I'm saddened at the death of John Wooden! He was both an amazing person and basketball coach. Reading the respect so many, many, many people had for him as a coach and more importantly as a person is nice in this era of so much cynicism and pain.
I know how much meeting him meant to D.S., my high school classmate, as a high school student in the 1960's when UCLA played at Purdue University near to where we lived.
One could only wish that more of us could live to be 99 and active nearly til the end as he did with dignity and kindness.
Thanks!
Friday, June 04, 2010
Sunday, May 30, 2010
90 Days of: "Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem" - Reflections
I just finished watching Day 90 - Parts A and B - of Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem through You Tube.
The 90 days of daily videos were an incredible education for me in many ways. Seeing so many Palestinian people in so many settings has helped expand my understanding of so many different things related to Palestinians and Israelis and Americans as well as Moslems, Jews and various other religions that are in the West Bank and Gaza Areas as well as in Jerusalem.
While the series is/was seemingly not "political" in nature, inevitably the politics of life in Palestine and Israel was most important in the words and pictures I've taken in.
I return in my head over and over and over again to images - which link - Palestine with Apartheid and South Africa as well as Slavery and the oppressions which followed it in the United States. There are so, so many parallels - between how Palestinians are scapegoated and blamed for what has been done to them.
I have a mixture of emotions: sadness, anger and a general state of uneasiness. I do not expect that Most Americans will see the importance of a free and strong Palestine in their world(s).
It seems obvious to me that IF - a new and just peace were established through Israel and the United States either Honestly helping make possible or through international pressure forcing things to change that so many other things could more easily be dealt with. Obvious examples include: "International Terrorism" in general, the oppressive regimes of many, if not most other states in the Middle East, as well as Pakistan, a most dangerous place in today's world. Obviously Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Iran might either develop in alternate more accepting ways or at the very least be forced or able to deal with their own problems.
It is unfortunate that in the United States we both have a history of hurting others, while at the same time proclaiming our being "the best", better than others in the world. It is not enough to say that we are "better" than the worst of the rest of the world. We need to change our history (as it develops) so that the destruction of Native Americans, Slavery, as well as the many, many governments we've overthrown. In Iran - our efforts in the 1950's until the Shah was overthrown in the late 1970's - lead in so many ways to what is going on there now. Our actions in Cuba lead to Castro and his Cuban Revolution. We fail to see the good things that Castro did in Cuba such as creating a health care system for the people, which we still don't have in the U.S.
Understanding Palestinians through listening and caring is new to most of us. Hopefully we will start to see them as people, with needs and desires not that different from ours.
I hope that over time I will find other kindred spirits to communicate with related to Palestine. There is a US coalition of groups committed to peace through:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/ - The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. Locally there is: Jewish Voice for Peace - an excellent group of fellow concerned (mostly) Jewish people.
I would always welcome individuals who would like to share ideas and perspectives in a respectful, caring way! Thanks!
The 90 days of daily videos were an incredible education for me in many ways. Seeing so many Palestinian people in so many settings has helped expand my understanding of so many different things related to Palestinians and Israelis and Americans as well as Moslems, Jews and various other religions that are in the West Bank and Gaza Areas as well as in Jerusalem.
While the series is/was seemingly not "political" in nature, inevitably the politics of life in Palestine and Israel was most important in the words and pictures I've taken in.
I return in my head over and over and over again to images - which link - Palestine with Apartheid and South Africa as well as Slavery and the oppressions which followed it in the United States. There are so, so many parallels - between how Palestinians are scapegoated and blamed for what has been done to them.
I have a mixture of emotions: sadness, anger and a general state of uneasiness. I do not expect that Most Americans will see the importance of a free and strong Palestine in their world(s).
It seems obvious to me that IF - a new and just peace were established through Israel and the United States either Honestly helping make possible or through international pressure forcing things to change that so many other things could more easily be dealt with. Obvious examples include: "International Terrorism" in general, the oppressive regimes of many, if not most other states in the Middle East, as well as Pakistan, a most dangerous place in today's world. Obviously Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Iran might either develop in alternate more accepting ways or at the very least be forced or able to deal with their own problems.
It is unfortunate that in the United States we both have a history of hurting others, while at the same time proclaiming our being "the best", better than others in the world. It is not enough to say that we are "better" than the worst of the rest of the world. We need to change our history (as it develops) so that the destruction of Native Americans, Slavery, as well as the many, many governments we've overthrown. In Iran - our efforts in the 1950's until the Shah was overthrown in the late 1970's - lead in so many ways to what is going on there now. Our actions in Cuba lead to Castro and his Cuban Revolution. We fail to see the good things that Castro did in Cuba such as creating a health care system for the people, which we still don't have in the U.S.
Understanding Palestinians through listening and caring is new to most of us. Hopefully we will start to see them as people, with needs and desires not that different from ours.
I hope that over time I will find other kindred spirits to communicate with related to Palestine. There is a US coalition of groups committed to peace through:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org/ - The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation. Locally there is: Jewish Voice for Peace - an excellent group of fellow concerned (mostly) Jewish people.
I would always welcome individuals who would like to share ideas and perspectives in a respectful, caring way! Thanks!
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Respect and Coexistence - an Alternate Perspective
Episode 85 of the excellent You Tube series: "Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enTbBx622-8 had a dramatically different, interesting perspective as a leader of Naturei Karta ( http://www.nkusa.org/ ) was interviewed in Jerusalem. From their website it states: "The name was given to a group of Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem who refused (and still refuse) to recognize the existence or authority of the so-called "State of Israel" and made (and still make) a point of publicly demonstrating their position, the position of the Torah and authentic unadulterated Judaism."
These people believe that the "State of Israel" can only be established when the Messiah returns. This traditional Jewish (religious) perspective had adherents in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel living peacefully with their Arab neighbors, though the growing tensions after World War I inevitably affected them. The rabbi and his wife were interviewed eloquently expressing their desires to live respecting the lives of their Palestinian neighbors and potentially within a Palestinian State.
As I've watched many episodes of the You Tube series I've learned quite a few new terms such as:
"martyr" which would translate into "terrorist who'd been killed by Israeli forces" in my good old days I grew up in and of course "settler", the Jewish residents of West Bank settlements.
As I watch more and more I increasingly have images both of traditional segregation and racism in the United States and of the former apartheid of South Africa.
The link between these was clearly shown in the recent Sleepless episode. The Orthodox Jews of Mea Shearim (in Naturei Karta) respect those they see as "different" such as Palestinians. They do Not see themselves as "better than" these people, allowing them to dictate how the others should live. They want the freedom to live their own lives in their religious community without interference. (I would note that their biggest difficulties and conflicts often are with Jewish and/or Israeli authorities who either support "secular Judiasm" or from their perspective distort their religious rules/lives.)
In contrast to this perspective The Settlers, Israeli military/political establishment, American political establishment and many others rarely see Palestinians as their/our equals. Palestinians are expected to leave where their families have lived for generations and "go with the Arabs" (e.g. in Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc.)
When we look at other issues, this issue of respect pushes forward so easily. Arizonans with "accents" when speaking English are somehow "wrong", despite both the facts that Arizona was originally in Mexico, a Spanish speaking country as well as the fact that we have: Southern accents, New York accents, Bostonian accents, "hillbilly" accents as well as British accents we hear frequently.
We are both a "Christian" and "English speaking" country in the U.S. according to the views of many. The Native Americans who were here before both the Christians and English speakers have no such rights to dictate how we live. We are "basically good" and the country that should be emulated by the rest of the world despite: the genocide Native Americans experience here, the history of slavery and segregation and inequality towards Black Americans, the nuclear explosions of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and other things that have been done in our name.
Palestinians will not find peace until or unless there is respect and acceptance of them. Iran and Iraq will not have peace until we and they find respect and acceptance of each other. North Korea and Pakistan and other countries face similar issues. Some of these issues are more complex than others, but they all require us to respect and support others.
Thanks!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enTbBx622-8 had a dramatically different, interesting perspective as a leader of Naturei Karta ( http://www.nkusa.org/ ) was interviewed in Jerusalem. From their website it states: "The name was given to a group of Orthodox Jews in Jerusalem who refused (and still refuse) to recognize the existence or authority of the so-called "State of Israel" and made (and still make) a point of publicly demonstrating their position, the position of the Torah and authentic unadulterated Judaism."
These people believe that the "State of Israel" can only be established when the Messiah returns. This traditional Jewish (religious) perspective had adherents in Palestine before the establishment of the State of Israel living peacefully with their Arab neighbors, though the growing tensions after World War I inevitably affected them. The rabbi and his wife were interviewed eloquently expressing their desires to live respecting the lives of their Palestinian neighbors and potentially within a Palestinian State.
As I've watched many episodes of the You Tube series I've learned quite a few new terms such as:
"martyr" which would translate into "terrorist who'd been killed by Israeli forces" in my good old days I grew up in and of course "settler", the Jewish residents of West Bank settlements.
As I watch more and more I increasingly have images both of traditional segregation and racism in the United States and of the former apartheid of South Africa.
The link between these was clearly shown in the recent Sleepless episode. The Orthodox Jews of Mea Shearim (in Naturei Karta) respect those they see as "different" such as Palestinians. They do Not see themselves as "better than" these people, allowing them to dictate how the others should live. They want the freedom to live their own lives in their religious community without interference. (I would note that their biggest difficulties and conflicts often are with Jewish and/or Israeli authorities who either support "secular Judiasm" or from their perspective distort their religious rules/lives.)
In contrast to this perspective The Settlers, Israeli military/political establishment, American political establishment and many others rarely see Palestinians as their/our equals. Palestinians are expected to leave where their families have lived for generations and "go with the Arabs" (e.g. in Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc.)
When we look at other issues, this issue of respect pushes forward so easily. Arizonans with "accents" when speaking English are somehow "wrong", despite both the facts that Arizona was originally in Mexico, a Spanish speaking country as well as the fact that we have: Southern accents, New York accents, Bostonian accents, "hillbilly" accents as well as British accents we hear frequently.
We are both a "Christian" and "English speaking" country in the U.S. according to the views of many. The Native Americans who were here before both the Christians and English speakers have no such rights to dictate how we live. We are "basically good" and the country that should be emulated by the rest of the world despite: the genocide Native Americans experience here, the history of slavery and segregation and inequality towards Black Americans, the nuclear explosions of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and other things that have been done in our name.
Palestinians will not find peace until or unless there is respect and acceptance of them. Iran and Iraq will not have peace until we and they find respect and acceptance of each other. North Korea and Pakistan and other countries face similar issues. Some of these issues are more complex than others, but they all require us to respect and support others.
Thanks!
Monday, May 24, 2010
Respect and Perhaps Pain
If I respect others (Women, People of Color, Differently Abled People, Children, Iraqi's, Iranians, or even others whose political beliefs are different than mine) I must listen to their voices and really hear them as individual people. To respect them I Acknowledge that they have Feelings. To respect them I readily see that they are "important" just as my family and friends are "important".
When I am hurting, my pain may affect how I respond to others. IF I let this Pain excuse how I treat others in negative ways, I may Not Respect Others. To do this I also do Not Respect Myself.
There is a big difference between expressing our hurts, our pain, our anger and more and Not respecting Others. Feeling Angry or Hurt by the words and actions of Others does Not justify losing respect.
