American Leadership

Get put of my way

You morons

Get out of my way

So I can lead you

I know the way to go

You're just milling around

I know what to do,

How to stop,

How to start, 

How to finish the things 

that need to be done

for you fools

who have no idea

how to do anything for yourselves

except wait for your sustenance

to arrive in the mail so 

you can party away my

hard earned money.

I will lead you away 

from your transgressions

against me and make you 

just like me, good and pure,

knowing what to do, and

how to fulfill your life.

Then the world will be a better

place, once we’re all the same.

Myths are Stories

“.....two fundamental realizations--of the inevitability of eventual death and the endurance of the social order have been combined symbolically and constitute the nuclear structuring force of the rites and, thereby, the society.” 

Joseph Campbell

Myths are powerful stories that give meaning to individual lives and shape the civilizations they inhabit.  The many functions of myths provide the narrative for individual lives and bring us together to share tragedy and create societal order. A myth, however, only retains its power by telling and retelling it’s stories and helps to shape and organize individuals into cultural and political groups. 

There are many ways to tell these stories.  In American Gods Neil Gaiman uses the metaphor of worship to explain why the old Gods are losing their power. Worship is another form of storytelling. No matter the form of the story, if the stories are not told they begin to lose their power and the functions they provide to individuals and society are replaced by new myths whose stories become accepted through the cycle of telling and retelling. 

The Nile River

The Egyptian myth cycle clearly illustrates this dynamic.  As George Hart notes in Egyptian Myths, “Egyptian myths, though seemingly outlandish to some, have survived because the society out of which they originated considered them crucial to the creation of a  view of the world. Scribes, priests and story-tellers transmitted myths to explain etiological phenomena, to provide data for the continuity of existence in the afterlife and to exhibit the versatility of their imaginations. So whether as part of a religious quest of anthropological investigation or whether for an adventure into the surreal, the myths and legends of ancient Egypt leave us richer for their speculation and imagery.” 

The harsh realty of the Egypt's geography provided the material for its stories. A narrow river valley surrounded by bleak deserts and the punishing sun beating down each day was the genesis for Egyptian myths. As in all societies, there was a need for each individual to understand the meaning of their life and what happened upon death and there was a need to organize a society that could survive the harsh environment they had been given. The river Nile overflowing its banks and providing the rich silt which nourished the earth and gave rise to agriculture was proof of resurrection. Individuals had to work together to exist and insure that the cycle of life continued from year to year. 

This brutal reality gave rise to many Gods and stories of creation, resurrection and survival in the villages up and down the length of the Nile river. Jules Cashford elegantly explains this concept, “The ancient Egyptians explored these questions in the context of the overwhelming reality of their daily lives: the annual rising and falling of the River Nile, on which their life depended. The land of Egypt is re-created every year by this river which flows from south to north, from the equator to the Mediterranean,  Life was--and still is contained in a narrow valley on either side of the river.  Beyond this lies desert, a barren land of sand and rock with no water and no shade from the burning sun.”

These stories began to consolidate as villages became city-states while leaders learned the power of the Gods to keep society functioning. The rites of worship and ways of life were forms of the stories needed to to create society and cultures. Significantly, the rulers began to transcribe the stories in order to perpetuate their power. 

In Egypt these stories were transcribed on what is known as the Pyramid Texts.  In Egyptian Myths George Hart explains that these texts are, “Columns of hieroglyphs were carved 4,300 years ago in the vestibule and sarcophagus hall of the pyramid of King Wenis (c2350 BC) at Sakkara, necropolis of the royal capital of Memphis, with the intention of seeking a hereafter for the monarch in the vicinity of the sun god. Subsequent rulers of the old Kingdom (c2649-2152 BC continued this tradition. Known as Pyramid Texts, this corpus of spells and speculations gives us the opportunity to evaluate the complex imagery centered upon the Egyptian pantheon,. It also forms the earliest religious compilations in the world. “

The pyramid texts were the precursors to a civilization rich in written stories, oral storytelling, rites of worship and a pantheon of Gods to support the many functions that myths provide. The four basic functions of myth were prevalent in the stories of the Gods. The creation myths supported the awe and explanation of the universe as seen from the perspective of the narrow river valley in which they lived. Gods such as Ra, Osiris and Anubis gave shape to the social order of the great civilizations that rose under the relentless heat of the rising and setting sun transversing their river valley. The story of Isis and Osiris gave instructions about how to be human in an ever expanding empire beset with outside attacks and the cruelty of nature.

