Headline story in today's Washington Post:

"The confrontation with Russia over Ukraine. Houthi missile attacks potentially aimed at Americans. North Korea’s latest missile tests. China’s intimidation tactics against Taiwan. These four thorny foreign policy problems don’t have much in common, other than being inherited headaches President Biden confronts at the dawn of his second year in office."

Explain to me please why these are OUR problems? None of them is...are. At age 65, I am still trying not to get involved in solving other people's problems (unless I'm asked to). It is a constant challenge for me. It appears the USA has the same challenge.

Difference is, the first step is acknowledging you have a problem.

 

I keep telling myself I gotta get back to this blog and I keep not doing it, so I’ll re-activate with a quick thought I had this freezing cold January morning:

 

If two people are having an argument about the existence of God, one for and one against, which one is actually playing devil’s advocate?

But if nothing else, I am much better now at spelling misogyny!

A recent widely-shared (among my family and ya-yo friends) article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution dealt with examples of the misogyny rampant in today's world, and it brought out an initial reaction from me to Cheryl for which I apologized later, when she asked if I had read it:

"You mean the article on how Men Suck?"

Hey - I said I apologized for it! I am not proud to observe that I am far more sympathetic to and interested in battling racism than I am misogyny. 

I know far more women who outwardly and/or admittedly hate men than vice versa.

But...I would also say that I know far more men who don't respect women, than vice versa. And I think the issue of misandry and misogyny could/should be kept separate. 

As for the article itself, I didn't learn anything from it. Her points have been made repeatedly so I was surprised and disappointed that the author wasn't able to add anything new to the dialogue. That said, there is always value in continuing to give energy, publicity and power to the push back.

The issue and belief I have, in Jamie World, that I've never heard anyone else spew, is the undervalued and underused power of femininity. But that is so at odds with the feminist mindset, I believe it's hard for most to really try to explore it intellectually. 

Since our society has always equated femininity (which is THE worst word to try to say when you've had a beer or three) with weakness, it's a challenge to think of it any other way. And as I have probably said in this blog somewhere else, I find women to be superior to men in every way except physical attributes. Wait, that doesn't sound right - I way prefer women's physical attributes! I'm talking about the kinds of things measured in, say, the Olympics. ("The Olympics!") And I think when it comes to the power of women, it's like Glinda telling Dorothy that she had the power all along.  Someday, women may not only realize their powers, they will use them. And because women are kinder, more giving, more thoughtful and smarter, and better at playing and working well with others, not to mention easier to dance with, I suspect they'll use that power for good, not the way we men too often have used our strength/s.

We know, sadly, what Huey Lewis thinks

What is most powerful?

- Wealth

- The desire for and pursuit of wealth...

- Or love? 

And not just the love that comes with falling in love, which is the best feeling in the world, or being in love, which is the second best, but treating everyone with love and making all one's decisions based on love.

Or is the quest for power the most powerful? 

Even if one's goal is to use that power to make, say, a country's, policies based on love?

I guess the easy answer...and the most accurate...is that it depends on the person. But more generally, I think depends on whether one looks at our day-to-day lives and the fabric of society that includes procreation, but when it comes to government and policies that impact every aspect of our lives, it's probably the quest for and exercise of power.

Just something I was thinking maybe a little too much about.

Clearly this is the best, the most tremendous post ever!

In uncomfortable ways, Donald Trump reflected the worst in all of us, Republican, Democrat and Independent or Other. To Donald, everything he did was the biggest, the best, the most tremendous, etc. And we on the left were annoyed by it, but...how different is that from what we crave? We want our football team to be the best. We want our favorite to win the Oscar, Grammy, Emmy. We want our country to win the most gold medals. We want our country/state/county/town/street/house/living room to be the most tremendous. We want our favorite restaurant to be ranked the best. We want our country and people to be exceptional (which literally, everyone and every country is, by definition.)

And it all ties in with our desire to spend trillions of dollars on a military that is thousands of times bigger than it needs to be so that it, and thus, we, can be the best, the strongest, the most intimidating, just like we want our football team to be.

So, wait, we're NOT exceptional then?

It is said that history is written by the winners. In the latest blog entry by Anand Ghiridharadas, and his interview with Ayad Akhtar, they refer to a quote by Norbert Elias, the great German sociologist: 

“The established majority takes its we-image from a minority of its best, and shapes a they-image of the despised outsiders from the minority of their worst.” 

And they go on to give this case in point: "We've had a tough time getting anybody to take white domestic terrorism seriously as terrorism. Now that conversation has finally gone mainstream, when of course the threat to the American social body because of Islamic terrorism has really been pretty minuscule in comparison over the years." 

So history is written by the winners and the majority gets to not only define themselves, but the minority as well, all of which only perpetuates those myths and makes our job harder to show that we are all equal and all have the same strengths and weaknesses.

OY! como va (Not sure Santayana said that either)

 

Irish statesman Edmund Burke is often misquoted as having said, “Those who don’t know history are destined to repeat it.” Spanish philosopher George Santayana is credited with the aphorism, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” while British statesman Winston Churchill wrote, “Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

But doesn't that presume all history is bad? Seems to me there is some history we do need to repeat, like a return to democracy, honoring the Constitution, stronger workers' rights, a strong middle class, and a return to an emphasis on peace, love and understanding. 

And maybe even a return to just two choices of toothpaste.

 (Ed. Note: I actually wrote this on January 19th and didn't post it until after Joe Biden's inauguration yesterday where it was so refreshing to see that Joe seems to have the same concerns and priorities regarding Democracy, the Constitution, etc. 

No references in his speech to toothpaste however. Perhaps in his second term.)