hopelesshappiness.com

Twas the week before Christmas, when all through our states

Trump zealots obsess as the left celebrates

Allegations are flung all about without care,

In hopes they’d unmask the unfairness of fair;

The sides they both wrestle with which one was which

While visions of truth dance a twitterbug twitch;

And mamma in her wisdom, and I in my dolt,

Find ourselves caught in their jitterbug jolt.

Jerked here and shoved there in pandemicus clatter,

Unreason trumps reason, and death doesn't matter.

Away out the window hope flew like a flash,

As did comfort and health and a whole lotta cash.

But the loon in his nest, now the fact he must go

Gives the lustre of mid-day to objects below,

And then what to my wondering eyes should appear,

But a shot, a vaccine, some more hope for next year.

And this new old white driver and lively sidekick,

Will this be enough? Will this do the trick?

More rapid than eagles, the issues they came,

And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;

“Now, Covid! Now, Health Care! Now, Racial Unrest!

Injustice! Disunion! On, Poor and Oppressed!

From the Populist Strife! To the Trump Border Wall!

There is urgent work now in front of us all!”

As dry leaves that before the wild hurricane fly,

When they meet with an obstacle, mount to the sky,

So up to the White House the new team will go,

With a sleigh full of hope for Kamala and Joe.

But then, in a twinkling, I think we’ll find out

All this prancing and pawing will not erase doubt,

As Joe draws in his head and is turning around,

Down the chimney comes Mitch and his cronies unbound.

They’re dressed all in prickles and barbs and sharp thorns,

And they’ll tarnish Joe’s efforts and blow their own horns,

A bundle of subterfuge flung far and wide,

Backbiting and fighting though we're on the same side.

Joe's eyes how they crinkle when he looks with disdain!

He should know his contempt, it leaves nothing to gain!

His droll little mouth when drawn up like a bow,

Spawns further division and political woe.

The bumps and the bruises this nation's endured,

You'd think that our vision would not be so blurred;

You'd think that our justice would not be so smelly;

You'd think we'd be better than Machiavelli.

And perhaps Joe will be our jolly old elf,

And make some improvements in spite of himself;

But that wink of his eye and that shake of his head,

Leaves me to wonder what more I might dread.

Best to speak not a word; go straight to his works,

And fill all our stockings; ignore all the jerks,

But alas I believe that the games will win out,

And not one of our leaders will hear my sad shout;

“Stop killing the people, the planet, the hope!

Start doling out justice and help us to cope!

Stop fighting each other, the future, the facts!

Start thinking before your reaction reacts!”

“From 3 to 8 billion in the blink of my eye!

It's too late to blame or to argue the why!

I'm here to exclaim as I fade out of sight!

Think first! Then act fast! Or to all a good-night!”

If capitalism has its way, and if our government continues to preen and prance and pretend they're not stomping bunny heads, then in January somewhere between 6 million households and 40 million people will be without heat and/or home, adding a depth of meaning to powerless and arguing that eviction is a path to freedom. Never mind that free (homeless) bunnies with stomped heads are helpless and hopeless and sad, those in Washington will celebrate the American way and those on the ground will be left to navigate this Dickensian scene of modern-day poverty and injustice.

What is puzzling me though is the uproar over this human atrocity only now, when before the pandemic, (according to un.org), we were averaging between 3 and 4 million eviction filings and approximately 1.5 million evictions per year for at least the last two decades. Is there alarm now because before the pandemic, evictions disproportionately impacted minorities and single moms? People who (many of us believe) have themselves to blame for their circumstance? And now this pandemic, practicing inclusiveness, is impacting many who do not deserve this equality? People who (many of us believe) have minorities and single moms to blame for their circumstance?

If we act for 6 million, why would we not be moved to act for 1.5 million? And why would we not be moved to act for 3 to 4 million? Does it help to see 3 to 4 million as 4,100 people per day? Individual people who are threatened, intimidated and terrorized on a monthly basis? If you think this is overstated, go talk (and really listen for understanding) to a single mom who is terrified by the prospect of homelessness while also facing utility cutoffs and food insecurity, all with limited transportation options and new babies to take care of.

As I write this, there are tears of grief, sorrow, anger, outrage. As I write this, I see 1 face out of 1,500,000; 1 face out of 4,000,000; 1 face out of a possible 40,000,000. As I seek answers for 1, I only find more tears. But, by seeking answers for 1, I feel for 40,000,000.