As the city-states combined and a strong nation developed, encompassing the land from Sudan to the Mediterranean Sea, the Gods too consolidated and their stories were told in ever increasing ways. Other forms of storytelling beside the pyramid texts were the Coffin Texts, the Bremner-Rhind Papyrus and the "Shabaka Stone" .  The latter contains the story of the accession of the god Horus to the throne of Egypt and the Memphite myth of the creator god. These stories were preserved by King Shabaka (712-698 BC) who discovered the papyrus scrolls on which they were inscribed was being eaten by worms. Evidence for Amun as the creator is found on Papyrus Leiden. 

There are also stories inscribed into statues and buildings perpetuating the mythic stories. Temples in Luxor contain stories of Amun and his sexual union fathering the future monarch of Egypt and temple decorations at Esna and Edu that also record accounts of creation. 

It is clear that the preservation of the stories was important to the rulers of Egypt. They understood the power of myth and in particular the organizing capabilities of the stories. In 1984 Mary Boyce reported on the research of Berger and Luckmann linking social construction, story and organization and determined that story can be a vehicle for social control. The wide spread telling and preservation in ancient Egypt would indicate that the Pharaohs and men of power understood exactly how to create a political state using myth.

The most enduring myth of Egypt is that of Osiris. He underwent several changes over the years as his importance waned and waxed.  His stories served many functions for ancient Egyptians. He was a legendary king who brought civilization to his people, showed them how to cultivate crops, taught people how to worship the gods, is associated with the afterlife, fertility, and resurrection and serves as a dynastic myth. He had a long and useful life in ancient Egypt as long as his story was told.

This myth, as Cashford explains, was not extant in a full epic version but had be pieced together from several ancient and classical sources: The pyramid texts of the old kingdom, the coffin texts of the middle kingdom, the Book of the Dead from the new kingdom, a ribald text entitled the Contest of Horus and from the twentieth dynasty and the summary of Plutarch in Concerning Isis and Osiris from the second century AD. 

The stories of Osiris are illustrative of the power of myth in relation to the telling of the stories. Plutarch saved Osiris by searching for his story and finding it at the festival of Abydos a yearly event following the inundation of the Nile. It was not until 1882 and the discovery of the Rosetta Stone that the stories of Osiris and other Egyptian myths became available to the modern world. 

The resurgence of these stories in today’s world is an indicator of the power of the stories they tell. Although their power has not reach the level of organizing society, they are multifunctional and appealing to the individual who is wondering what life is all about.

Works Cited

Boyce, Mary E., Organizational Story and Storytelling: A Critical Review, University of

Redlands, California, 1996, Web, 13 Sept. 2010.

Campbell, Joseph, Myths To Live By, Penguin Group, New York, 1972, Print.

Cashford, Jules, The Myth of Isis and Osiris, Barefoot Books, Boston, 1993, Print.

Gaiman, Neil, American Gods, Harpertorch, New York, 2001, Print.

Hart, George, Egyptian Myths, British Museum Publications University of Texas Press, Austin,

1990, Print. 

Reid, Patrick V., ed., Readings In Western Religious Thought: The Ancient World, Paulist

Press, New Jersey, 1987, Print.

Everyone Wants to be Rich

The impoverished Of America 

are not just those lacking money,

but include those with

poverty of the imagination.

In a war on the new other

house after house 

and building after building

has been abandoned

rural areas are armed and

inner cities are battle zones

beauty is lost.

We have A disaster like no other

For In our quest for gold

We have obliterated distinctions

The land of individual liberty

Has destroyed our differences.

To create identical things

with replaceable workers 

who go home 

on our pocked streets

bloated with cars 

that all look the same 

staying within the lines looking  for

gas stations, restaurants and motels 

made out of ticky tacky.