It can be difficult to respect Others (e.g. Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Americans such as Glenn Beck or for some Barack Obama). When we let our feelings related to our Perceptions of the actions of such people to allow us to lose Respect for them, they often are no longer "human" or even "real" to us as individual people.
I can not suggest that we "love" everyone! When we don't respect those we perceive as our "enemies", we can lose layers of our own humanity. Channeling our fears and anger is important. Confronting Racism, Sexism, Militarism and "rude behavior" is important. How we do it can affect others around us as well as how we are as individual people.
Thanks!
When I am hurting, my pain may affect how I respond to others. IF I let this Pain excuse how I treat others in negative ways, I may Not Respect Others. To do this I also do Not Respect Myself.
There is a big difference between expressing our hurts, our pain, our anger and more and Not respecting Others. Feeling Angry or Hurt by the words and actions of Others does Not justify losing respect.
It can be difficult to respect Others (e.g. Adolf Hitler, Saddam Hussein, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or Americans such as Glenn Beck or for some Barack Obama). When we let our feelings related to our Perceptions of the actions of such people to allow us to lose Respect for them, they often are no longer "human" or even "real" to us as individual people.
I can not suggest that we "love" everyone! When we don't respect those we perceive as our "enemies", we can lose layers of our own humanity. Channeling our fears and anger is important. Confronting Racism, Sexism, Militarism and "rude behavior" is important. How we do it can affect others around us as well as how we are as individual people.
Thanks!
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Confronting the Opposition
While I can appreciate the discomfort of some Tea Partyites and others and resulting glee of those in opposition to the recent statements of Kentucky Senatorial candidate Rand Paul, I'm also reminded of the traps that we so easily fall into in such areas.
Yelling at and ridiculing those whose beliefs are much different than ours may raise our morale at times, but it rarely helps us bring about lasting change.
Bringing about change requires grassroots work with others, respecting them and helping them respect us. Oft times in political areas we much reach those "in the middle" as well as motivating others to work seriously with us. Such work is much slower than the sound bites of ridicule, but rarely does the ridicule help us more than momentarily.
Thanks!
Yelling at and ridiculing those whose beliefs are much different than ours may raise our morale at times, but it rarely helps us bring about lasting change.
Bringing about change requires grassroots work with others, respecting them and helping them respect us. Oft times in political areas we much reach those "in the middle" as well as motivating others to work seriously with us. Such work is much slower than the sound bites of ridicule, but rarely does the ridicule help us more than momentarily.
Thanks!
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Reflecting Forward and Backwards
Today, on my 59th birthday, I went out and ran a little longer than the past few days. It was early (cooler) and I felt stronger and much better than on previous days when my legs felt heavy and immobile. While I'm a long way from being in good running shape, I can see that with a cooler, less humid climate and work I can get back into running shape. It won't be the shape I was in when younger, but...
It feels funny to say that I'm 59. It feels like 40-45 was a long time ago, but am I really "that old"? It feels like I'm in a transition, but it is unclear where I'm moving both from and to. Thankfully it feels relaxing and not pressured.
I feel happy to have others who are so kind to me, despite all my weaknesses and flaws.
I'm happy that today is also my son's 23rd birthday. He's running his first half-marathon in Chicago where he lives starting in a little less than half an hour. I'm proud of all that he's done, and hopeful that the economy based threats to his job will in the end dissipate. He's been very successful as a first year science teacher as well as coaching cross country and track. More importantly he's a good person growing into adulthood.
I wonder about the immediate future. My cell phone rang at 3:40 a.m. (12:40 a.m. West Coast Time) and I couldn't get it in time to answer it. "Restricted Number" Could it be my mother or even about my mother. My mother just turned 83, and my step-father's 88th birthday was last month. B's mother will turn 87 in a few days.
I've been lucky in so many ways, despite my miss-steps and questionable doings and not doings in my earlier life. I enjoy being retired very much! My duplicate bridge playing has grown. I'm no longer a so-so player, having moved to being a moderately good player. It feels good to place in not-high level competition at least 2/3 of the time. I enjoy reading and playing around on the computer. Exercising at the gym and elsewhere continues to be most enjoyable.
I hope, despite so much evidence to the contrary, that Peace in the Middle East will break out - with changing tides among increasing numbers of American Jews as well as others in Europe and elsewhere. It is sad to me that so many people don't read and understand history and realities of the present in more thoughtful, deep ways. While I can enjoy some movies and a little television I don't confuse the fantasies of escapism from some of the often simple realities we all face in our daily lives.
I hope that Barack Obama will grow as a leader and assert himself for some of the "liberal" causes that he espoused recently, despite the barrage of recent manure that has shown the racism and short-sightedness of so many. I also hope that more of us will see the need to reflect and grow: as men, learning how to better relate to the worlds of women, children and other men; as White People in a world that is increasingly multi-cultural; as Americans in a world where, despite being "so strong" we often are out-of-touch and at times irrelevant to the worlds around us.
Thank you!
It feels funny to say that I'm 59. It feels like 40-45 was a long time ago, but am I really "that old"? It feels like I'm in a transition, but it is unclear where I'm moving both from and to. Thankfully it feels relaxing and not pressured.
I feel happy to have others who are so kind to me, despite all my weaknesses and flaws.
I'm happy that today is also my son's 23rd birthday. He's running his first half-marathon in Chicago where he lives starting in a little less than half an hour. I'm proud of all that he's done, and hopeful that the economy based threats to his job will in the end dissipate. He's been very successful as a first year science teacher as well as coaching cross country and track. More importantly he's a good person growing into adulthood.
I wonder about the immediate future. My cell phone rang at 3:40 a.m. (12:40 a.m. West Coast Time) and I couldn't get it in time to answer it. "Restricted Number" Could it be my mother or even about my mother. My mother just turned 83, and my step-father's 88th birthday was last month. B's mother will turn 87 in a few days.
I've been lucky in so many ways, despite my miss-steps and questionable doings and not doings in my earlier life. I enjoy being retired very much! My duplicate bridge playing has grown. I'm no longer a so-so player, having moved to being a moderately good player. It feels good to place in not-high level competition at least 2/3 of the time. I enjoy reading and playing around on the computer. Exercising at the gym and elsewhere continues to be most enjoyable.
I hope, despite so much evidence to the contrary, that Peace in the Middle East will break out - with changing tides among increasing numbers of American Jews as well as others in Europe and elsewhere. It is sad to me that so many people don't read and understand history and realities of the present in more thoughtful, deep ways. While I can enjoy some movies and a little television I don't confuse the fantasies of escapism from some of the often simple realities we all face in our daily lives.
I hope that Barack Obama will grow as a leader and assert himself for some of the "liberal" causes that he espoused recently, despite the barrage of recent manure that has shown the racism and short-sightedness of so many. I also hope that more of us will see the need to reflect and grow: as men, learning how to better relate to the worlds of women, children and other men; as White People in a world that is increasingly multi-cultural; as Americans in a world where, despite being "so strong" we often are out-of-touch and at times irrelevant to the worlds around us.
Thank you!
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
"Anti-Semitism Here?" - I think NOT!
At Berkeley, moral victory despite divestment vote loss
Dina Omar, The Electronic Intifada, 3 May 2010
On 28 April, University of California, Berkeley's Student Senate narrowly missed an historic opportunity to divest its funds from United Technologies and General Electric which manufacture F-16 jets and Apache helicopters -- weapons sold to the Israeli military and used against civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
More than a month earlier, on 18 March 2010, the Student Senate approved a bill (SB118A) to divest from companies that provide military support for the Israeli occupation of Palestine. UC Berkeley student body president Will Smelko vetoed SB118A a week later, and the bill was voted on again on 14 April and 28 April was the last debate considering the bill. However, the count was one vote short of the two-thirds majority (14 votes) needed to override the veto.
The battle at Berkeley -- part of a global movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions of apartheid Israel -- was closely watched. Speakers for the bill on 28 April and on 14 April included UC Berkeley faculty members Judith Butler, Daniel Boyarin, Hatem Bazian, law professor George Bisharat of UC Hastings and UN Special Rapporteur on human rights Richard Falk along with testimonies of Palestinian students living under Israeli occupation.
Notable personalities and dozens of activist groups on campus and around the world strongly supported the resolution. More than 40 student groups representing a variety of ethnic groups and political interests joined the call on the university to divest its funds from companies profiting from Israel's war crimes.
More than 100 UC faculty members, 45 from UC Berkeley, signed a statement supporting overriding the presidential veto. Prominent thinkers such as Naomi Klein, Alice Walker and five Nobel Peace Prize Laureates -- among them Archbishop Desmond Tutu -- supported UC Berkeley Students for Justice in Palestine in their efforts to uphold the divestment bill.
Nobel Women Peace Laureates Shirin Ebadi, Mairead Maguire, Rigoberta Menchu Tum and Jody Williams issued a Statement of Support reading: "We stand united in our belief that divesting from companies that provide significant support for the Israeli military provides moral and strategic stewardship of tuition and taxpayer-funded public education money."
However, the tremendous amount of support for SB118A was not enough to override the veto.
According to a report in the Jewish Daily Forward, the Berkeley chapter of Hillel organized closed meetings for the student senators with representatives of the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Jewish Community Relations Council, J Street and Akiva Tor, the Israeli consul general of San Francisco ("How To Beat Back Israel Divestment Bill: Get Organized," 21 April 2010).
Some senators received threatening e-mails and Senator Emily Carlton told the Forward: "'There were undertones of intimidation'" during the meeting organized by Hillel. Three student senators reversed their votes over the course of multiple senate meetings and extensive lobbying efforts.
Waseem Salahi, a UC Berkeley student and senator-elect, questioned the influence of powers that be: "The senators knew what was right, but decided instead to cow to political pressure and intimidation." After the bill missed passage by one vote, international students expressed their dismay about attending a university that continues to actively support the oppression of their family members and friends overseas.
In support of the bill UC Berkeley alum Basima Sisemore told the student senators a moving story about her two-year-old cousin who died at an Israeli checkpoint in the occupied West Bank because he was turned away while in need of medical attention.
The final speaker and visiting scholar from Palestine, Ibrahim Shikaki, drew a standing ovation from the audience by when he challenged the senators, saying: "the narrative that has captured you is the same that named Nelson Mandela and Malcom X terrorists. If that is the case, then I am a proud, indigenous, Palestinian freedom fighter, because that is what we are. Rethink your terminology, rethink your narrative, rethink injustice and rethink this veto."
Once it was clear the veto was going to be upheld, despite the wishes of the 700 students, educators and community members supporting the bill, the supporters exited the room with their mouths covered in tape in a gesture meant to convey that their voices had been silenced by the veto.
Senator Rahul Patel, who supported the bill from the beginning, invited student supporters to raise their left fist in the air and to walk out. Patel said their fists raised symbolized "The seeds of truth and freedom that we have sowed tonight."
Hundreds of students walked out of the meeting, and reconvened outside to share their feelings about the vote. UC Berkeley and SJP alum Sophia Ritchie said: "Something has shifted -- in the discourse, in the sheer numbers of people who are concerned, in the solidarity work and coalition building amongst a broad and truly diverse range of student and community groups, in the energy around Palestine -- that cannot be ignored. In this way, we are winning."
Dina Omar is a UC Berkeley graduate student in Middle Eastern Studies and Anthropology. The author is a member of SJP and a poet and currently works as the membership coordinator for the Arab Resource and Organizing Center.