I believe Humanity is capable of seeing a face and showing compassion for an individual. I believe Humanity is capable of seeing a crisis or catastrophe and showing compassion for a defined group of individuals. But it appears to me that Humanity is incapable of showing compassion for a faceless mass, forgetting that this mass is made up of individual faces. Is the current uproar then due to the dramatic increase in numbers? And if so, will we get used to it, forget it and move on? Or is it really because this crisis has impacted (what our leaders consider to be) real Americans? Or at 6 million and 40 million have we passed a certain proportional threshold that offends sensibility? Have the numbers simply gotten too big to ignore? Regardless, Humanity has always been harsh and judgmental, and Life always has the potential to be hard. Yet today we continue to pretend to be full of compassion and empathy; it is a lie.

I really have to come back to the pre-pandemic disproportionality vs the pandemic inclusiveness. As appalling and repulsive as it is to think, it truly appears that we are a nation of elitist bigots. Until we overcome this empathyless national infirmity, those who look different (minorities and immigrants), those who fall into circumstance created and perpetuated by rich white men (poor people, single moms and felons), those born into less opportunity than advertised, those who don't take advantage of the opportunity there is, and those who are on the overcrowded side of the ever-widening wealth gap, will continue to be victimized. The funny part here, (at least funny to the rich white men and the 9.9% born on third base), is that even though the potential victims constitute a large majority of all Americans, somewhere around one-half of this majority remain active, bona fide, card-carrying elitist bigots, and I would guess that at least half of the remaining half are (to varying degrees) closeted supporters.

My entire life I have (for reasons unknown to me) had a full-bodied disrespect for the pursuit of wealth. And though money may be the most obvious measure of wealth, other factors including social standing, position, power, family, health, education, and culture also contribute mightily to one’s sense of wealth and well-being. And I suppose it is not a huge leap for one of the majority to act as an elitist bigot based on an overinflated sense of personal value which in turn is based on any one or any combination of these other factors. Our system of measurement is wrong; it is unjust, immoral and misguided. Perhaps my disrespect for money and status stems from my very strong belief that every 1 of the 7,831,190,117 individuals living on this planet in this moment are as necessary as every other one. I will never understand why or how someone would or could prioritize their bank balance over the needs of a victim. Whether that victim could or could not have made a better decision at some point in the recent or distant past to alter their trajectory should make no difference; statistics show they will, regardless, land on a ladder rung very near to where they began, and be prohibited from climbing too far. So, if today they are a victim, (as are 90% of us in this country), why would we choose to withhold available wealth and rob them of their personal sense of significance? Why would we choose to turn our backs and allow them to question and doubt their self-worth? Why would I choose to believe that I am any more necessary than they are?

Today, utilizing a capitalistic yardstick, I am solidly in the bottom 50%, yet I was fortunate to be born on first base, and for many years, decades, I believed I had hit a single; I did not. I may still be (barely) hanging on to first base, but the lineup behind me is weak and in this game there are no sacrifices. Some are born on third base and go through their life believing they hit a triple. Many are born on the bench and never get in the game, and some are born in the squalor two blocks from the ballpark and have never seen a game. There is wealth in this nation and we withhold it on a daily basis, believing that the minorities and the single moms and the immigrants and the felons and the poor and those born in the dugout or in the minor leagues or in the wrong neighborhood all created their own circumstance. The truth is all of these unfairly judged undesirables, all of these looked-down-upon deplorables, (all of them!) are no different than 90% of all of us living in these United States today. The top 0.1 percent of U.S. households hold 22 percent of this country’s wealth. The next 9.9 percent hold 55 percent of the wealth. The rest of us, the bottom 90 percent hold only 23 percent of wealth. To be in the 9.9 percent requires a net worth of between 1.2 and 2.4 million dollars; they’re doing okay. The rest of us? Ninety percent of us? We are victims. Yet many of us pretend to be wealthy in some obscure way and show off this imagined wealth by becoming an elitist bigot. And this is exactly what the top ten percent want. If this were not truth, we would see more of them denounce their wealth and prioritize human dignity over their bank balance.

It is overwhelming for us to think about numbers as big as 6 million; or 40 million; or even 1.5 million. It is overwhelming for me to think about 1. All I ask for, from our government, is justice. But because our nation and our government and our individual leaders are so beholden to capitalism, the mass will remain faceless, the individual will remain a victim, justice will continue to flounder, and I will continue to seek answers and shed tears.

I don't care who you are, your comfort is only temporary; then you're gone. Did you make the world a better place? According to who? According to your grieving spouse? Your children? Your neighbor? According to history not yet written? According to your God? Or is your God only interested in your comfort? And what about your neighbor's God? What if his God is the one true God and your God is a sham? Belief, Faith, even confidence requires uncertainty. Right?

And comfort, satisfaction, even happiness requires ignorance.