Screens with 

with hundreds of channels, 

are unable to show us 

anything to help 

build Our dreams 

instead they manipulate us

to be a part of the collective.

slaves to the whims of those who

control all so that they can live like kings

and we their modern vassals.

Education and Politics

I keep hearing politicians in New Mexico talk about a need for vocational training and the limitations of a college education. One candidate even spoke about universities restricting the majors that are available based upon the ability to pay high enough wages to pay back their loans.  There was an indication that vocational education would cut costs for universities.

These are certainly wrong headed notions about the purpose of universities and the cost of vocational training. All majors can produce enough money to pay back student loans. No one needs to start at the top of a pay scale. They are also wrong headed notions about freedom of choice.  Each person needs to learn to create their own plan for their future, not fulfill somebody else's plan.

What we need to do for education is stop preparing children for college or work. We need to prepare them for life. How to establish relationships and how to manage a household. People should know how machines and things like water systems work. In this way they will learn what they need to know for their future, not the society's past.

To accomplish this, mandatory education should be complete after 10 years of schooling. Students should know enough academic skills at this point to choose a direction to explore. Secondary education should allow them to explore the world of work and academia to learn what is possible and make choices about their future that suits their needs.

The best thing politicians can do is promise to fund an education system that allows for personal growth and development, not one that fits children into boxes and determine their future. Margaret Mead once famously said, "children learn what they need to know for the future." Let us accommodate that idea, not one that determines their future

What did we learn in school? Socialism

I know the textbook I used as a teacher of World History included a section on different economic theories. We compared communism, capitalism, socialism. We talked about who owned the means of production and why that mattered. We also discussed the various governmental philosophies. So why do people not understand these basic concepts today?

I was following a thread about socialism and one of the participants was dead set against socialism because of Jamestown, "and we all know how that ended", he wrote. First of all, Jamestown was a corporate charter exploratory colony and I would say that the outcome was ok. I smoked cigarettes, the outcome of that colony, for many years. Other comments on that thread and others I have read demonstrated a misunderstanding of the terms.

Socialism advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange of goods should be controlled or owned by the community as a whole.  Whereas, communism as espoused by Marx is achieved by class war, eventually all property is publicly owned, and each person is paid according to their abilities and needs. In a capitalist system the means of production, distribution and exchange are owned by private entities to make a profit. I would add here that today, the capitalists are well on their way to own and control the government.

Another ism that gets bandied about quite bit is fascism and nazis. I am including the definition for that because I believe it too is misunderstood.  Fascism tends to include a belief in the supremacy of one national or ethnic group, a contempt for democracy, an insistence on obedience to a powerful leader. who controls the economy, and a strong demagogic approach. Some think that this is the turn the U.S. economy and government are taking.

Communism and socialism were 19th century responses to capitalist overreach. The robber barons set the mode of operation for the capitalist system. That was to disregard the needs of the workers and the workings of nature. The expectations of early capitalists for their labor force seemed to have been based upon the feudal system and some form of forced labor, such as slavery or indentured servitude. They have built their wealth using the nation's resources while disregarding the beauty and functions of the earth. Clean air and water are not the price we should have to pay for capitalists to create their wealth.

Communism and socialism have been demonized by capitalists because their ability to create as much wealth as they desire would be curtailed. If corporations have to pay the total cost of doing business their overhead would be much higher, less profit. Cooperative economic systems want their taxes to go for building and maintaining infrastructure, including schools, public spaces and services. That would mean that the capitalists would have to pay to clean up the toxic waste some of their businesses leave behind. They would have to pay their workers at least enough that anyone working would not need to use public welfare services, like food stamps. 


The capitalist system has painted all systems of government, control, and economic development as either good or bad, but just like all of life, it's systems are nuanced. Each government exists somewhere on a spectrum of each of the economic and governmental organization. The United States uses some of it's tax money to build roads, bridges and assist in the overall transportation systems of the country. Helping those in need is another example of using our resources to give a lift to those who need it. The pentagon is funded to protect us and the workers in that system live in a socialist economy where their food, housing and other benefits are subsidized or provided.