Dina Omar, The Electronic Intifada, 3 May 2010
On 28 April, University of California, Berkeley's Student Senate narrowly missed an historic opportunity to divest its funds from United Technologies and General Electric which manufacture F-16 jets and Apache helicopters -- weapons sold to the Israeli military and used against civilians in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.
More than a month earlier, on 18 March 2010, the Student Senate approved a bill (SB118A) to divest from companies that provide military support for the Israeli occupation of Palestine. UC Berkeley student body president Will Smelko vetoed SB118A a week later, and the bill was voted on again on 14 April and 28 April was the last debate considering the bill. However, the count was one vote short of the two-thirds majority (14 votes) needed to override the veto.
The battle at Berkeley -- part of a global movement for boycott, divestment and sanctions of apartheid Israel -- was closely watched. Speakers for the bill on 28 April and on 14 April included UC Berkeley faculty members Judith Butler, Daniel Boyarin, Hatem Bazian, law professor George Bisharat of UC Hastings and UN Special Rapporteur on human rights Richard Falk along with testimonies of Palestinian students living under Israeli occupation.
Notable personalities and dozens of activist groups on campus and around the world strongly supported the resolution. More than 40 student groups representing a variety of ethnic groups and political interests joined the call on the university to divest its funds from companies profiting from Israel's war crimes.
More than 100 UC faculty members, 45 from UC Berkeley, signed a statement supporting overriding the presidential veto. Prominent thinkers such as Naomi Klein, Alice Walker and five Nobel Peace Prize Laureates -- among them Archbishop Desmond Tutu -- supported UC Berkeley Students for Justice in Palestine in their efforts to uphold the divestment bill.
Nobel Women Peace Laureates Shirin Ebadi, Mairead Maguire, Rigoberta Menchu Tum and Jody Williams issued a Statement of Support reading: "We stand united in our belief that divesting from companies that provide significant support for the Israeli military provides moral and strategic stewardship of tuition and taxpayer-funded public education money."
However, the tremendous amount of support for SB118A was not enough to override the veto.
According to a report in the Jewish Daily Forward, the Berkeley chapter of Hillel organized closed meetings for the student senators with representatives of the Anti-Defamation League, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the Jewish Community Relations Council, J Street and Akiva Tor, the Israeli consul general of San Francisco ("How To Beat Back Israel Divestment Bill: Get Organized," 21 April 2010).
Some senators received threatening e-mails and Senator Emily Carlton told the Forward: "'There were undertones of intimidation'" during the meeting organized by Hillel. Three student senators reversed their votes over the course of multiple senate meetings and extensive lobbying efforts.
Waseem Salahi, a UC Berkeley student and senator-elect, questioned the influence of powers that be: "The senators knew what was right, but decided instead to cow to political pressure and intimidation." After the bill missed passage by one vote, international students expressed their dismay about attending a university that continues to actively support the oppression of their family members and friends overseas.
In support of the bill UC Berkeley alum Basima Sisemore told the student senators a moving story about her two-year-old cousin who died at an Israeli checkpoint in the occupied West Bank because he was turned away while in need of medical attention.
The final speaker and visiting scholar from Palestine, Ibrahim Shikaki, drew a standing ovation from the audience by when he challenged the senators, saying: "the narrative that has captured you is the same that named Nelson Mandela and Malcom X terrorists. If that is the case, then I am a proud, indigenous, Palestinian freedom fighter, because that is what we are. Rethink your terminology, rethink your narrative, rethink injustice and rethink this veto."
Once it was clear the veto was going to be upheld, despite the wishes of the 700 students, educators and community members supporting the bill, the supporters exited the room with their mouths covered in tape in a gesture meant to convey that their voices had been silenced by the veto.
Senator Rahul Patel, who supported the bill from the beginning, invited student supporters to raise their left fist in the air and to walk out. Patel said their fists raised symbolized "The seeds of truth and freedom that we have sowed tonight."
Hundreds of students walked out of the meeting, and reconvened outside to share their feelings about the vote. UC Berkeley and SJP alum Sophia Ritchie said: "Something has shifted -- in the discourse, in the sheer numbers of people who are concerned, in the solidarity work and coalition building amongst a broad and truly diverse range of student and community groups, in the energy around Palestine -- that cannot be ignored. In this way, we are winning."
Dina Omar is a UC Berkeley graduate student in Middle Eastern Studies and Anthropology. The author is a member of SJP and a poet and currently works as the membership coordinator for the Arab Resource and Organizing Center.
Saturday, May 01, 2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8b-a6rHYl0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8b-a6rHYl0 - Episode 60 - of: "Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem" - The You Tube Video - Episode 61 is the latest of 90 daily videos as I write now.
In the first half of this episode a Palestinian man was interviewed at his house. The house has apparently been owned by his family since prior to his birth. The front porch and only entrance to the house is in Jerusalem. The inside of the house is in The West Bank.
This man and his family have been assigned "West Bank" identity cards. It is illegal for them to be in Jerusalem. At one point several busloads of people in their area were arrested and held for a good part of a day because it was alleged that they had to have violated the law in entering their houses (from Jerusalem).
The man's grown child has a Jerusalem identity card. Their spouse has a West Bank identity card. If the Jerusalem identified adult moves with their spouse to the West Bank they will lose their Jerusalem identity card and any rights to be in Jerusalem. Their young child has not been assigned an identity card at all.
This really makes a lot of sense! Thanks!
In the first half of this episode a Palestinian man was interviewed at his house. The house has apparently been owned by his family since prior to his birth. The front porch and only entrance to the house is in Jerusalem. The inside of the house is in The West Bank.
This man and his family have been assigned "West Bank" identity cards. It is illegal for them to be in Jerusalem. At one point several busloads of people in their area were arrested and held for a good part of a day because it was alleged that they had to have violated the law in entering their houses (from Jerusalem).
The man's grown child has a Jerusalem identity card. Their spouse has a West Bank identity card. If the Jerusalem identified adult moves with their spouse to the West Bank they will lose their Jerusalem identity card and any rights to be in Jerusalem. Their young child has not been assigned an identity card at all.
This really makes a lot of sense! Thanks!
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Being Honest - and Realistic
My step-son was "30 seconds" late for school yesterday and the school had its usual response (email and phone call about the brutal deed). Yesterday he also did a "good deed" reporting to the office a car's turn signal being on along the school. Were these extenuating circumstances where a parent should intervene?
My partner and step-son are nearly always "on the edge" of being on time to school. The idea of leaving a few minutes early regularly so that he'd be there five minutes early is a totally foreign concept (e.g. a waste of precious time and an impossibility). He's been a few minutes late before.
Playing competitive bridge with a regular partner he told me that I shouldn't have corrected an opponent when s/he conceded the last trick of the hand to me. In fact s/he shouldn't have lost that trick (e.g. if s/he simply played their card they would win the trick). I told my partner that I wouldn't be dishonest in such situations (period).
We often face situations in life where we make choices as to how we view things. How we look at them shapes how we respond.
I find that I tend to look at situations and say to myself:
1.) Is there an issue of principle here in this moment?
2.) Does this really matter?
3.) Am I:
a. 100% right?
b. 100% wrong?
c. Mostly right?
d. Mostly wrong?
e. Partially at fault - unclear as to amount?
f. Is there no "right" or "wrong" here - but it matters to the other person?
g. Other - ?
I try to think of the situation and the other person and look at How important it is that I "win" or not. What lessons are here for me (and for the other person(s))?
Feelings certainly matter!
I also think of how we can work towards the future on the itsy bitsy issue and the larger issues that I see.
How can we move to both be assertive and to work at a micro level towards a better world of communication and compromises?
Thank you!
My partner and step-son are nearly always "on the edge" of being on time to school. The idea of leaving a few minutes early regularly so that he'd be there five minutes early is a totally foreign concept (e.g. a waste of precious time and an impossibility). He's been a few minutes late before.
Playing competitive bridge with a regular partner he told me that I shouldn't have corrected an opponent when s/he conceded the last trick of the hand to me. In fact s/he shouldn't have lost that trick (e.g. if s/he simply played their card they would win the trick). I told my partner that I wouldn't be dishonest in such situations (period).
We often face situations in life where we make choices as to how we view things. How we look at them shapes how we respond.
I find that I tend to look at situations and say to myself:
1.) Is there an issue of principle here in this moment?
2.) Does this really matter?
3.) Am I:
a. 100% right?
b. 100% wrong?
c. Mostly right?
d. Mostly wrong?
e. Partially at fault - unclear as to amount?
f. Is there no "right" or "wrong" here - but it matters to the other person?
g. Other - ?
I try to think of the situation and the other person and look at How important it is that I "win" or not. What lessons are here for me (and for the other person(s))?
Feelings certainly matter!
I also think of how we can work towards the future on the itsy bitsy issue and the larger issues that I see.
How can we move to both be assertive and to work at a micro level towards a better world of communication and compromises?
Thank you!
Saturday, April 17, 2010
46 Days of Palestinian Videos
I have now watched 46 days of videos on You Tube of “Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem” . Six days a week Palestinian women (primarily media producers) in Jerusalem, Gaza and Ramallah are videotaped talking with Palestinian people in various settings. While certainly the videos are “political” they also tell a story which a critical viewer can not readily ignore. They expose life in its complexities amongst Palestinians. They show the diversity of the people of the West Bank and Gaza.
The more that I watch the more that I feel a variety of things including shame, anger, admiration, sadness and much more.
Before I began watching the videos I was not aware that Gaza had an educated middle class population as well as people in poverty. I’ve also learned of different communities within the West Bank such as the Samaritans, whose religious faith seems closer to Judiasm than to Islam.
It seems increasingly obvious to me that the Israeli leadership unfortunately either does not want a peaceful permanent settlement with the Palestinians or is so scared of Palestinians per se, that nothing will convince them of genuine cooperation from “the other side”. In either case, it clearly is a situation where the status quo will not change for the better without increasing pressures to force serious negotiations on the part of the Israeli leadership.
It also seems obvious that “peace” is more than creating borders (which is most difficult in of itself). Peace is a recognition that the Palestinian people are the equals of the Jews of Israel. The situation seems clearly similar to how the dominant feelings were in the U.S. amongst White People in relation to Blacks in perhaps the late 1940’s. At that time talking of “freedom” for Black people did Not mean that a Black person would have the right to buy a house next door to a White person. That was “radical” and not realistic.
Today it is “radical” to deem Palestinian needs for water and other resources as being equal to those of the Israeli Jews.
Absent a radical shift in Israeli perspectives whereby Palestinians are miraculously turned into people who accept Palestinians as – “just like us”, building a future peace is in some ways much more complex.
There is a now a total paradox between two conflicting “realities”. With Israel so powerful and Palestinians in a weak position, seemingly Palestinians will need to compromise greatly on whatever is “reasonable” to achieve a true peace.
At the same time the combination of Israeli superiority complexes and their fears of Palestinians requires that Palestinians have a very secure, established state established where Israeli interference in internal affairs Can Not be carried out (as is done today).
It is often stated in the Israeli and American presses that the Palestinians and Arabs have repeatedly been shown to be “untrustworthy” and worse. What is not said is how the increasing apartheid or similar on the West Bank builds upon pre-existing feelings and makes peace more and more difficult to achieve.
