-
In C.S. Lewis' The Screwtape Letters, Screwtape, a high ranking agent of Hell, is coaching his nephew on how to lead an Englishman away from God. Through his instructional letters, we see what Lewis believed about humanity, God, Christianity, contemporary values, and morality.
Lewis & I are miles apart when it comes to doctrine. According to the book, God wants us to focus on the here & now while Satan wants us to think about the future, pacifists are essentially cowards, and progressive/liberal thought is the product of Hell's trickery. Given that the story was written as Germany was continually bombing Great Britain, I can sympathize with his views toward pacifists, who were seen as not doing their part against the Nazis. Yet, I believe responsible people DO plan for the future, and progressive/liberal thought has lead to civil rights being granted to minorities.
While I personally believe his ideas to be misguided, and even offensive, I thought the vehicle he used to communicate his views was well written, cleaver, and entertaining. This lead me to wonder why we like the books we like. Do we have to agree with an author to enjoy their work? I'd answer, not necessarily.
While I disagree with many of his beliefs, I can appreciate his creativity, word usage, and the flow of the story.
“We have done this through the poets and novelists by persuading he humans that a curious, and usually short-lived, experience which they call "being in love" is the only respectable ground for marriage; that marriage can, and ought to, render this excitement permanent; and that a marriage which does not do so is no longer binding. This idea is our parody of an idea that came from the Enemy. ”
Here Lewis is saying, Hell has tricked man into believing love & romance shouldn't expire from a marriage, and if love does leave a marriage, the couple may divorce. In other words, leaving a loveless marriage is a sin. I may personally believe that a healthy marriage should be filled with a sense of love and romance from beginning to end. Yet, I can respect Lewis' use of vocabulary and sentence structure to reflect a seriously reasoned thought. I can even concede the underlining point that a bump in the road isn't necessarily grounds for divorce, without forfeiting the view that some couples do irreconcilably grow apart and sometimes should separate.
I think readers, in general, can appreciate the craftsmanship of a well written carefully reasoned book, without necessarily being swayed by its message. I'd even argue that it's important to read the work of writers with opposing points of view; reading opposing, but intelligently written, viewpoints, can help a reader define and refine their view of the world.
This blog began as a writing and literature blog with the occasional Op-Ed piece on current events & issues. The political writing has, slowly but surely, taken this blog over. Readers will still be treated to some of my thoughts on pop culture and sports, but, for the most part, Blogito Ergo Sum will feature my opinions on the state of our union and world.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Thursday, February 24, 2011
The Voice Of Public Workers
-
During any given week, millions of people will watch the news to see what’s happening in Washington D.C., New York, Hollywood, and The Middle East. However, for the past week, we’ve been watching, with great interest, the goings on in Wisconsin. Wisconsin? The place with the cheese hats? Yes, that’s the place, and what happens there may very well set a precedent for the rest of America.
To quickly recap, Wisconsin’s, Koch brothers backed, governor, Scott Walker, announced last week that in order to close a $137 million budget gap, he would make cuts to public employees’ pay and benefits, and limit the rights of collective bargaining, essentially breaking up the public employee unions in Wisconsin. In response to this proposal, thousands of angry public employees stormed the capitol, and began a ‘round the clock protest. When it was clear that Republicans had the votes to pass the proposal, Democrat lawmakers fled to prevent a legal quorum from being convened. Then, as if deploying an army of Pinkerton agents, Governor Walker sent the state police to drag the Democrats back to the capitol, forcing the legislators to hide in an undisclosed location in Illinois.
This mess is only the most visible by-product of a nation wide effort to curtail the bargaining rights of public employees, and has little, if anything, to do with balancing budgets. Keep in mind, union leaders in Wisconsin have acknowledged budgetary short-falls, and have agreed to the proposed cuts in pay and benefits. The only sticking point left is the issue of bargaining rights. While the unions have offered a two year moratorium on bargaining, Governor Walker refuses to negotiate.
While the stand off drags on in Wisconsin’s capitol, Hillsboro’s teachers are trying to negotiate their contract as well. The district has proposed the elimination of step pay raises until further notice, and initially proposed the addition of an unpaid day of work to the school year. In response, the Hillsboro Education Association added up the number of hours teachers contribute to their jobs (correcting papers, writing lesson plans, etc…) off the clock. They found that teachers already collectively contribute 10,878 unpaid hours to Hillsboro’s schools each year.