Economics is concerned with studying and influencing the economy. Politics is the theory and practice of influencing people through the exercise of power, e.g. governments, elections and political parties. These two systems  work together and often are conflated. Socialism and communism appear to us as bad systems because they have been adopted by authoritarian leaders. In essence those leaders make great promise to the average working man, making them easy to manipulate and use to gain power. Just because communism was used by Stalin in a brutal manner does not mean a more enlightened country with democratic principles can't benefit from the system. Likewise, Putin uses democracy as a tool to rule today's Russia and that does not mean the people of Russia have the same freedoms as people in the United States. 

The promise of socialism and communism is the use of cooperation versus individual enterprise. Individual enterprise allows the greedy to rise to the top while cooperation appears to them to deaden the roots of ambition. If the past is any guide these two principles will be blended to create a better world. Just as feudalism and mercantilism set the stage for capitalism, communism and socialism have set the stage to give the working man and woman the dignity individual enterprise has denied them.

Things That Divide Us-Pro-Choice/Life

This divisive topic pits life against death. What could be more inflammatory? I think this is the heart of the pro-life narrative. Most people would choose life if that is the choice. However, there are competing narratives that do use such stirring language. I would argue that the more nuanced narratives have less emotional appeal and are not heard the same way.

How do you pack the same punch into the argument that "they do it anyway". How can that be framed to compete with "life vs death". It seems to me that argument is a more understanding reason and deserves more thought. As long as families and society are intolerant of "unwanted pregnancies" that is exactly what will happen. The woman who has sperm and eggs uniting inside her will feel rejected and if the child is born, there is a chance it may feel the same.

A number of woman make the choice to abort the pregnancy. They are not killing a child, they are stopping a pregnancy.  So, in a sense, the narrative becomes "stopping a pregnancy or allowing it to continue".  At that point the argument becomes softer, less stark. In addition, many people feel that life begins when egg is fertilized. That, however is not the only thought on when life begins.

From an evolutionary point of view it is the purpose of human beings is to reproduce themselves. This is true for all types of life.  We are biologically capable of reproducing prolifically. Men have unlimited sperm and women unlimited eggs during their reproductive cycles.  If a sperm does not make it to an egg nothing is lost because there are so many sperm that one will surely make it eventually. If not right now, probably later.  Sometimes the egg and sperm create a zygote that does not make it. No worries it can happen later. My point is that there are numerous opportunities to create life and if that process is aborted nature/creator/God has provided for that possibility.

Does life begin with conception, or when the heart beats begin, or as many maintain, when the first breath is taken? This question has been debated for ages and there is no consensus.  Judaism Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism and other religious and cultural groups have differing ideas about when life begins. The stance of the pro-life supporters, that life begins at conception, is a minority view. They have taken the science of life beyond the ideas of scientists, who do not all agree that the beginning is at conception.

Wherever life begins, it is access to a woman's body that is being debated. It would appear that those who abhor a "nanny" government have no compunction about controlling what a woman can or can not do with her body. The patriarchy inherent in societies around the world have believed for centuries that it is a male right to control their women.

Over time women have asserted their rights as individuals who not only control their own lives, but also their say in public debate and governance. This has been a difficult war in which the right to birth control and the final say over their pregnancy has been fought battle by battle. Pro-choice adherents believe they are the only ones who should have access to what happens to their bodies, while pro-life supporters believe the government has the right to decide what happens to a woman's body.

Male control over women has weakened and they can no longer dictate what happens to a woman. It is my belief that most women desire a rational dialogue with their partners about ending a pregnancy, but believe the final choice is theirs to make.

Certainly it is noble and idealistic to wish that all pregnancies be carried to to birth. That should be the goal not a dictum. I think many humans agree that abortion should not be used as birth control. However, the most important ingredient to living a fulfilling life is love. Every child should be loved, valued, and nourished before they are conceived. That is how we end unwanted pregnancies.