Clearly any peace agreement will require that the West Bank be a single, contiguous Palestinian country, with No Israeli “islands” within it. IF there are to be any sites that Israelis maintain access to and partial control over they will need to be under the ultimate control of the Palestinian State. Israel’s recent track record has shown unfortunately that it can not be trusted to be fair and accepting and just to the Palestinians.
Perhaps 15 years ago it might have been possible for some small areas to remain under Israeli control surrounded by a Palestinian State. Ironically now as Israel expands its settlements trying to create “new realities” it seals future possibilities. The choices are either a total Apartheid and a state of permanent near war if not low level combat or a very clearly separated two state solution. (One can only hope that with a two state solution that continued trade and commerce and other existing connections can be continued and developed in new non-exploitative ways.)
It is sad to look back and see how things could have and should have been done differently. Absent the corrupt and ignorant leadership of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Israel might well have come to be a much smaller state than it now is. Absent the poor leadership of the neighboring Arab countries, peace might have been possible before the 1967 War.
It is easy to see how some of the Arabs of the Middle East have made mistakes and helped, particularly going back many years, in helping allow things to get bad for the Palestinian cause. One can also readily criticize the leadership of Arafat in various ways and use him as an excuse for various failures.
It is more difficult to look back with criticism upon how Israel has become a world military power and the oppressor of an entire people. It is more difficult to see how we as Americans have developed into both the apologist for and the key force preventing peace from developing in the Middle East.
It is fortunate now that President Obama is seeing how Palestine-Israel is a prime impediment to stopping the growth of radical Islam in much of the Muslim world. I can only hope that his insights will lead to real change in U.S. policy, despite the intense pressures in the U.S. to maintain that status quo via Israel and the Palestinians.
Thank you!
The more that I watch the more that I feel a variety of things including shame, anger, admiration, sadness and much more.
Before I began watching the videos I was not aware that Gaza had an educated middle class population as well as people in poverty. I’ve also learned of different communities within the West Bank such as the Samaritans, whose religious faith seems closer to Judiasm than to Islam.
It seems increasingly obvious to me that the Israeli leadership unfortunately either does not want a peaceful permanent settlement with the Palestinians or is so scared of Palestinians per se, that nothing will convince them of genuine cooperation from “the other side”. In either case, it clearly is a situation where the status quo will not change for the better without increasing pressures to force serious negotiations on the part of the Israeli leadership.
It also seems obvious that “peace” is more than creating borders (which is most difficult in of itself). Peace is a recognition that the Palestinian people are the equals of the Jews of Israel. The situation seems clearly similar to how the dominant feelings were in the U.S. amongst White People in relation to Blacks in perhaps the late 1940’s. At that time talking of “freedom” for Black people did Not mean that a Black person would have the right to buy a house next door to a White person. That was “radical” and not realistic.
Today it is “radical” to deem Palestinian needs for water and other resources as being equal to those of the Israeli Jews.
Absent a radical shift in Israeli perspectives whereby Palestinians are miraculously turned into people who accept Palestinians as – “just like us”, building a future peace is in some ways much more complex.
There is a now a total paradox between two conflicting “realities”. With Israel so powerful and Palestinians in a weak position, seemingly Palestinians will need to compromise greatly on whatever is “reasonable” to achieve a true peace.
At the same time the combination of Israeli superiority complexes and their fears of Palestinians requires that Palestinians have a very secure, established state established where Israeli interference in internal affairs Can Not be carried out (as is done today).
It is often stated in the Israeli and American presses that the Palestinians and Arabs have repeatedly been shown to be “untrustworthy” and worse. What is not said is how the increasing apartheid or similar on the West Bank builds upon pre-existing feelings and makes peace more and more difficult to achieve.
Clearly any peace agreement will require that the West Bank be a single, contiguous Palestinian country, with No Israeli “islands” within it. IF there are to be any sites that Israelis maintain access to and partial control over they will need to be under the ultimate control of the Palestinian State. Israel’s recent track record has shown unfortunately that it can not be trusted to be fair and accepting and just to the Palestinians.
Perhaps 15 years ago it might have been possible for some small areas to remain under Israeli control surrounded by a Palestinian State. Ironically now as Israel expands its settlements trying to create “new realities” it seals future possibilities. The choices are either a total Apartheid and a state of permanent near war if not low level combat or a very clearly separated two state solution. (One can only hope that with a two state solution that continued trade and commerce and other existing connections can be continued and developed in new non-exploitative ways.)
It is sad to look back and see how things could have and should have been done differently. Absent the corrupt and ignorant leadership of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Israel might well have come to be a much smaller state than it now is. Absent the poor leadership of the neighboring Arab countries, peace might have been possible before the 1967 War.
It is easy to see how some of the Arabs of the Middle East have made mistakes and helped, particularly going back many years, in helping allow things to get bad for the Palestinian cause. One can also readily criticize the leadership of Arafat in various ways and use him as an excuse for various failures.
It is more difficult to look back with criticism upon how Israel has become a world military power and the oppressor of an entire people. It is more difficult to see how we as Americans have developed into both the apologist for and the key force preventing peace from developing in the Middle East.
It is fortunate now that President Obama is seeing how Palestine-Israel is a prime impediment to stopping the growth of radical Islam in much of the Muslim world. I can only hope that his insights will lead to real change in U.S. policy, despite the intense pressures in the U.S. to maintain that status quo via Israel and the Palestinians.
Thank you!
Sunday, April 04, 2010
Easter - Jerusalem - etc.
Today is Easter. I am Jewish. In my past life Easter has had meanings limited to trivia – such as having commercially bought Easter chocolate eggs given by others. Pesach – Passover proximate to Easter always carried whatever feelings I had in my past life.
Today I watched several episodes of the You Tube videos: “Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem” (particularly episodes 34A and B) which showed Christian (including Greek Orthodox) attempts at prayers in Jerusalem, the West Bank and finally Gaza from yesterday.
Today I saw much which made me both sad and angry, as well as appreciative of how the spirits of people can continue while they are visibly oppressed by others.
In all the locations I saw Christians, a minority of the Palestinian community, trying to pray and appreciate their historic religious traditions.
In Jerusalem (particularly) the senseless harassment of religious people was most vivid! Christian people were unable to come from the West Bank to pray for Easter because they were “not Israeli citizens” (hardly an acceptance and tolerance of non-Jews).
Yesterday I had seen a Greek Orthodox service from Friday which was beautiful.
Today (yesterday when filmed) the host initially was unable to enter the Old City (of Jerusalem) through the New Gate because it was blocked by Israeli soldiers. She continued in her efforts to get to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a most important site in the history of Christianity. Hundreds of people were waiting and waiting and waiting for the gate to (hopefully) be opened.
The host successfully entered the Damascus Gate, but again her way was blocked as it was to all (who didn’t reside in the blocked area). She continued to try a third way of getting to the area of the Church and it too was blocked. Then a scout band came to the blocked spot. The Israeli authorities let the band go through, also letting the host and her camera person enter.
The host then witnessed the procession from the Church as she had hoped to do.
The other people shown on camera were routinely kept out of the area of the church, regardless of any mitigating factors. There were no stones, no angry words or yelling, no gatherings of young boys or youths who were “threatening”.
On the “other side” (where she was let in) the people were no different from those who were kept out (except those inside had arrived earlier). There was no “security screening” or other such actions.
This was simply (religious) harassment of Palestinians (who were harassed because they are Palestinians) as well as affecting some other pilgrims from outside.
It is obvious that Israeli leadership wants Jerusalem to be “Jewish” which it is not. Jerusalem is both Israeli and Palestinian as well as Jewish, Moslem, Catholic and Greek Orthodox (and other smaller religions).
It seems obvious to me that what has happened recently in the Old City of Jerusalem is a perfect example as to Why any lasting peace settlement can Not simply have Jerusalem as an Israeli (Jewish) City. The “benevolent” (current) leadership will not fairly oversee the needs of the non-Jewish faiths that are also in the Old City. There is no intifada. There is no major unrest.
Where unrest does occur it generally is instigated by Israelis or is in reaction to harsh, unfair measures of the Israelis.
It is unfortunate, but true, that Israel has become “the oppressor”. I can no longer say that it is “radicals” on both sides that prevents peace. That might have been true several decades ago.
I hope that things will change for the better! I can’t imagine this happening until the growing international movements seeking divestment and boycotts of Israel grow. I can’t imagine this happening until the U.S. Government becomes a real mediator, and not a cheerleader for the Israeli Government, occasionally slapping Israel’s hands.
Peace is possible! It isn’t easy and it won’t be easy! Thanks!
Today I watched several episodes of the You Tube videos: “Sleepless in Gaza and Jerusalem” (particularly episodes 34A and B) which showed Christian (including Greek Orthodox) attempts at prayers in Jerusalem, the West Bank and finally Gaza from yesterday.
Today I saw much which made me both sad and angry, as well as appreciative of how the spirits of people can continue while they are visibly oppressed by others.
In all the locations I saw Christians, a minority of the Palestinian community, trying to pray and appreciate their historic religious traditions.
In Jerusalem (particularly) the senseless harassment of religious people was most vivid! Christian people were unable to come from the West Bank to pray for Easter because they were “not Israeli citizens” (hardly an acceptance and tolerance of non-Jews).
Yesterday I had seen a Greek Orthodox service from Friday which was beautiful.
Today (yesterday when filmed) the host initially was unable to enter the Old City (of Jerusalem) through the New Gate because it was blocked by Israeli soldiers. She continued in her efforts to get to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a most important site in the history of Christianity. Hundreds of people were waiting and waiting and waiting for the gate to (hopefully) be opened.
The host successfully entered the Damascus Gate, but again her way was blocked as it was to all (who didn’t reside in the blocked area). She continued to try a third way of getting to the area of the Church and it too was blocked. Then a scout band came to the blocked spot. The Israeli authorities let the band go through, also letting the host and her camera person enter.
The host then witnessed the procession from the Church as she had hoped to do.
The other people shown on camera were routinely kept out of the area of the church, regardless of any mitigating factors. There were no stones, no angry words or yelling, no gatherings of young boys or youths who were “threatening”.
On the “other side” (where she was let in) the people were no different from those who were kept out (except those inside had arrived earlier). There was no “security screening” or other such actions.
This was simply (religious) harassment of Palestinians (who were harassed because they are Palestinians) as well as affecting some other pilgrims from outside.
It is obvious that Israeli leadership wants Jerusalem to be “Jewish” which it is not. Jerusalem is both Israeli and Palestinian as well as Jewish, Moslem, Catholic and Greek Orthodox (and other smaller religions).
It seems obvious to me that what has happened recently in the Old City of Jerusalem is a perfect example as to Why any lasting peace settlement can Not simply have Jerusalem as an Israeli (Jewish) City. The “benevolent” (current) leadership will not fairly oversee the needs of the non-Jewish faiths that are also in the Old City. There is no intifada. There is no major unrest.
Where unrest does occur it generally is instigated by Israelis or is in reaction to harsh, unfair measures of the Israelis.
It is unfortunate, but true, that Israel has become “the oppressor”. I can no longer say that it is “radicals” on both sides that prevents peace. That might have been true several decades ago.
I hope that things will change for the better! I can’t imagine this happening until the growing international movements seeking divestment and boycotts of Israel grow. I can’t imagine this happening until the U.S. Government becomes a real mediator, and not a cheerleader for the Israeli Government, occasionally slapping Israel’s hands.