Uncertainty and ignorance, in both the individual and the species, are necessary for functional progress and survival. Uncertainty propels and ignorance paves the way. Too much uncertainty, the going is rocky and slow. Too much ignorance, we build walls and a roof spreading up and back and we do not pave roads forward; into the unknown. And to stay here or back there when all around us is moving forward is to be left behind; to die.

We must adapt.

Battling the impact of an advanced species, depleted of some resources, the planet changes; working to survive. If we don't adapt along with the planet, we are left behind.

Humanity also changes; working to survive. The doctrine, the policies, the principles, the way for 8 billion people today must evolve and advance from the way for 3 billion people a mere older generation ago. If we don't adapt along with the species, we are left behind.

As individuals, as families, as communities, as nations, we must adapt.

A thought, a word, an action in this moment, is already outdated. I must rethink, rephrase, redo; now; and again…

I understand, there are some, perhaps many, maybe most in whom a little uncertainty creates a disproportionate amount of discomfort. And I believe this more extreme spike is the cause of more extreme reaction in thought, word and deed; a desperate grasping for a misremembered comfort that is no longer possible as illusion or reality; a reaction that encourages building walls and a roof spreading up and back, and discourages paving roads forward into the unknown.

For the sake of the species, we must find a way to bring comfort to this reactive constituency, and then we must find leadership in whom uncertainty and ignorance are proportionally efficient and productive. We must find leadership to bring comfort, then pave the way. In this moment, in this country, our leadership is extreme and desperate. In a few weeks we may have an infusion of some proportional productivity, but because there will remain considerable reactive divisiveness, comfort will be sporadic and the road will remain rocky; and the possibility for long term survival will continue to teeter.

I believe our elected leadership should be responsible for comfort and underlying layers of experts, advisers and thinkers should be responsible for planning the way forward and guiding the elected leadership toward efficient and productive decisions and policy. I believe expertise, vision, humility, eloquence and persuasiveness is a combination of characteristics rarely found in a single individual. I believe eloquence and/or persuasiveness will continue to be the yardstick for politicians, which in turn (I believe) dictates a degree of exaggerated ego; and this pretentious politician should not be allowed to operate heavy equipment. I believe we must discount persuasiveness in favor of (even some small amount of) vision and humility. I believe this combination is the politician more likely to bring comfort and allow more qualified others to operate the machinery that will pave roads forward; into the unknown.

I don't care who you are, your comfort is only temporary; then you're gone. Did you make the world a better place? According to who? According to your grieving spouse? Your children? Your neighbor? According to history not yet written? According to your God? Or is your God only interested in your comfort? And what about your neighbor's God? What if his God is the one true God and your God is a sham? Belief, Faith, even confidence requires uncertainty. Right?

And comfort, satisfaction, even happiness requires ignorance.

Alaska, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wyoming. If this were Jeopardy, (which in a sense, it is), the question might be, what are thirteen states with high rates of incarceration? Or Death Penalty States? Or states with high rates of gun ownership? Or firearm deaths? Or executions? If you guess any of these, you are only partially correct. First, of the thirteen states listed above, all but Alaska have the death penalty, and of the twenty-eight states that do have the death penalty, eleven of the remaining twelve on this list have executed prisoners in the last six years; and ten of the remaining twelve are in the top 25 states for number of executions since 1976, with five of those ten placing in the top 10. It is a concerning parallel to the (unrevealed) topic at hand. Furthermore, with about 4% of the world’s population, the United States houses about 25% of the world’s prisoners and owns about 46% of the civilian held firearms, and (shockingly) is responsible for approximately 90% of worldwide child and teen firearm deaths. Looking deeper, of the thirteen states listed above, ten rank in the top fourteen of all fifty states in per capita imprisonment rate, ten rank in the top twenty of all fifty states in per capita gun ownership, and eleven rank in the top nineteen of all fifty states in per capita (2008-2017) firearm deaths. So, in a roundabout way, I am talking about all of these things including and most especially a death penalty. The list above shows the thirteen states that do not (as of this week) have a mask mandate. Correlations abound.