Responsible Ownership of Weapons

It is amazing how our debate about the ownership of rifles and guns has devolved into such a heated partisan issue.  The weapon manufacturers have been working hard to arm everyone in the name of profits.  The moral issue of responsible ownership has become lost in the calls for "gun" control.  The most ludicrous part of the arguments is the fear of those who are not responsible owner of weapons causes the call for unregulated ownership of those same weapons.

The second amendment with its indirect language has provided fuel for both sides.  It reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." During the discussions after the Parkland shootings a representative of the NRA was defending their position on this topic and stated that all gun owners are the militia.  

I like this idea.  It makes the language clearer.  Gun owners belong to a "well regulated" militia to help provide security for a free state.  It is my opinion this gives the state the right to provide laws for responsible ownership. 

Educational Organization

Education is still mostly organized around control.  We have been operating on a 19th century philosophy developed by Prussians to teach cohorts of students, based on age teaching the same subjects each day.  We use a technique that pours information into their brains and those who can not keep up are rejected or shunned in some way by the establishment.  The twentieth century brought about Pavlov and his ideas of reward and punishment.  These became the established system for controlling students in their classrooms.  The primary example is grades, A for the hard worker and F for the lazy.  The rhetoric is straight our to Protestant orthodoxy.  Work hard, live a good life and you will go to heaven. This system fit neatly into an industrial society where creativity and critical thinking were not important for the average worker who basically shifted widgets around for the owners of industry.

These concepts and philosophies never worked because they are antithetical to learning.  Certainly those who were motivated to learn did so, but those who had no support and found the lessons difficult had no way to excel in this system.  There were many more drop outs than graduates of the system.

The end of the 20th century brought the technological revolution which required that education actually teach students knowledge they would need to work.  Not just basic skills and science but, retrieval of data that they would use in the workplace.  This includes creative and critical thinking,  research skills  and social emotional maturity necessary necessary to work cooperatively as teams to develop, plan and create. 

As Kuhn pointed out in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, paradigms shift slowly and much of what we know about learning has been discovered in the last thirty years.  Changes in our thinking has been shaped by neuroscientists who delve into the physical brain to discover how it works.  These discoveries have debunked the systems of reward and punishment we have used to control students in school.  There have also been many experiments in education to find out what is the best way to organize for learning and it is not large groups of children, sitting at desks listening to a teacher talk.

The primary finding is that when children are treated with respect and given individual support they do much better.  One of my favorite stories is about a free school in Massachusetts where students are not required to do any academic work.  There were no classrooms, no desks, no prescribed curriculum.  The students sit on committees that hire teachers and make decisions about the nature of the school.  They can learn anything they want, when they want and choose how they want to learn.  One girl, for whom this school was a last chance for education due to her behavior, decided that she would leave. There were no guards, no rules about attendance.  As she reached the street she had an epiphany.  Why am I leaving there are no reasons to do so.  She turned around and decided to pursue her education. We must have internal motivation to truly learn.

If we want school to be a place where learning is a center of organization rather than control we must rethink our schools.  To certain extent the charter movement has cut into traditional schools but they have not been embraced by the establishment.  We must decentralize our classrooms, understand how humans learn and treat all students with dignity and respect before our education system will be center on learning.

Religion is a Mythic Journey

Religion is a mythic journey through life that requires dependence upon a guide.  To make life's journey alone is frightening and requires the courage to destroy the objects of the myth by understanding they are projections and fantasies.  Then a new space is created that is reality and an individual can discover that those fantasies and projections are inside themselves. Now the journey of their life can continue as reality and experience.

Faith in America's Promise

In America, we have had faith that our country's systems work. The systems of self-rule, liberty and justice along with a government of the people, by the people and for the people are the primary values we depend upon to keep us together and inspire the rest of the world. It seems as though our current president's followers have lost faith in the democratic process and no longer care about the rule of law. They can ignore all of this president’s behavior as long as he gives them Supreme Court justices and panders to their racial sentiments. The few have decided that they can elevate their leader to the status of dictator and that will be ok as long as they get their way.

For some reason nobody else matters besides them. It is a sad day when resentment and anger replace democracy and justice. When personal gain is more important than cooperative self interest. Our country's infrastructure is outdated and unreliable. While other countries invest in themselves we no longer seem to have the will to keep our nation functional. Looking at America today is like driving through the poorest of neighborhoods and seeing their unhappiness in the way they maintain their homes, their streets and their communities.