Peace is possible! It isn’t easy and it won’t be easy! Thanks!
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Health Reform - Interesting Week
It will be interesting to see how the Democrats in the House of Representatives "perform" this week as the (potential) health care vote nears.
On the "left" we have some who are not willing to give any more and could vote against the bill if it is unduly (more) restrictive on abortion.
On the "right" we have the die hard opponents of abortion rights.
Other smaller issues similarly divide.
The drug companies and hospitals have been "bought off" to support a situation where seemingly they will do better than the status quo. The Chamber of Commerce interests merge with the Republican issues and matter only in how strongly they can lobby with the conservative Democrats.
If the Democrats win the vote this week it will be a moderately impressive success at allowing some to "duck and cover" and vote against the bill, while having enough votes to just barely win. Unless the Democrats can effectively get votes from both the right and left they will be doomed to a serious defeat.
One can hope that enough Democrats in the end will recognize the obvious paralysis of the party if the vote doesn't go through and vote for it. If the bill passes, the Democrats road will still be difficult. If the bill fails, the path will be pretty hopeless both for future legislation and the 2010 elections.
If the bill succeeds, it will obviously be necessary for future legislation to add to the "reform" so that cost savings actually occur. Otherwise, costs will continue to skyrocket with some more people potentially covered.
It is sad that Obama won't ask both houses to vote on a non-binding resolution in support of a public option to see if the votes are there to pass it. That clearly could either unite the Democrats or spell their doom (and the risk is probably too great to try that).
Perhaps some day I'll live long enough to see single payer - and a "destruction" of our current health care mess. That seems unlikely until and unless Congress passes serious legislation limiting the powers of "private interests" to own individual Congresspersons. That seems a long, long way away! Thanks!
On the "left" we have some who are not willing to give any more and could vote against the bill if it is unduly (more) restrictive on abortion.
On the "right" we have the die hard opponents of abortion rights.
Other smaller issues similarly divide.
The drug companies and hospitals have been "bought off" to support a situation where seemingly they will do better than the status quo. The Chamber of Commerce interests merge with the Republican issues and matter only in how strongly they can lobby with the conservative Democrats.
If the Democrats win the vote this week it will be a moderately impressive success at allowing some to "duck and cover" and vote against the bill, while having enough votes to just barely win. Unless the Democrats can effectively get votes from both the right and left they will be doomed to a serious defeat.
One can hope that enough Democrats in the end will recognize the obvious paralysis of the party if the vote doesn't go through and vote for it. If the bill passes, the Democrats road will still be difficult. If the bill fails, the path will be pretty hopeless both for future legislation and the 2010 elections.
If the bill succeeds, it will obviously be necessary for future legislation to add to the "reform" so that cost savings actually occur. Otherwise, costs will continue to skyrocket with some more people potentially covered.
It is sad that Obama won't ask both houses to vote on a non-binding resolution in support of a public option to see if the votes are there to pass it. That clearly could either unite the Democrats or spell their doom (and the risk is probably too great to try that).
Perhaps some day I'll live long enough to see single payer - and a "destruction" of our current health care mess. That seems unlikely until and unless Congress passes serious legislation limiting the powers of "private interests" to own individual Congresspersons. That seems a long, long way away! Thanks!
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Two Parables - Oppression - I Can't See (Fully) Inside
Yesterday I wrote about - Wrong Place, Wrong Time, John Rich's fascinating book. (Now I'd like to say a little more related to what I read in this book.)
A. Parable One:
Roy Martin, as John Rich described him, is an admirable man who has struggled and moved from the inner city world of his youth to successfully working to help youths growing up as he grew up. He has moved, with serious struggle, to a middle class world, though it hasn't been and isn't easy for him.
At one time Roy Martin was just completing a period as an intern at Senator Kerry's Office when he totally disappeared from Senator Kerry's Staff and John Rich. While Rich could not reach Martin, he heard that he was "ok" but needed to take care of some things before he could be reachable and in contact again.
After being unreachable for close to a year, Rich was able to contact Martin and was together with him briefly. Martin was clearly stressed and scared. He disclosed little as to what was going on but indicated that he was doing what he needed to do and would be in touch when things were worked out.
Close to a year later Martin reappeared and began working for Senator Kerry again. John Rich then learned that Martin had been getting his hair cut when a young man from his past came into the barber shop, clearly being about to physically attack him.
Martin escaped and realized that he'd not gotten free of his past, He felt that he needed to resolve things (privately) before he could move forward in his life. He did not want to face a situation where he might be attacked while working for Senator Kerry or being with John Rich. He did not want to have his violent past thrust into the lives of his new mentors and supporters in his middle class, predominantly White worlds.
Rich evidently never learned details as to how Martin made peace with those who wanted to attack him. He was only clear that he'd not attacked or killed others in achieving what he had sought.
While I can understand the words and appreciate much here this is a totally foreign type of life experience in my White World.
B. Interlude:
I've lived mostly in a "safe White world". As a child I had no fears of "criminals" attacking me, burglars or robbers invading our home or other things that might have been more common in poorer, often minority, often urban communities.
As an adult my life has similarly been mostly "safe" and isolated from the complexities of worlds of murders, serious drug problems, and other such issues. I have had moments of drama such as the two times I was held up at gunpoint in Chicago (1970's) and Oakland (1990's), not living in isolation.
As a child there were, of course, things that happened. My father died of stomach cancer when I was 13 and my brother was 11. A boy I knew (part of the Jewish community of our town) died at a junior high school football practice after choking on his own vomit. Others faced serious obstacles in their lives.
Two stories I've recounted previously stick in my mind relating to oppressions:
1. During my men's anti-rape organizing period in the mid-1980's - I remember the quoted story (in a video I think) of a woman who was the majority leader of one of the legislative branches of the Wisconsin State Government at the time. She indicated that despite the power that she wielded at the state capitol, when she stepped into the nearby parking garage at night, she was just another woman trying to be careful that she not sexually assaulted by a man who might be hidden from her sight.
2. At a men's retreat I attended in California a little later in the 1980's I remember a man I talked with (who was Black). He'd co-hosted a major session on racism with a White ally/friend earlier. In that session he'd encountered much resistance to his statements regarding racism and oppression. Other men had talked of how he shouldn't talk at them in the tone/style he used, because they'd faced oppressions themselves - related to abuse and homophobia. Talking privately he confided to me that he'd chosen Not to respond to their words speaking of how he'd been physically attacked and similarly oppressed as a boy, on top of the racism that he'd faced.
C. Parable Two:
Someone I care about has just learned that she will soon have a new supervisor at work who will be between her and her boss. Previously, she was seemingly "number two" at her agency.
She was and is extremely upset that she's "not good enough" to be the one formally taking over the leadership position that is being created. She had previously suggested that the leadership logically could either involve a single deputy director as is seemingly happening now (hoping that it would be her), or involve two such leaders; herself and a new director.
The only answers which come forth all relate to her being assertive and "making others uncomfortable", including her boss. Being Non-White and assertive and "not like us" is threatening.
It doesn't matter what she says or does. "The Good Ole (White) Boy's Network" has morphed into a "Safe White Women's Network".
Racism - is Racism - is Racism.
Respect and cooperation and support is often in the eyes of the beholder! Competency and performance and other factors don't seemingly matter here.
I'm sad. I'm touched. While I can understand the words and appreciate much here this is a totally foreign type of life experience in my White World.
Thanks!
A. Parable One:
Roy Martin, as John Rich described him, is an admirable man who has struggled and moved from the inner city world of his youth to successfully working to help youths growing up as he grew up. He has moved, with serious struggle, to a middle class world, though it hasn't been and isn't easy for him.
At one time Roy Martin was just completing a period as an intern at Senator Kerry's Office when he totally disappeared from Senator Kerry's Staff and John Rich. While Rich could not reach Martin, he heard that he was "ok" but needed to take care of some things before he could be reachable and in contact again.
After being unreachable for close to a year, Rich was able to contact Martin and was together with him briefly. Martin was clearly stressed and scared. He disclosed little as to what was going on but indicated that he was doing what he needed to do and would be in touch when things were worked out.
Close to a year later Martin reappeared and began working for Senator Kerry again. John Rich then learned that Martin had been getting his hair cut when a young man from his past came into the barber shop, clearly being about to physically attack him.
Martin escaped and realized that he'd not gotten free of his past, He felt that he needed to resolve things (privately) before he could move forward in his life. He did not want to face a situation where he might be attacked while working for Senator Kerry or being with John Rich. He did not want to have his violent past thrust into the lives of his new mentors and supporters in his middle class, predominantly White worlds.
Rich evidently never learned details as to how Martin made peace with those who wanted to attack him. He was only clear that he'd not attacked or killed others in achieving what he had sought.
While I can understand the words and appreciate much here this is a totally foreign type of life experience in my White World.
B. Interlude:
I've lived mostly in a "safe White world". As a child I had no fears of "criminals" attacking me, burglars or robbers invading our home or other things that might have been more common in poorer, often minority, often urban communities.
As an adult my life has similarly been mostly "safe" and isolated from the complexities of worlds of murders, serious drug problems, and other such issues. I have had moments of drama such as the two times I was held up at gunpoint in Chicago (1970's) and Oakland (1990's), not living in isolation.
As a child there were, of course, things that happened. My father died of stomach cancer when I was 13 and my brother was 11. A boy I knew (part of the Jewish community of our town) died at a junior high school football practice after choking on his own vomit. Others faced serious obstacles in their lives.
Two stories I've recounted previously stick in my mind relating to oppressions:
1. During my men's anti-rape organizing period in the mid-1980's - I remember the quoted story (in a video I think) of a woman who was the majority leader of one of the legislative branches of the Wisconsin State Government at the time. She indicated that despite the power that she wielded at the state capitol, when she stepped into the nearby parking garage at night, she was just another woman trying to be careful that she not sexually assaulted by a man who might be hidden from her sight.
2. At a men's retreat I attended in California a little later in the 1980's I remember a man I talked with (who was Black). He'd co-hosted a major session on racism with a White ally/friend earlier. In that session he'd encountered much resistance to his statements regarding racism and oppression. Other men had talked of how he shouldn't talk at them in the tone/style he used, because they'd faced oppressions themselves - related to abuse and homophobia. Talking privately he confided to me that he'd chosen Not to respond to their words speaking of how he'd been physically attacked and similarly oppressed as a boy, on top of the racism that he'd faced.
C. Parable Two:
Someone I care about has just learned that she will soon have a new supervisor at work who will be between her and her boss. Previously, she was seemingly "number two" at her agency.
She was and is extremely upset that she's "not good enough" to be the one formally taking over the leadership position that is being created. She had previously suggested that the leadership logically could either involve a single deputy director as is seemingly happening now (hoping that it would be her), or involve two such leaders; herself and a new director.
The only answers which come forth all relate to her being assertive and "making others uncomfortable", including her boss. Being Non-White and assertive and "not like us" is threatening.
It doesn't matter what she says or does. "The Good Ole (White) Boy's Network" has morphed into a "Safe White Women's Network".
Racism - is Racism - is Racism.
Respect and cooperation and support is often in the eyes of the beholder! Competency and performance and other factors don't seemingly matter here.
