone tells me they're going to a shopping mall. I sometimes ask the Intrepid shopper to do me a favor and buy something practical for me, "Could you please buy me a hammer." I usually get the same reaction, a puzzled look accompanied by a response "They don't sell practical things like hammers at shopping malls." Now I'm not denying that malls sell clothes or that we need clothes. Most mall clothes are for far more than staying warm or covering up. They are much more often than not, for impressing others.
For that reason, I'm not shedding tears for the shattering of dozens of mall stores at Crestwood Plaza or anywhere else. The failure of most of the stores means that we won't be buying things we don't actually need. Because Hallmark no longer sells its commercial greeting cards, we might be "forced" to create and send our own personalized cards and letters to each other. Now that Libby Lu gone, our pre-teen daughters can get back to being children rather than obsessing about their sex appeal. In my mind, many of these store closings are mostly good things, although I am saddened by the thought that so many people have lost their jobs due to these shutdowns. See these terrific videos by Josh Golin of CCFC regarding the dangers of turning our children into rampant consumers.
Another silver lining is that the mall owners have been forced to do something different with their space in order to survive (assuming they do survive). What they've done at Crestwood Plaza is to lease out many of the "store" spaces to art galleries, educational facilities, community theaters and other arts and crafts workshops for children and adults. In other words, it appears that the mall owners are opening up their malls for people who want to develop their minds and skill-sets rather than simply their pocketbooks.
80-year old Paul Kurtz is still upbeat about civilization. Kurtz, "the father of secular humanism," should probably be considered one of the "old atheists." For decades before anyone ever heard of Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, Kurtz worked tirelessly to promote the virtues of secular humanism, the duties each of us owe to our communities and the need for critical thinking and skeptical inquiry. In addition to being a prolific author and philosophy professor, Kurtz is also founder and chairman of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, formerly the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), the Council for Secular Humanism (publisher of Free Inquiry Magazine), and the Center for Inquiry.
Kurtz coined the termeupraxsophy(originally eupraxophy) to refer to "philosophies or lifestances such as secular humanism and Confucianism that do not rely on belief in the transcendent or supernatural." As the foundation for the practice of eupraxsophy, Kurtz stresses that it is not a simplistic pitting of religion against science. Though scientific reasoning is a cornerstone of his world view, Kurtz also designates three basic virtues: caring, cognition and courage. One of his biggest concerns is that many religions have lost faith in the ability of human beings to identify and solve the problems facing them, causing them to attempt to look beyond the real world for real-world solutions.
"Secular humanism" is often criticized by people who have never studied it's guiding principles, which includes the need for a common moral decency and deep caring for the welfare of others. If only the critics of secular humanism would actually take the time to consider the principles of secular humanism, most of them would find substantial overlap with their own guiding principles. Consider these principles of humanism:
We believe in an open and pluralistic society and that democracy is the best guarantee of protecting human rights from authoritarian elites and repressive majorities.
We cultivate the arts of negotiation and compromise as a means of resolving differences and achieving mutual understanding.
We are concerned with securing justice and fairness in society and with eliminating discrimination and intolerance.
The overlap among the religous and the non-religous goes far beyond enumerated principles, however. In the August/September 2009 issue of Free Inquiry, Kurtz eloquently pointed to the locus of the meaning of life from the perspective of those who don't believe in God (and, arguably, for those who do). Here is an excerpt from his well-written essay:
[W]e create our own meanings. The meaning of life is not to be found in secret formulas discovered by ancient prophets or gurus who withdraw from living to seek quiet release. Life has no meaning per se; it does, however, present us with innumerable opportunities, which we can either squander and retreat from in fear or seize with exuberance. These can be discovered by anyone and everyone who has an inborn zest for living. They are found within life itself, as it reaches out to create new conditions for experience.
The so-called secret of life is an open scenario that can be deciphered by anyone. It is found in the experiences of living: in the delights of a fine banquet, the strenuous exertion of hard work, the poignant melodies of a symphony, the appreciation of an altruistic deed, the excitement of an embrace of someone you love, the elegance of a mathematical proof, the invigorating adventure of a mountain climb, the satisfaction of quiet relaxation, the lusty singing of an anthem, the vigorous cheering in a sports contest, the reading of a delicate sonnet, the joys of parenthood, the pleasure of friendship, the quiet gratification of serving our fellow human beings—in all these activities and more.
It is in the present moment of experience as it is brought to fruition, as well as in the memories of past experiences and the expectations of future ones, that the richness of life is realized. The meaning of life is that it can be found to be good and beautiful and exciting in its own terms for ourselves, our loved ones, and other sentient beings. It is found in the satisfaction intrinsic to creative activities, wisdom, and righteousness. One doesn’t need more than that, and we hope that one will not settle for less.
The meaning of life is intimately tied up with our plans and projects, the goals we set for ourselves, our dreams, and the successful achievement of them. We create our own conscious meanings; we invest the cultural and natural worlds with our own interpretations. We discover, impose upon, and add to nature.
In the following video,Paul Kurtz discusses eupraxsophy in greater detail, as well as the alleged inability of non-religious persons to base their actions upon a legitimate moral foundation:
Hello, I invite you to subscribe to Dangerous Intersection by entering your email below. You will have the option to receive emails notifying you of new posts once per week or more often.