What has happened to our pride in ourselves? Why do we no longer care about our country's infrastructure nor how our neighbor feels? I think the answer is the lost faith in the promise of America. We do not understand that all progress has setbacks, but the general trend of history is technological and human progress. Our lives are much better than they were 100 years ago. Go back as far as you wish and we live much better than ever and better than most people in the world today.
America does not have a perfect past, nobody does. We do not treat everybody with equity and our past is littered with violence against others who were in the way of America's image of itself. Part of evolution is a change in the way cultures view outsiders. America is working its way through these problems. Not smoothly, not to everyone's satisfaction nor quickly enough in today's world of instant communications. Our problems are transparent and have become the discussion of everyday life. We are constantly confronted with the problems caused by racism, exclusion, violence, greed and resentment. Only by confronting who we are can we reduce the anxiety and stress brought by these issues.

America's struggles is the tension that has  determined what type of culture we live in and has driven us to where we are today. To a certain degree, the states take some of the pressure of culture change. Each state does not change at the same pace as our national culture and allows citizens who are reluctant to change to have time to accept and adopt the changes . The culture of America is making a fundamental change to one that accepts all people as equal citizens and views cooperation as a better value than competition.

America is even bigger than the culture wars that are being waged there. It is a large diverse group of human beings who have mostly agreed on the basic values of self-rule, liberty and justice. This is what draws people to this country, the promise of these values. This promise has been spread across the globe and in this time of technological communications people world wide understand the change America is bringing about. That is a government of the people, by the people and for the people with liberty and justice for all. We must maintain our faith in the promises we have made to ourselves and the world.

The non existent U.S.A.

So, one side believes the "nanny" state weakens America and that taxes should be so low to be almost nonexistent.  They do not want the government to regulate businesses that pollute, dirty our water, tear up our land and use common resources for their own purposes unwilling to share with the people.  They do not want people in need to go to the government for help. I guess I am astounded at the idea that so many citizens are ok with this.  Why has the idea of a government for the people, by the people and of the people been so easily lost in this era?  Maybe everyone agrees that government should be to help the rich get richer.  No need to encourage the promise that America is land of liberty and justice for all.

Nativist or Accommodation?

The U.S. has never been a truly moral country, even though we talk as if we are above moral reproach. The biggest lies we tell are to ourselves, which keeps us from facing our morality. The lies are not necessary because that is who we are.  All countries do bad things, all countries do good things.  Mostly bad things are done for nativist purposes, to create an illusion of morality, and what good things are done come about to accommodate all the majority.

The U.S. is a great country because of our promise.  The promise of liberty and justice for the average person resonates across the world.  The U.S. set up a system to bring that about.  We have not always lived up to our promise, but we continually work toward making that promise come true.

It is the tension between the belief in our morality and our actions that brings about the great changes that have occurred.  As we draw more people who are different into our promise the tension increases until change occurs.  Throughout our history the change has usually been advantageous for everyone. However, sometimes the change is a war, ostensibly to protect ourselves.

The problem from the tension is that nativist want to impede progress in order to keep their world intact while progress is causing change to occur.  With a population as large as the that of the U.S. , it is imperative to find common ground and be willing to compromise.

Time Travel

 

Neuroscientists Say

Our memories are never accurate because we create our lives from overly plentiful data that must be filtered by our brain as it decides what we saw or felt or tasted, even memories of those we love are closer to creative non fiction
than truth.  It makes me wonder
how in the hell humanity has progressed
at all.

We tend to think that time is moving forward, but is it really?  The true time machine is the human mind which allows us to encounter any time period in human history we can discover.  Because there is so much incoming information the human brain allows us to see what it expects us to see.  So if  your neurons have been habituated during walks in the woods, when you walk in the woods your brain determines what you see based on what you have seen.

Which leads me back to time travel.  If you immerse yourself in the 1890s, according to brain studies, I would think you should expect to see the 1890s. What do you think?