I'm sad. I'm touched. While I can understand the words and appreciate much here this is a totally foreign type of life experience in my White World.
Thanks!
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Great Book - on Poor Urban Black Men
I just finished reading: "Wrong Place, Wrong Time" - by John A. Rich. It is by far the best book I've ever read at explaining inner city violence (as it relates to poor, Black young men).
p.57 - as per "Jimmy"
* If you want to avoid being a sucker, you have to have a rep.
* If you want to have a rep, you have to earn it.
* You earn a rep by putting in work.
* In Jimmy's world, work means doing violence.
* Have a rep, even if you got it by violence, makes you known.
* When you are known, you are somebody.
* You could get a rep for doing good, but people still come after you for disrespecting them in the past. Therefore violence is more effective.
"Violence worked in his world to accomplish something that all of us wanted- to be somebody- but that Jimmy could not find any other way to do."
John Rich is a Black, middle-class (raised and currently) physician whose worlds had shielded him from much of what he discovered (in 2006 he was awarded a MacArthur "genius" Fellowship).
Rich's best informant: Roy Martin tellingly answered him explaining: (p.60)
' "I bet this kid isn't the kind of kid who's gonna be a basketball star. Or a lady's man, a player, right?" Roy said, answering his own question. "He probably ain't no great brainiac who's going to college. If he was any one of those things, he would be doing that. He'd be about that kind of stuff. But he's not." '
p.63 - "If these young men were numb from all the violence that they had seen and if they, like Jimmy, were unable to see a clear future, then the whole concept of violence in the inner city was beginning to make sense."
Dr. Rich provides a brilliant expose of the humanity of poor, "tough" Black young men and their worlds. He talks of the traumas the violence creates (and often is ignored by others). His picture in no way romanticizes this life, but it really helps "outsiders" to understand a lot more.
This book isn't long. It isn't difficult to read, though much of what it talks of is scary. For anyone interested in such a subject, I highly recommend it!
Thanks!
p.57 - as per "Jimmy"
* If you want to avoid being a sucker, you have to have a rep.
* If you want to have a rep, you have to earn it.
* You earn a rep by putting in work.
* In Jimmy's world, work means doing violence.
* Have a rep, even if you got it by violence, makes you known.
* When you are known, you are somebody.
* You could get a rep for doing good, but people still come after you for disrespecting them in the past. Therefore violence is more effective.
"Violence worked in his world to accomplish something that all of us wanted- to be somebody- but that Jimmy could not find any other way to do."
John Rich is a Black, middle-class (raised and currently) physician whose worlds had shielded him from much of what he discovered (in 2006 he was awarded a MacArthur "genius" Fellowship).
Rich's best informant: Roy Martin tellingly answered him explaining: (p.60)
' "I bet this kid isn't the kind of kid who's gonna be a basketball star. Or a lady's man, a player, right?" Roy said, answering his own question. "He probably ain't no great brainiac who's going to college. If he was any one of those things, he would be doing that. He'd be about that kind of stuff. But he's not." '
p.63 - "If these young men were numb from all the violence that they had seen and if they, like Jimmy, were unable to see a clear future, then the whole concept of violence in the inner city was beginning to make sense."
Dr. Rich provides a brilliant expose of the humanity of poor, "tough" Black young men and their worlds. He talks of the traumas the violence creates (and often is ignored by others). His picture in no way romanticizes this life, but it really helps "outsiders" to understand a lot more.
This book isn't long. It isn't difficult to read, though much of what it talks of is scary. For anyone interested in such a subject, I highly recommend it!
Thanks!
Friday, February 19, 2010
Tales of "new" and "old"
In looking at the failures of the Democrats and Obama to reform health care and to make other significant changes, it seems obvious to me that Money Talks. Until we have Serious Campaign Finance Reform and in general live in a world in the U.S. and the world as a whole where "people matter" we will face serious obstacles to both world peace and justice in general.
The failures of the Democrats and Obama also have helped make the rise of the Tea Partyites and the pushes towards Facism and Fundamentalism and similar much scarier.
Recently I've been doing a lot of genealogical work and related studying of my father's family. My father's family includes a great-uncle who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in the 1960's, a noted psychotherapist who was the first wife of Erich Fromm as well as some serious scholars and many fascinating people in general. My great-grandfather was a successful and wealthy German (Jewish) banker. I was named after him.
Most recently hearing the sad story of my great-aunt Rahel (Rachel, as well as one of her sons and his wife, gives in some ways a "counter story" to some of what I hear and feel today as discussed above. Rahel's husband Sally owned or managed a most successful timber business in Koenigsberg (now Kaliningrad) after World War I. The business had offices in other parts of Europe and his sons managed some of these offices as the business grew.
In 1936 Rahel and Sally moved to Amsterdam and the Nazi's relieved the families' ties to their business because they were Jewish. Sally died of natural causes in 1940 as World War II began.
Soon after Sally's death, a family member living in Zurich unexpectedly received a large trunk from Rahel. Rahel hoped to escape to Switzerland with her family and have her possessions safe from the turmoil in The Netherlands. In 1942, after escaping detection in Holland, Rahel, a son and daughter-in-law fled to Paris. In Paris they moved constantly tried to avoid detection by the Nazis and desperately sought to escape to Switzerland, South America or some other safe haven.
Rahel - unlike many other desperate Jews - was wealthy. Despite having lost some of their wealth, she could afford to pay for whatever was necessary to escape.
Unfortunately - the contact (to escape) that they finally made was with a pathological French physician - who killed them with injections and then hacked their bodies to pieces and burned the remains, while taking their possessions. He was put to death in 1946 after a trial, having killed well over 100 people including some non-Jews as well. (Evidently his actions had nothing directly to do with any support of the Nazis.)
The sad story of Rahel and part of her family is a case where money didn't matter. Being Jewish was "the crime" and "the curse". Jews - had had some economic power, but that power was useless as Nazi ideology blamed Jews for all that had befallen the Germans after World War I.
Today in the U.S. we face the realities of how millions of Blacks were enslaved and exploited after 1865. Racism persists. Many have died because they were the wrong skin color and were seen as "the enemy" by jealous White Men (usually men anyway). The racism in the U.S. used economic exploitation.
Today in the U.S. we face problems as the Glenn Beck's of our country exploit the economic turmoil with its resultant fears and ignorance. Hopefully we will Not go further in the directions that lead to sad stories such as my relatives faced.
Thanks!
The failures of the Democrats and Obama also have helped make the rise of the Tea Partyites and the pushes towards Facism and Fundamentalism and similar much scarier.
Recently I've been doing a lot of genealogical work and related studying of my father's family. My father's family includes a great-uncle who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in the 1960's, a noted psychotherapist who was the first wife of Erich Fromm as well as some serious scholars and many fascinating people in general. My great-grandfather was a successful and wealthy German (Jewish) banker. I was named after him.
Most recently hearing the sad story of my great-aunt Rahel (Rachel, as well as one of her sons and his wife, gives in some ways a "counter story" to some of what I hear and feel today as discussed above. Rahel's husband Sally owned or managed a most successful timber business in Koenigsberg (now Kaliningrad) after World War I. The business had offices in other parts of Europe and his sons managed some of these offices as the business grew.
In 1936 Rahel and Sally moved to Amsterdam and the Nazi's relieved the families' ties to their business because they were Jewish. Sally died of natural causes in 1940 as World War II began.
Soon after Sally's death, a family member living in Zurich unexpectedly received a large trunk from Rahel. Rahel hoped to escape to Switzerland with her family and have her possessions safe from the turmoil in The Netherlands. In 1942, after escaping detection in Holland, Rahel, a son and daughter-in-law fled to Paris. In Paris they moved constantly tried to avoid detection by the Nazis and desperately sought to escape to Switzerland, South America or some other safe haven.
Rahel - unlike many other desperate Jews - was wealthy. Despite having lost some of their wealth, she could afford to pay for whatever was necessary to escape.
Unfortunately - the contact (to escape) that they finally made was with a pathological French physician - who killed them with injections and then hacked their bodies to pieces and burned the remains, while taking their possessions. He was put to death in 1946 after a trial, having killed well over 100 people including some non-Jews as well. (Evidently his actions had nothing directly to do with any support of the Nazis.)
The sad story of Rahel and part of her family is a case where money didn't matter. Being Jewish was "the crime" and "the curse". Jews - had had some economic power, but that power was useless as Nazi ideology blamed Jews for all that had befallen the Germans after World War I.
Today in the U.S. we face the realities of how millions of Blacks were enslaved and exploited after 1865. Racism persists. Many have died because they were the wrong skin color and were seen as "the enemy" by jealous White Men (usually men anyway). The racism in the U.S. used economic exploitation.
Today in the U.S. we face problems as the Glenn Beck's of our country exploit the economic turmoil with its resultant fears and ignorance. Hopefully we will Not go further in the directions that lead to sad stories such as my relatives faced.
Thanks!
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Howard Zinn, J.D. Salinger, and C.
Last week saw the confluence of three things from my past which have no direct ties to each other:
1. Howard Zinn died,
2. J.D. Salinger died, and
3. My "old" friend C. - was incapacitated with major "replacement" surgery.
Generationally - the two deaths hit me hard - yet they seem not to have really hit some of the generation of bloggers who are younger than me as hard.
I grew up in a world which seemed to me at least much more "conformist" than things are today. There was a definite lack of alternative periodicals (though there were a few)as well as no internet - nor other simple means of being reached by others.
Howard Zinn was a giant in reaching out to those in my generation who were open to looking at the United States in an alternate way that was both critical and loving. He was different from some whose focus seemed to be on Marxism, though Marxism certainly must have influenced him. He was scholarly, but wasn't aloof from those outside of academia. The sources where I've had the most to read of online, since his death have largely been - Peace Seeking Jews opposed to the status quo re: Palestine-Israel - and this certainly wasn't his primary focus in his long and bountiful life.
Howard Zinn was clearly a "mensch" - one who gave and shared and loved.
J.D. Salinger wrote a few Great Novels - which were lovingly read by me as a teen. He chose a life apart from nearly all. I'm glad to have been touched by his writings and they will live on well beyond his death.
Salinger was a great writer who chose to be "apart". While he wasn't a "bad" person, he also wasn't "of this world" in many ways and certainly lacked greatness as a "person".
C. - my old buddy - is working hard at recovering from his surgery. He's my one friend who I could count on to know and appreciate both of them. If he'd not been of necessity focusing upon his surgery and subsequent recovery, I suspect he might have had significant feelings (different from mine no doubt) about both of them.
C. - has had some of the drive of Zinn and some of the creativity of Salinger.
May the memories of the first two live on in us and those who follow us and may C.'s recovery be smooth and as comfortable as is possible.
Thanks!
1. Howard Zinn died,
2. J.D. Salinger died, and
3. My "old" friend C. - was incapacitated with major "replacement" surgery.
Generationally - the two deaths hit me hard - yet they seem not to have really hit some of the generation of bloggers who are younger than me as hard.
I grew up in a world which seemed to me at least much more "conformist" than things are today. There was a definite lack of alternative periodicals (though there were a few)as well as no internet - nor other simple means of being reached by others.
Howard Zinn was a giant in reaching out to those in my generation who were open to looking at the United States in an alternate way that was both critical and loving. He was different from some whose focus seemed to be on Marxism, though Marxism certainly must have influenced him. He was scholarly, but wasn't aloof from those outside of academia. The sources where I've had the most to read of online, since his death have largely been - Peace Seeking Jews opposed to the status quo re: Palestine-Israel - and this certainly wasn't his primary focus in his long and bountiful life.
