Fairytales

I realize it’s hard. That day when you realize your parents aren’t gods. That your mom and dad aren’t perfect. That Santa Claus doesn’t exist. That good doesn’t always win over evil. That you’re going to die someday.

But you can’t be an adult until you learn to accept those things. To reject the saccharine lies of ignorance. The pretty, pleasant half truths.

Truth isn’t comforting. It can be uplifting through tragedy and beautiful through ugliness. But we will never be adults until we accept unpleasant truths. And reject the falsehoods, however comforting they may be.

This nation was built on genocide, using the strength of enslaved hands. And that legacy continues. The idea of it continues. Even if we were to wipe away racism, the mode of thought that led to those atrocities would still be with us: that to the conquerer goes the spoils. That the less fortunate, who do the actual work, deserve less because they’re not on top. The manifest destiny of the CEO is the same same as the conquistador or the slaveowner.

Any student of ancient history knows that the righteousness of a party in any conflict never decided their likelihood of winning. It was wealth. And as wealth is passed down, so is dominion over the conquered. And those who inherit wealth or dominion or privilege have to internally justify inheriting it. No person sees their life as perfect. None are. And we only have our own perspective by which to judge the world.

So, if it was possible, though difficult, for you to get and maintain a car, you might feel that those who can’t afford a car mustn’t have been able to handle the difficulty you overcame. It’s a fallacy borne of perspective. As foolish as a woman condemning a man for not being able to get pregnant. You were born with the ability. Even if the act took work.

The problem with all of us is the inability to see (beyond the confines of our own small, meaningless lives) that we are a link in a long chain. But we have the power to sever the bonds that make the future a sad repetition of the past. We need only learn that the pretty tales of the past were lies in order to have the indignation to ensure that the future can be truthfully better.

To take example from the fairy tales we were taught to make the future better. Instead of believing the fairy tales were once true and clinging to a decadent past.

– Edgar

How?

If you want to know how we got here, it can be traced back to the blind nationalistic chauvinism following 9/11. Laws were passed circumventing freedoms and giving the government emergency powers that it never relinquished.
Socially, soldiers and police were all “heroes,” regardless of anything they might have done wrong. The fear of terrorism led to militarization of police forces. Anyone who pointed out the problems was labeled unpatriotic.

I remember before 9/11. I never rose for the pledge of allegiance. And very rarely did anyone ever say anything about it. My problem wasn’t the country’s people, but the inclusion of the phrase “under god” and the fact that I take oaths and promises seriously, and before I swear an oath to anything, I have to be sure it won’t become a monster.

But it was ok with most people. Very few really even noticed. Some prick teachers thought I was required to, but I could inform them that the foundational law of the country they pledge allegiance to granted me the right to refuse to swear an oath to it.

That changed. My refusal to issue blanket praise to all of our troops when some were committing war crimes, my criticisms of the Bush administration, and the fact that I stood up for the religious freedoms of pagan students who were told they couldn’t wear their religious symbols got me put on a threat watch list one of my friends found when they were left alone in the assistant principle’s office.

I was in school. I wasn’t even an adult. At that age, I was a Buddhist, and I’m a bigger danger to myself than anyone else, despite being forced into defending myself on a few occasions. In school I’d prevented more fights than I’d ever been in.

When people are frightened, they scapegoat anyone who seems different. And frightened people are willing to give up freedoms for the illusion of safety. Even when the loss of those freedoms causes more harm in the long run than any terrorist attack could.

We gave the government emergency powers and the ability to define what an emergency is. We gave the police weapons of war and responsibilities beyond the scope of law enforcement duties. Then we assumed they’d be responsible with it.

Set all this in a country built by genocide and slavery, where a few rich people have all the money and the majority of everyone else can’t afford to lose a paycheck or two. Add severely mismanaged global pandemic, a rapidly changing climate, and a greedy con man with the reins of power. The rest falls into place.