In addition to the thirteen states above, Kansas has a statewide mask mandate, but a state law was passed by the esteemed lawmakers in that great state in June that stripped the governor of some emergency powers and allowed counties to opt out of the mask mandate; 80 out of 105 counties have done so. So that makes 14 of 50 states thumbing their nose at science and reason. And furthering the death penalty parallel above, 11 of these 14 states are in the top 25 in per capita coronavirus cases, with the other 3 coming in at #26, #28 and #29. And what about Texas? It appears to be an exception because they do have a mask mandate, yet they lead the nation in total number of death penalty executions since 1976, and total number of death penalty executions since 2014; and they are #6 in state rankings for per capita incarceration and they have more civilian held firearms and more firearm deaths than any state in the nation. Regardless of appearances, this disregard for Life is borne out in that they also lead the nation in total number of coronavirus cases, and they are second in total number of deaths attributed to Covid. Additionally, some may feel that Texas statistics should be considered in light of the fact that it is the second most populous state, but when compared to the most populous state, Texas has nearly half again as many per capita Covid cases, more than half again as many per capita Covid deaths, and (perhaps most telling) Texas has administered less than half the total number of Covid tests as has California.

I could go on…

…but I would like to focus on the numbers; specifically, the 14 of 50 states thumbing their nose at science and reason. I believe this range, (somewhere between one-quarter and one third), is an accurate approximation of how we are divided: approximately one-fourth unreasonable and incapable of reason; approximately one-fourth unreasonable but capable of reason; approximately one-fourth reasonable but incapable of reason; and approximately one-fourth reasonable and capable of reason. (Or I believe it could be as much as two-thirds unreasonable and only one-third reasonable). I am not looking at this in a strict political light. In fact, I believe that a very large majority of politicians would fall into one of the two unreasonable factions, because when I look at their results, I am hard pressed to make a case for a reasonable politician or a reasonable government. (Adding supportive depth to all this ratio conjecture, I can also note that 89.4% of all executions since 1976 have been carried out in 26% of the states).

I would like to think that reasonable is growing and unreasonable shrinking. Even if we are only moving individuals into the deferential or even apathetic reasonable-but-incapable-of-reason camp, this at least helps to de-politicize what is today a powder keg of vitriolic misinformation and divisive manipulation. Perhaps lifelong learning is not for everyone. Based on the four divisions above, I might surmise that only one-fourth are making any kind of actual, consistent effort toward lifelong learning. I believe that those (including many politicians) in the unreasonable-but-capable-of-reason crew believe they are lifelong learners, but because "one's ability to reason begins with one's ability to differentiate between a fact and a premise” those who argue a premise as a fact may show they are capable of reason but also show they are unreasonable in that they believe a premise as a fact. Any premise with which there is widespread disagreement, must be afforded the respect that comes from acknowledging the fact that it is a premise. And even a premise that is agreed upon by a majority, must be acknowledged as merely a strongly held conviction or belief. To believe requires a leap; a leap entails some risk (with no safety net), so to work to justify that leap as a stroll through the park is unreasonable; and I do not believe it is possible for one who is consistently unreasonable to be practicing lifelong learning. For lifelong learning, some uncertainty is required.

I believe the root of unreasonable is fear and/or discontent. And I believe this root of fear and discontent has spread for many reasons, flowering into a more and more active unreason. To varying degrees, fertilizers have been consistently spread on these roots to help them bloom since the founding of our nation. Today and in recent decades, some of the more heavily and frequently used growth stimulants include an increasing wealth gap, the color of law, homelessness, food insecurity, discriminatory policing, and lack of equitable or consistent health care. So perhaps the way to move more individuals into a reasonable bloc is to resolve some of these issues that are creating the fear and discontent. Yet we continue to give power to the wealthy and powerful who prefer the status quo and (more than anything) fear the loss of their wealth and power. We continue to listen to the unreasonable politicians who make unachievable promises, blame others who don’t believe as they do, claim they as we, claim expertise, and defame actual experts.

It appears we may have taken a baby step with the (yet-to-be-accomplished) ouster of our current prevaricator-in-chief. But we cannot lose sight of the fact that our incoming administration has spent a lifetime as part of the political old guard, and (I believe) still sets firmly on the side of unreason. There has simply been too much contentious separation in our political system to believe anyone can flip a switch from unreasonable to reasonable. We will continue to see significant, disruptive contempt between the two parties, that will play out between the House and the Senate and the Administration and the now-politicized Courts. And those in power, remain wealthy and powerful. They have us right where they want us.

So, if our only choices for leaders are the unreasonable, perhaps by giving power to those in the unreasonable-but-capable-of-reason clique we will be choosing policymakers who might figure out that by resolving some of the issues creating discontent, they are more likely to lull the masses and maintain power. That is, after all, what they want: to stay wealthy and to maintain power. And until we are able to fully plumb the depths of the reasonable-and-capable-of-reason network to find efficiency in progress, I am afraid it will continue to be baby steps. I am actively hopeful though that since 2016 and into the next administration, we will at least continue to learn that creating discontent does not resolve discontent. And I am actively hopeful that as a discontented constituency, we will continue to pressure our current cabal of unreasonable-but-capable-of-reason leaders to narrow and ultimately close gaps that for far too long have perpetuated an unreasonable disregard for Life.