Howard Zinn was clearly a "mensch" - one who gave and shared and loved.
J.D. Salinger wrote a few Great Novels - which were lovingly read by me as a teen. He chose a life apart from nearly all. I'm glad to have been touched by his writings and they will live on well beyond his death.
Salinger was a great writer who chose to be "apart". While he wasn't a "bad" person, he also wasn't "of this world" in many ways and certainly lacked greatness as a "person".
C. - my old buddy - is working hard at recovering from his surgery. He's my one friend who I could count on to know and appreciate both of them. If he'd not been of necessity focusing upon his surgery and subsequent recovery, I suspect he might have had significant feelings (different from mine no doubt) about both of them.
C. - has had some of the drive of Zinn and some of the creativity of Salinger.
May the memories of the first two live on in us and those who follow us and may C.'s recovery be smooth and as comfortable as is possible.
Thanks!
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Haiti - Incredible Sadness
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2010/01/12/GA2010011203712.html?sid=ST2010011302017
The images are horrific to see! I'm very sad! Haiti had so many problems related to being such a poor country and now...
The images are horrific to see! I'm very sad! Haiti had so many problems related to being such a poor country and now...
Thursday, January 07, 2010
Those Poor Democrats and the Big Mo
Yesterday Senators Byron Dorgan, D, N. Dakota and Christopher Dodd, D, Connecticut announced that they would not seek new terms in 2010. The news media immediately talked of the perilous times for President Obama and Democrats as they might now lose their 60 vote - "super majority".
While first of all "duh"! Did anyone really believe given how bad the economy is and the 47% approval rating of President Obama that Democrats were likely to keep all their senate seats in 2010?
It also is questionable whether this 60 seat majority is that significant - as shown by healthcare reform legislation when one recognizes how - impotent the Democrats have proven to be at dealing with both the intransigence of the Republicans and the Democrats "moderate" members such as Senator Nelson who hold healthcare captive to their support.
Let's go back to the "landslide" election of President Obama. President Obama's election was won with about 41-42% of the White vote. People of Color elected Barack Obama with a lower percentage of White Voters than elected Reagan in 1980.
The "Democratic Mandate" of 2008 if there ever was such a thing was a reaction to the Republican failures and a statement of - "no - not this" - not "yes, we want Democrats".
Pundits earlier talked of the Big Momentum shown by governor losses by the Democrats in 2009 in Virginia and New Jersey. Few looked at the facts that Governor Corzine in New Jersey had alienated the populace and that in Virginia without a Strong Black Vote - the Democrat had little chance of winning.
Let's finally look at the candidates. Dorgan - might have been a slight favorite to win in 2010. Republicans are likely to win without him - in a heavily Republican State. Dodd was in big trouble and the Democratic candidate seemingly has a better chance at winning in 2010.
This is hardly - a landslide for the Republicans. The Democrats may well lose seats in 2010. This will though be a result of both their failures and the successes of the right-wing forces at fighting against Democratic leadership.
Thanks!
While first of all "duh"! Did anyone really believe given how bad the economy is and the 47% approval rating of President Obama that Democrats were likely to keep all their senate seats in 2010?
It also is questionable whether this 60 seat majority is that significant - as shown by healthcare reform legislation when one recognizes how - impotent the Democrats have proven to be at dealing with both the intransigence of the Republicans and the Democrats "moderate" members such as Senator Nelson who hold healthcare captive to their support.
Let's go back to the "landslide" election of President Obama. President Obama's election was won with about 41-42% of the White vote. People of Color elected Barack Obama with a lower percentage of White Voters than elected Reagan in 1980.
The "Democratic Mandate" of 2008 if there ever was such a thing was a reaction to the Republican failures and a statement of - "no - not this" - not "yes, we want Democrats".
Pundits earlier talked of the Big Momentum shown by governor losses by the Democrats in 2009 in Virginia and New Jersey. Few looked at the facts that Governor Corzine in New Jersey had alienated the populace and that in Virginia without a Strong Black Vote - the Democrat had little chance of winning.
Let's finally look at the candidates. Dorgan - might have been a slight favorite to win in 2010. Republicans are likely to win without him - in a heavily Republican State. Dodd was in big trouble and the Democratic candidate seemingly has a better chance at winning in 2010.
This is hardly - a landslide for the Republicans. The Democrats may well lose seats in 2010. This will though be a result of both their failures and the successes of the right-wing forces at fighting against Democratic leadership.
Thanks!
Sunday, January 03, 2010
Swiss Healthcare System - a "Free Market" Option
Swiss health-care system might serve as model for U.S.
By The Dallas Morning News Sunday, February 26, 2006
BERN, Switzerland -- Karl Zbinden's hospital room overlooked the snowy banks of the Aare River on a bleak January afternoon. The gaunt, 53-year-old biologist was in bed with pancreatitis, a serious condition that emerged after a kidney transplant.
Like all Swiss citizens, Zbinden has health insurance. And, like all Swiss, he pays for it himself with no help from his employer.
An American in his situation might face tens of thousands of dollars in expenses. But under the Swiss health-care system, individuals pay about a third less on health care than the average American, in part because of government-enforced price controls.
President Bush is pushing for health care reforms based on individual choice. The Swiss system offers some of those choices, and some health economists say their system works better.
"I think we're going to get there soon, not eventually," said Regina Herzlinger, a Harvard Business School professor who's studied the Swiss system. "The major reason is, most people agree that employer support for health insurance is just not going to continue."
Every resident of Switzerland is required to buy health insurance. If they don't, they pay stiff monetary penalties. Companies have no role. Health-care plans are chosen at the kitchen table, not through employee benefit departments.
And the plans can be costly. A family of four in Switzerland pays an average of $680 a month in premiums. Government assistance helps pay premiums for those less well off.
Health-care prices are set each year after negotiations between insurance companies and medical providers. The fee schedule has to be approved by the Swiss canton (or state) governments -- an approach Uwe Reinhardt of Princeton University compares to the doomed health-reform plan drafted by the Clinton administration.
Drug costs also are subject to price ceilings, but they still seem fairly expensive, at least in the minds of Swiss consumers.
"Within Europe, we are almost the only country left with a strong drug company sector," said Swiss congressman Felix Gutzwiller, a medical doctor who also heads the University of Zurich Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine.
"The public has a very peculiar attitude about that. They want a high level of innovation, but there is a permanent discussion about the cost of medications."
The Swiss approach insures everyone while eliminating the headaches and costs of health care for companies sensitive to global competition.
"People in Switzerland realize what these costs do to American business, and they don't want to add to the anti-competitive burden of Swiss businesses in the global economy," Gutzwiller said.
"Also, people do not want employers to get so much into their private life and lifestyle."
The Swiss think the quality of their medical care is among the best in the world. They spend more of their national income on health care, at 11.5 percent, than anyone except Americans, who spend 16 percent.
The Swiss have the freedom to see any doctor in their canton, and they don't have long waits. And Swiss health-care providers have much less paperwork than their U.S. counterparts.
In 2003, Switzerland spent an average of $3,781 per person on health care. The United States spent $5,635 per person, according to an October report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Herzlinger said consumer choice accounts for Switzerland's lower costs.
Bush and market-oriented health economists are all for consumer choice. They're urging Americans to start health savings accounts and buy high-deductible health care plans. Bush gave those ideas another push in his State of the Union Address. Critics call it health-care rationing by income, where only the wealthy have health savings accounts big enough to cover medical expenses.
While everyone in Switzerland is obliged to buy insurance, the 87 Swiss health insurance companies also have to offer a basic health-care plan priced without regard to risk.
The companies can't make a profit on this basic plan, and they compete for profits by offering high or low deductibles and supplemental benefits. A healthy 24-year-old living in Bern pays the same premium as someone like Zbinden (300 Swiss francs a month, or about $242).
Swiss insurers charge a premium for each family member. Children have a lower premium than adults, but for a family of four, insurance premiums for the basic coverage plan are about $8,167 a year. An American family with employer-provided health insurance pays an average of $2,713 a year in premiums, according to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Deductibles and co-pays are comparable to those paid in the United States.
Swiss cantons subsidize health insurance premiums based on income. With premiums climbing an average of 5 percent a year over the last decade, subsidies now go to nearly a third of Switzerland's 7.5 million residents.
Swiss health insurance premiums are lower than the U.S. average when employers' costs are added, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation survey. For an American family of four, employers contribute an average of $8,167, for a total of $10,880 a year. That's up 73 percent since 2000, according to the Kaiser survey.
And fewer American companies are offering health insurance. In 2000, 69 percent of workers got health insurance as a benefit. In 2004, that dropped to 60 percent.
Small companies in particular are finding the costs too high, and the number of uninsured Americans is climbing, said Drew Altman, chief executive and president of the Kaiser Family Foundation. More than 46 million Americans have no health insurance.
"Americans have a clear sense of what they are paying out of pocket, and they're really upset about it," he said. "But as health-care premiums have gone up sharply, employers have eaten a significant share."
Devon Harrick, a health economist with the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis, said employers got into the business of paying health insurance premiums when they couldn't compete for workers by offering higher wages.
"The only reason our current system exists the way it does is because of the tax laws in the 1940s. Price controls prohibited wage hikes, but you could attract employees with health insurance," he said. And, unlike payroll, health care benefits are not taxed.
"In the end, employees pay their own health-care costs," Harrick said. "A lot of employees don't understand that's really not a free benefit. It's part of their compensation."
In a consumer-driven health-care system such as Switzerland's, employers freed from health insurance obligations pay higher wages, said Herzlinger.
A health-care system based on choice would, in theory, also give consumers a way to compare the prices charged by doctors and hospitals. Those prices are hard to come by in the United States. But in Switzerland, they are all pretty much the same.
"Price (in the Swiss system) doesn't matter, because it's set by these negotiations," said Reinhardt, a professor of political economy at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
U.S. health care providers fiercely oppose that approach, said Altman.
"Government regulation to control costs of a kind practiced in every other developed country is opposed by our health care providers," he said, "so we are stuck in a bunch of half-measures."
Not all Swiss citizens are happy with the system. They complain that prices are getting too high, that their system encourages patients to stay in hospitals longer than necessary and that the insurance companies, trying to find ways to make money in a regulated market, offer such a bewildering mix of plans that most consumers aren't making informed choices.
"Theoretically, it's consumer-driven. But practically, no," said Gaudenz Silberschmidt, head of the international affairs division of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health.
The complicated nature of the system is partly the fault of the insurers, he said. "They offer thousands of different premium plans, and when it's that many, it means it's not transparent."
"There is no best health-care system, no gold standard," he said.
There does seem to be a standard for what countries want to avoid, however.
"It's a sad thing, but when I go to international conferences, there's no question the U.S. health system is the bogeyman everywhere," said Reinhardt.
Zbinden's wife, Katharina, says the couple feels fortunate. "We are very grateful to have the Swiss system, even though it's expensive. We could not afford this in the United States."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_427691.html
By The Dallas Morning News Sunday, February 26, 2006
BERN, Switzerland -- Karl Zbinden's hospital room overlooked the snowy banks of the Aare River on a bleak January afternoon. The gaunt, 53-year-old biologist was in bed with pancreatitis, a serious condition that emerged after a kidney transplant.