I hope very much that we can make it out of this a better people and a better union than we have been. I sincerely doubt it, but we have to try.

Your friend
-Ed.

A Philosophical Quandary

I have had cause, recently, to ponder something. I will do my best to not use current, real world examples so I don’t elicit reactions based upon loyalty or bias. Because my question is abstract. It’s about the notion itself, not its current applications.

So let me set up the premise: a philosophy emerges that denounces all other philosophies as wrong. We’ll call this ideology 1ism. Well, 1ism says that anyone who doesn’t believe 1ism is mistaken or is an enemy. After generations, 1ism leads to cruelty and oppression and proves to lead to atrocities more often than not.

Not every 1ist is cruel. Most are genuinely sympathetic to others who disagree with them. They view those outside of their ideology as ignorant of the truth, not as incapable of seeing the truth or as enemies of the truth, which they believe is 1ism.

Let’s set aside, for the purposes of this conversation, whether 1ism is actually true or not, and also whether it is beneficial to follow the ideology. That part doesn’t really matter, as those are subjective and arguing those points won’t come to anything.

By definition, 1ism is intolerant of other perspectives, true or not. It holds itself as the immutable truth. Any other viewpoint, way of life, or way of interpretation is wrong. The kind and peaceful followers of 1ism ideology think that those outside should be taught and brought in. The more extreme 1ists think those who refuse to follow the doctrine are enemies.

The ideology is often oppressive and exclusive. Despite the best nature and best efforts of those who only wish to educate the outsider to what see as a beneficial truth.

Enter the country of Justlivia. (Imagine for a moment such a place could exist.) In Justlivia, they tolerate all modes of thought and all philosophies. Here, they believe their strength is in what unites them, not their differences. So all thoughts and philosophies are welcome and included.

1ism comes to Justlivia. It preaches that all other ideas are wrong and must be changed (by the good 1ist teachers) or destroyed (by the extreme 1ists.)

The leader of Justlivia lets the 1ists in. They begin to spread. Divisive problems start. The idea that only one can be right takes hold. Factionalism begins to tear at the balance of Justlivia.

Their leader dies. You become the leader. You have many advisors. Some say to expel, silence, or execute the 1ists. Others advise to make the country a 1ist country. Some say to let the people fight it out and endorse the victor. But you have your own mind.

Question 1:

How do you deal with the problem and why do you do it that way?

Question 2:

Let’s say the 1ists have your personal worldview. Religion, science, philosophy, economics, politics, etc. The thing you actually think is correct. Has your answer changed? How? Why?

Question 3:

Let’s say the 1ists believe pretty much the opposite of what you currently think. How does your response change? What do you do?

I am very interested to hear your input. I’m personally unsure what my position would be. Which is why I ask for your input. I’d very much like to know. Should you comment (as I hope you will), the only thing I hope you will do as a favor to me is to avoid being unkind or cruel to other commenters and to keep any debates civil and on topic.

I thank you for reading, even if you don’t comment.

Your friend,
Ed.

Immutable

My Friends

Freedom is like a muscle: It must be exercised or it will atrophy. Press, expression, speech… so many more. There are freedoms intrinsic to who we are. Freedom cannot be taken from you. This has been forgotten because our lives can be taken from us. So, in fear that our lives will be taken, we give up willingly our freedoms to preserve our lives. And so freedom atrophies.
It saddens me how meaningless we are willing to let our lives become simply to preserve them. I am frightened more by a life without meaning than a meaningful death. There are many things that can be taken from you against your will, but there are certain noble attributes within you that no one can take from you without your willing consent. We should never give up that honor that cannot be taken from us for the preservation of those things that be can be robbed of.
After all: what is more important: life, or survival? There IS a difference. I hope we can choose to live, regardless of the consequences, instead of surviving regardless of the degradation of our spirit. I wish you all the best of luck.

Your friend,
Edgar.