And I am actively hopeful that it does not become too late.

One moment I think, “I am broken.” The next moment I ask, “am I broken?” “Or is reality broken?” Which leads me to ask, “is my reality broken?” “Or is our reality broken?” And then, “shouldn't they be the same?” If reality is something that exists independent of consideration, this implies there can be no interpretation; something either is or it isn't. Guided by facts, my reality should not differ from our reality. But, interpretation (of a fact as premise or a premise as fact) produces disagreement, and disagreement leads to multiple realities, which by definition is simply not possible. Yet in a contortionistic perversion of reason, multiple realities is our reality; and I suppose it has been for our entire history.

So perhaps it should not be a question of who or what is broken, nor even a question of reality or fact, but rather a question of one's ability to reason. If to reason is “to form conclusions, judgements or inferences from facts or premises” then it feels to me like one's ability to reason begins with one's ability to differentiate between a fact and a premise. To argue a fact as a premise is reasonable and may lead to some productive truth. But to argue a premise as a fact is dangerous in that (if done reasonably) it may lead to an ignorance and denial of actual fact. A fact is provable. To be reasonable, a fact that is provable but not easily provable, must be argued as a premise. A premise, by virtue of an assumption or a leap, is not provable. If we disagree on what is fact, we should argue everything as premise. This requires an objective patience, a patient empathy, and empathic respect.

An unreasonable individual will dispute facts not consistent with their agenda and put forth personally beneficial premise as indisputable fact, and in so doing may argue reasonably and appear reasonable. A reasonable individual then must argue everything as premise and risk that their objective, patient, empathic, respectful voice will be lost in the noise and distraction of indisputable disputation. The reasonable individual can continue in this vein, or the reasonable individual can more loudly dispute premise held as fact thus appearing to the unreasonable individual (and to many reasonable individuals) to be unreasonable.

And this is where we are at. But again, isn’t this where we have always been? Unreasonable individuals in power? Unheard individuals on the sidelines, arguing reasonably? And purportedly reasonable individuals on the playing field appearing unreasonable.

So perhaps my very first statement above is the most correct. I am broken. Broken by the unreasonable power of individuals. And broken by the insentient machinations of bureaucracy. And broken by unreasonable reason. And (perhaps worst of all) broken by my own (objective, patient, empathic, respectful) inclination to reason.

I believe we are changing, evolving, progressing, but I am afraid we are not doing so as quickly as what may be necessary for our survival. To move past 1) unreasonable power and 2) insentient machinations and 3) unreasonable reason requires first, (on the part of all three) an ability to differentiate fact from premise, thus finding agreement; a common ground. Yet unreasonable power likes the status quo. And insentient machinations are, well, insentient; heedless, uncaring, unfeeling, and in the service of unreasonable power. And unreasonable reason, though willing and capable, resist objective, patient, empathic, respectful reason that may remove it from the playing field.

And this is where we are at.

A couple of years ago, I believed it might take some sort of national or worldwide emergency, crisis or catastrophe to shake us up enough to move us away from divisive arguments of premise as fact and toward some agreement differentiating fact from premise. I was wrong. Nearly one year into a worldwide pandemic and we are still incapable of even beginning the process of necessary, interdependent reason. We are still incapable, as a community, as a culture, as a nation, as a species, of productively and efficiently moving forward. We are still incapable, as individuals, of acknowledging our mortality; the inevitability of my individual mortality and/or the possibility of our mortality as a species. This acknowledgement sorta kinda feels important.

Evidence of our mortality is all around us. Today could be my last day. Tomorrow, (a foreseeable tomorrow), could be our last day. These are facts. Facts that cannot be changed by denial and ignorance. Facts that one day, (How About Today?!!), we will no longer be able to ignore. Facts that are leading us and will follow us to our graves.

To argue requires a fact or premise. To argue reasonably requires some agreement on what is fact and what is premise. To argue productively requires reason. To reason requires an objective patience, a patient empathy, and empathic respect. Objectivity, patience, empathy and respect are difficult in the face of denial and ignorance. How about we begin by agreeing that on this planet, individual and species mortality is a fact. From there, those who do not believe the survival of Humanity into future generations is of consequence, should opt out. Because we, as a species, are on this planet, occupying this plane of existence, and because future generations are already here, perhaps our focus, our consideration, our concern, our efforts, should also be here. And perhaps from there we can argue productively?

Or we can continue to misinterpret fact and premise, continue to argue premise as fact, and continue toward an early grave, because reason is on the sidelines playing with itself.

Mortality is the First Fact!