If people such as Governor Walker have their way, and public employees are stripped of their voice, teachers and other professionals will have no recourse when agencies and school districts, such as Hillsboro, try to require more work for equal or less pay. The only safeguard these employees have is the collective bargaining power of their unions. If that safeguard is removed, highly qualified people will have no incentive to hold public sector jobs.
Do we want the best trained and qualified people we can find to be teaching are children and providing essential services, or do we want our teachers and civil servants to be the people who couldn’t find a job anywhere else? If we want top notch people in those jobs, the jobs have to be desirable.
During any given week, millions of people will watch the news to see what’s happening in Washington D.C., New York, Hollywood, and The Middle East. However, for the past week, we’ve been watching, with great interest, the goings on in Wisconsin. Wisconsin? The place with the cheese hats? Yes, that’s the place, and what happens there may very well set a precedent for the rest of America.
To quickly recap, Wisconsin’s, Koch brothers backed, governor, Scott Walker, announced last week that in order to close a $137 million budget gap, he would make cuts to public employees’ pay and benefits, and limit the rights of collective bargaining, essentially breaking up the public employee unions in Wisconsin. In response to this proposal, thousands of angry public employees stormed the capitol, and began a ‘round the clock protest. When it was clear that Republicans had the votes to pass the proposal, Democrat lawmakers fled to prevent a legal quorum from being convened. Then, as if deploying an army of Pinkerton agents, Governor Walker sent the state police to drag the Democrats back to the capitol, forcing the legislators to hide in an undisclosed location in Illinois.
This mess is only the most visible by-product of a nation wide effort to curtail the bargaining rights of public employees, and has little, if anything, to do with balancing budgets. Keep in mind, union leaders in Wisconsin have acknowledged budgetary short-falls, and have agreed to the proposed cuts in pay and benefits. The only sticking point left is the issue of bargaining rights. While the unions have offered a two year moratorium on bargaining, Governor Walker refuses to negotiate.
While the stand off drags on in Wisconsin’s capitol, Hillsboro’s teachers are trying to negotiate their contract as well. The district has proposed the elimination of step pay raises until further notice, and initially proposed the addition of an unpaid day of work to the school year. In response, the Hillsboro Education Association added up the number of hours teachers contribute to their jobs (correcting papers, writing lesson plans, etc…) off the clock. They found that teachers already collectively contribute 10,878 unpaid hours to Hillsboro’s schools each year.
If people such as Governor Walker have their way, and public employees are stripped of their voice, teachers and other professionals will have no recourse when agencies and school districts, such as Hillsboro, try to require more work for equal or less pay. The only safeguard these employees have is the collective bargaining power of their unions. If that safeguard is removed, highly qualified people will have no incentive to hold public sector jobs.
Do we want the best trained and qualified people we can find to be teaching are children and providing essential services, or do we want our teachers and civil servants to be the people who couldn’t find a job anywhere else? If we want top notch people in those jobs, the jobs have to be desirable.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Why I Can't Blog About The Riots In Egypt
-
Lately, the news has been dominated by reports of the protests/riots in Egypt. Just about every serious blogger has published their take on these events. Typically, I’d be in there too, writing, “This should happen,” or, “America should back X.” I haven’t done so yet, for the simple fact that I just don’t know which side we should back, or if we should back anyone at all.
I do know a bit of background. In September of 1978, President Carter helped Egypt’s President Sadat and Israel’s Prime Minister Begin negotiate a treaty, which gave control of the Sinai back to Egypt. As a result, relations between Egypt and the U.S. were friendly for the next few years. When Sadat was killed in 1981, and Hosni Mubarak took power, the United States wanted to maintain friendly relations with Egypt. Thus, when Mubarak held single candidate elections, every six years, imprisoned and tortured political opposition, and curtailed his people’s freedom of speech, American officials gave a collective shrug, figuring, “Eh, there are worse dictators out there.”
Inspired by the Tunisian uprising, the Egyptian people took to the streets on January 25th of this year, with the intent of ousting Mubarak from power. Mubarak first responded by ordering the police and military to quell the riots. However, with so many young men who’ve been pressed into mandatory military service, the majority of the soldiers sided with the public.
Next, Mubarak named Omar Suleiman, his Intelligence Chief, as his new Vice President. He hoped the change in governmental hierarchy would be enough of a change to appease his people. Unfortunately for Mubarak, protesters saw the symbolic title change as a reshuffling of old blood rather an attempt at substantive reform. Since then, he’s offered to not run for office in September‘s election, but has waffled on whether or not his son will run or not. All this, we know.