Like all Swiss citizens, Zbinden has health insurance. And, like all Swiss, he pays for it himself with no help from his employer.
An American in his situation might face tens of thousands of dollars in expenses. But under the Swiss health-care system, individuals pay about a third less on health care than the average American, in part because of government-enforced price controls.
President Bush is pushing for health care reforms based on individual choice. The Swiss system offers some of those choices, and some health economists say their system works better.
"I think we're going to get there soon, not eventually," said Regina Herzlinger, a Harvard Business School professor who's studied the Swiss system. "The major reason is, most people agree that employer support for health insurance is just not going to continue."
Every resident of Switzerland is required to buy health insurance. If they don't, they pay stiff monetary penalties. Companies have no role. Health-care plans are chosen at the kitchen table, not through employee benefit departments.
And the plans can be costly. A family of four in Switzerland pays an average of $680 a month in premiums. Government assistance helps pay premiums for those less well off.
Health-care prices are set each year after negotiations between insurance companies and medical providers. The fee schedule has to be approved by the Swiss canton (or state) governments -- an approach Uwe Reinhardt of Princeton University compares to the doomed health-reform plan drafted by the Clinton administration.
Drug costs also are subject to price ceilings, but they still seem fairly expensive, at least in the minds of Swiss consumers.
"Within Europe, we are almost the only country left with a strong drug company sector," said Swiss congressman Felix Gutzwiller, a medical doctor who also heads the University of Zurich Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine.
"The public has a very peculiar attitude about that. They want a high level of innovation, but there is a permanent discussion about the cost of medications."
The Swiss approach insures everyone while eliminating the headaches and costs of health care for companies sensitive to global competition.
"People in Switzerland realize what these costs do to American business, and they don't want to add to the anti-competitive burden of Swiss businesses in the global economy," Gutzwiller said.
"Also, people do not want employers to get so much into their private life and lifestyle."
The Swiss think the quality of their medical care is among the best in the world. They spend more of their national income on health care, at 11.5 percent, than anyone except Americans, who spend 16 percent.
The Swiss have the freedom to see any doctor in their canton, and they don't have long waits. And Swiss health-care providers have much less paperwork than their U.S. counterparts.
In 2003, Switzerland spent an average of $3,781 per person on health care. The United States spent $5,635 per person, according to an October report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Herzlinger said consumer choice accounts for Switzerland's lower costs.
Bush and market-oriented health economists are all for consumer choice. They're urging Americans to start health savings accounts and buy high-deductible health care plans. Bush gave those ideas another push in his State of the Union Address. Critics call it health-care rationing by income, where only the wealthy have health savings accounts big enough to cover medical expenses.
While everyone in Switzerland is obliged to buy insurance, the 87 Swiss health insurance companies also have to offer a basic health-care plan priced without regard to risk.
The companies can't make a profit on this basic plan, and they compete for profits by offering high or low deductibles and supplemental benefits. A healthy 24-year-old living in Bern pays the same premium as someone like Zbinden (300 Swiss francs a month, or about $242).
Swiss insurers charge a premium for each family member. Children have a lower premium than adults, but for a family of four, insurance premiums for the basic coverage plan are about $8,167 a year. An American family with employer-provided health insurance pays an average of $2,713 a year in premiums, according to a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation.
Deductibles and co-pays are comparable to those paid in the United States.
Swiss cantons subsidize health insurance premiums based on income. With premiums climbing an average of 5 percent a year over the last decade, subsidies now go to nearly a third of Switzerland's 7.5 million residents.
Swiss health insurance premiums are lower than the U.S. average when employers' costs are added, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation survey. For an American family of four, employers contribute an average of $8,167, for a total of $10,880 a year. That's up 73 percent since 2000, according to the Kaiser survey.
And fewer American companies are offering health insurance. In 2000, 69 percent of workers got health insurance as a benefit. In 2004, that dropped to 60 percent.
Small companies in particular are finding the costs too high, and the number of uninsured Americans is climbing, said Drew Altman, chief executive and president of the Kaiser Family Foundation. More than 46 million Americans have no health insurance.
"Americans have a clear sense of what they are paying out of pocket, and they're really upset about it," he said. "But as health-care premiums have gone up sharply, employers have eaten a significant share."
Devon Harrick, a health economist with the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis, said employers got into the business of paying health insurance premiums when they couldn't compete for workers by offering higher wages.
"The only reason our current system exists the way it does is because of the tax laws in the 1940s. Price controls prohibited wage hikes, but you could attract employees with health insurance," he said. And, unlike payroll, health care benefits are not taxed.
"In the end, employees pay their own health-care costs," Harrick said. "A lot of employees don't understand that's really not a free benefit. It's part of their compensation."
In a consumer-driven health-care system such as Switzerland's, employers freed from health insurance obligations pay higher wages, said Herzlinger.
A health-care system based on choice would, in theory, also give consumers a way to compare the prices charged by doctors and hospitals. Those prices are hard to come by in the United States. But in Switzerland, they are all pretty much the same.
"Price (in the Swiss system) doesn't matter, because it's set by these negotiations," said Reinhardt, a professor of political economy at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
U.S. health care providers fiercely oppose that approach, said Altman.
"Government regulation to control costs of a kind practiced in every other developed country is opposed by our health care providers," he said, "so we are stuck in a bunch of half-measures."
Not all Swiss citizens are happy with the system. They complain that prices are getting too high, that their system encourages patients to stay in hospitals longer than necessary and that the insurance companies, trying to find ways to make money in a regulated market, offer such a bewildering mix of plans that most consumers aren't making informed choices.
"Theoretically, it's consumer-driven. But practically, no," said Gaudenz Silberschmidt, head of the international affairs division of the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health.
The complicated nature of the system is partly the fault of the insurers, he said. "They offer thousands of different premium plans, and when it's that many, it means it's not transparent."
"There is no best health-care system, no gold standard," he said.
There does seem to be a standard for what countries want to avoid, however.
"It's a sad thing, but when I go to international conferences, there's no question the U.S. health system is the bogeyman everywhere," said Reinhardt.
Zbinden's wife, Katharina, says the couple feels fortunate. "We are very grateful to have the Swiss system, even though it's expensive. We could not afford this in the United States."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_427691.html
Friday, January 01, 2010
Avatar - some impressions
We went to see Avatar at an Imax theater last night. Prior to seeing the movie I'd heard:
1.) It's an incredible movie, one of the best ever seen - great insight into racism, environmental issues and how we relate to them,
2.) 2 1/2 stars - local newspaper - spectacular visual effects - but weak, stereotypical plot,
3.) Blasphemous movie - which is strongly counter to "Good Christian Values".
In some ways the movie was all of these things and perhaps more. It certainly had an appeal to it as it portrayed the importance of us being "with" nature and respecting others. It strongly, strongly put down the Zenophobia and "might is right" mindsets that we can best see in our U.S. Government-Military-Corporate culture. It could be seen as empowering confronting "the establishment" and not feeling disempowered by the Powers one faces in activism.
The mythical planet and its people and animals were portrayed in an incredibly beautiful way. Watching the movie for its images alone could result in one feeling incredibly enriched. The "education" of the hero can show a viewer how our life realities are rigidly ethnocentric. We can see how important it is to understand others as they are and how they view themselves.
The movie also is "very Hollywood" in some of its worst ways. The "good" are stereotyped as "very good" and the "bad" are "very bad". While there are surprises and unexpected nuances much of the movie is Very predictable. Perhaps more troubling is the naive, limited view of how change is brought about.
A few allies of the "hero" join him in taking on the rest of the "bad guys" from whence they came. It is not difficult to see how well-meaning people could take from such a movie - if they viewed it "directly" how we can for example use technology to help "those poor people" in Africa or wherever. While the movie pushes an image of "respect" and understanding our ethnocentricity, it also has an underlying image of "we can use our knowledge for good" which is limited.
Building systemic change requires grassroot organizing and building support to avoid cooptation and insignificant change which doesn't help (much) and may hurt things in some instances. We need significant campaign finance reform in the U.S. and our failure to end corporate dominance infects us over and over again - as can readily be seen related to healthcare reform legislation. It is no coincident that Connecticut has major insurance company "strength" and that Joe Lieberman looks out for the insurance companies' interests.
The movie is certainly a nightmare for rightwing Christians who believe in "the Lord" and "the natural order" of both the environment and private enterprise. It does strongly confront these stereotypic views and indicate that we need to respect the environment and people who are different from us.
I'm glad I saw the movie! I'd recommend it to others. It can "help" in some ways. To me it isn't "the answer", though that is a next-to-impossible thing to have. To reach "the masses" the message can't be 'too deep' or in some ways 'too radical'. I'd give the movie either a B+ (if looking at it's weaknesses) or an A- or even an A - if looking at its strengths and beauty.
Thanks!
1.) It's an incredible movie, one of the best ever seen - great insight into racism, environmental issues and how we relate to them,
2.) 2 1/2 stars - local newspaper - spectacular visual effects - but weak, stereotypical plot,
3.) Blasphemous movie - which is strongly counter to "Good Christian Values".
In some ways the movie was all of these things and perhaps more. It certainly had an appeal to it as it portrayed the importance of us being "with" nature and respecting others. It strongly, strongly put down the Zenophobia and "might is right" mindsets that we can best see in our U.S. Government-Military-Corporate culture. It could be seen as empowering confronting "the establishment" and not feeling disempowered by the Powers one faces in activism.
The mythical planet and its people and animals were portrayed in an incredibly beautiful way. Watching the movie for its images alone could result in one feeling incredibly enriched. The "education" of the hero can show a viewer how our life realities are rigidly ethnocentric. We can see how important it is to understand others as they are and how they view themselves.
The movie also is "very Hollywood" in some of its worst ways. The "good" are stereotyped as "very good" and the "bad" are "very bad". While there are surprises and unexpected nuances much of the movie is Very predictable. Perhaps more troubling is the naive, limited view of how change is brought about.
A few allies of the "hero" join him in taking on the rest of the "bad guys" from whence they came. It is not difficult to see how well-meaning people could take from such a movie - if they viewed it "directly" how we can for example use technology to help "those poor people" in Africa or wherever. While the movie pushes an image of "respect" and understanding our ethnocentricity, it also has an underlying image of "we can use our knowledge for good" which is limited.
Building systemic change requires grassroot organizing and building support to avoid cooptation and insignificant change which doesn't help (much) and may hurt things in some instances. We need significant campaign finance reform in the U.S. and our failure to end corporate dominance infects us over and over again - as can readily be seen related to healthcare reform legislation. It is no coincident that Connecticut has major insurance company "strength" and that Joe Lieberman looks out for the insurance companies' interests.
The movie is certainly a nightmare for rightwing Christians who believe in "the Lord" and "the natural order" of both the environment and private enterprise. It does strongly confront these stereotypic views and indicate that we need to respect the environment and people who are different from us.
I'm glad I saw the movie! I'd recommend it to others. It can "help" in some ways. To me it isn't "the answer", though that is a next-to-impossible thing to have. To reach "the masses" the message can't be 'too deep' or in some ways 'too radical'. I'd give the movie either a B+ (if looking at it's weaknesses) or an A- or even an A - if looking at its strengths and beauty.
Thanks!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)