Beyond this point, things become foggy. Many news organizations have implied that the protesters are doing the bidding of Islamic extremists looking to make Egypt a haven for the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, Taliban, and Al Qaeda. On the flip side, former CBS Middle East correspondent Lawrence Pintak claims American news is skewing the truth, and what we’re seeing are Islamic moderates seeking legitimate independence from oppression.
Are we seeing the dawn of a revolution being fueled by people hungry for freedom? While it’s clear that Mubarak is a dictator and despot, is he the only thing standing in the way of a Islamic fundamentalist regime in Egypt? Would such a regime necessarily ally itself with extremist terrorist organizations? I’m not there, I don’t know. Not knowing, I can’t, and won’t, blog an opinion one way or the other.
Lately, the news has been dominated by reports of the protests/riots in Egypt. Just about every serious blogger has published their take on these events. Typically, I’d be in there too, writing, “This should happen,” or, “America should back X.” I haven’t done so yet, for the simple fact that I just don’t know which side we should back, or if we should back anyone at all.
I do know a bit of background. In September of 1978, President Carter helped Egypt’s President Sadat and Israel’s Prime Minister Begin negotiate a treaty, which gave control of the Sinai back to Egypt. As a result, relations between Egypt and the U.S. were friendly for the next few years. When Sadat was killed in 1981, and Hosni Mubarak took power, the United States wanted to maintain friendly relations with Egypt. Thus, when Mubarak held single candidate elections, every six years, imprisoned and tortured political opposition, and curtailed his people’s freedom of speech, American officials gave a collective shrug, figuring, “Eh, there are worse dictators out there.”
Inspired by the Tunisian uprising, the Egyptian people took to the streets on January 25th of this year, with the intent of ousting Mubarak from power. Mubarak first responded by ordering the police and military to quell the riots. However, with so many young men who’ve been pressed into mandatory military service, the majority of the soldiers sided with the public.
Next, Mubarak named Omar Suleiman, his Intelligence Chief, as his new Vice President. He hoped the change in governmental hierarchy would be enough of a change to appease his people. Unfortunately for Mubarak, protesters saw the symbolic title change as a reshuffling of old blood rather an attempt at substantive reform. Since then, he’s offered to not run for office in September‘s election, but has waffled on whether or not his son will run or not. All this, we know.
Beyond this point, things become foggy. Many news organizations have implied that the protesters are doing the bidding of Islamic extremists looking to make Egypt a haven for the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood, Taliban, and Al Qaeda. On the flip side, former CBS Middle East correspondent Lawrence Pintak claims American news is skewing the truth, and what we’re seeing are Islamic moderates seeking legitimate independence from oppression.
Are we seeing the dawn of a revolution being fueled by people hungry for freedom? While it’s clear that Mubarak is a dictator and despot, is he the only thing standing in the way of a Islamic fundamentalist regime in Egypt? Would such a regime necessarily ally itself with extremist terrorist organizations? I’m not there, I don’t know. Not knowing, I can’t, and won’t, blog an opinion one way or the other.
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
My New Food Blog
-
I love good food, and over the last three years wine’s become a quasi-hobby of mine. Thus when I started blogging seriously, I began recording my culinary thoughts on my main blog, Blogito Ergo Sum. I looked at my blog last weekend, and some of my food entries didn't really seem to fit anymore. Therefore, I created a culinary blog.
I spent yesterday pimping it; selecting backgrounds & fonts, adding links, monetizing it with Amazon ads; and moved my food entries to the new blog, “On My Plate.” I kept any food entries which had been commented on on Blogito, but deleted the rest as I copied them to the new blog. My epicurean musings can be found at http://onjamesplate.blogspot.com/ from now on.
I love good food, and over the last three years wine’s become a quasi-hobby of mine. Thus when I started blogging seriously, I began recording my culinary thoughts on my main blog, Blogito Ergo Sum. I looked at my blog last weekend, and some of my food entries didn't really seem to fit anymore. Therefore, I created a culinary blog.
I spent yesterday pimping it; selecting backgrounds & fonts, adding links, monetizing it with Amazon ads; and moved my food entries to the new blog, “On My Plate.” I kept any food entries which had been commented on on Blogito, but deleted the rest as I copied them to the new blog. My epicurean musings can be found at http://onjamesplate.blogspot.com/ from now on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)