Aashish's Thoughts

John Mayer represents

2006-09-18T12:17:00.000-07:00

Lyrics to John Mayer Waiting On The World To Change

me and all my friends
we're all misunderstood
they say we stand for nothing and
there's no way we ever could
now we see everything that's going wrong
with the world and those who lead it
we just feel like we don't have the means
to rise above and beat it

so we keep waiting
waiting on the world to change
we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

it's hard to beat the system
when we're standing at a distance
so we keep waiting
waiting on the world to change

now if we had the power
to bring our neighbors home from war
they would have never missed a Christmas
no more ribbons on their door
and when you trust your television
what you get is what you got
cause when they own the information, oh
they can bend it all they want

that's why we're waiting
waiting on the world to change
we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

it's not that we don't care,
we just know that the fight ain't fair
so we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change
and we're still waiting
waiting on the world to change
we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change
one day our generation
is gonna rule the population
so we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

we keep on waiting
waiting on the world to change

9/11

2006-09-11T06:03:00.000-07:00

A few days back I found two sheets of paper that are very special to me. These sheets contain my raw emotions from this day, five years ago. After running the 5 miles from ground zero to my apartment on the upper west side that day, I remember walking into my apartment and realizing there was ash and dirt all over my clothes. The tears that swelled in my eyes were able to make me clean.

I try not to think about the chaos and pain of being down there too often. Rarely now do I find myself retelling the story of my, our experience. I no longer think about it when see high rise buildings. I no longer buy it as a justification for war. The group that I ran those 5 miles with is scattered across the nation and we don’t call each other any more on this day to say hello, I should. However, I still rise at 5am on this day on the west coast to make sure I am watching TV to join the moment of silence.

Finding those sheets of paper brought it all back. After getting back to my apartment that day and answering a number of calls, I went back on the street. As I looked south I could see the smoke rising. People were gathered on street corners, embracing, looking for answers, crying for what we had lost. We tried going back down to ground zero to see if we could help, only to be turned back. By 6pm that evening the signs started appearing. For those in NYC at that time, I don’t think we will ever forget those signs. Missing: my father; missing: my husband, with a picture attached.

Later that night we gathered in the apartment of a friend, to watch the news and try to make sense of what we had experienced that day. We drank, like many Americans did that night. We went out on the streets and held candles with others. When I got back to my apartment later that evening, I sat down and poured my emotions onto two sheets of paper. These pages are filled with anger, a function of the helplessness we felt that day, running for our lives. There is pain; there is a call for revenge. Ultimately there is sadness for innocence lost.

Five years later those emotions still reside within, but they are tempered. I, like many who experienced this event first hand, have moved on. We have grown disillusioned by how that event has been molded into a political campaign slogan and the justification for anything this administration wants to do. I sleep through the nights, the sounds of the planes hitting or the building falling don’t wake me up anymore.

Those sheets brought it all back and reminded me that this day will always hold a special significance to me, as much as I try to forget, it all comes back.

For all the people who never made it home, my you rest in peace.

May 31st

2006-05-31T11:28:00.000-07:00

Why is May 31st important or notable in a historic context? Most people would not agree that at is, but May 31st 1987 was a historic day indeed. On that historic day, for the first time publicly, President Regan acknowledged and spoke about the AIDS epidemic that had been spreading rapidly through the country and the world for the past six years. Regan’s silence on the issue was indicative of his administrations dealing with the matter. While thousands were dying and thousands more were getting infected, the administration remained silent and uncaring. It is this issue alone which will never allow me to respect Regan as a person, let alone as a president.

Many of Regan’s supporters argue over the merits of what he could have done to help combat this incurable disease. The list of things he could have done from the perspective of funding research and education is beyond belief. Instead he allowed Jessie Helms to pass an act in congress (which still stands today) which does not allow for Federal funding for any AIDS awareness and education campaign that makes reference to sexual behavior. Need I remind everyone that AIDS is a SEXUALLY transmitted disease, so this defies any logic known to man. However, Regan’s silence was even worse, because of the affect it had on the victims of this disease.

In the early days, AIDS was seen as a disease that affect only gays, IV drug users, and Haitians. Unfortunately the first two groups were seen by Regan’s administration as sinners and the third group doesn’t have a very strong lobby. As fears of the disease started spreading, the ignorance was at an all time high (which is to be expected). As the disease spread to hemophiliacs, many of whom were children, the hate filled rhetoric aimed at gays (Got Aids Yet) actually transferred to the children who got the disease. Children were kicked out of schools, their homes were burned to the ground and their parents were fired from work, leaving many homeless and broke.

By 1984 the virus which cause AIDS, HIV, had been identified by both French and American scientist. It was also understood that the virus was transmitted through blood. This allowed scientist to definitively identify the means of transmission of the disease. Scientist from the CDC, the WHO and NIH all agreed that it was imperative that the President make a public statement about transmission of the disease, notably that it could not be transmitted through causal contact or even kissing or the sharing of food or drink. A speech was written in 1984 for Regan to deliver, however despite indisputable scientific evidence, the President’s legal counsel, Mr. Roberts (you may know him now as Chief Justice Roberts), edited that portion out and basically made the president say we still don’t know definitively how the diseases is spread. This silence and misinformation caused not only the public to continue their ignorance, but it also diverted need dollars away from research of a very mainstream disease.

At the end of the day, Regan’s silence was a function of his feeling about gays and drug users. I find it to be very interesting that people call gays and drug users sinners based on religious grounds, but that same religion teaches to “love the sinner and hate the sin”. Regan’s apathy and spreading of misinformation created an environment where these “sinners” paid the ultimate price; they died alone and without hope. His inaction allowed the disease to spread rapidly due to a lack of education. The administrations inability to get needed funds allocated to the disease set the research community back countless years and has resulted in thousands of meaningless deaths. I wonder if the disease had been mainstream from day one, would Regan and his administration’s actions have been different? Absolutely. Apparently in the land “where all men are created equal”, that is not the case.

To me, no man can be regarded as any kind of respectable person if they allow others to suffer and pass away without interveening to help, particularly when they have the means and power to do so.

Epilogue:

So what did Regan actually say when he spoke on May 31st 1987 – he did acknowledge the disease could not be transmitted through causal contact. However, he then called for a ban on immigration on anyone that tested positive for the disease. By the end of the speech, half the crowd had turned their backs to the president in protest, disgusted at what he was saying.

Liberal Honor

2006-05-28T13:28:00.000-07:00

Call me liberal, I wear it like a badge of honor.

Being liberal means being right, despite apparently residing on the left. Recently on a trip to Salt Lake City I over heard a conversation, which ended with one of the parties accusing the other of being “too left to make any god-damn sense”. The more I thought about it in the context of history, the more I realized throughout the course of history, liberals have always been right. I define liberal thought as the opposite of conservative, those who demand change and progress are liberal, those who want to keep things as they are or regress back to an earlier time are conservative. I realize my definitions are somewhat cruel and general. Clearly there are types of conservatives and liberals and people may vary on where they stand on an issue to issue basis. For the sake of my argument, lets explore a social liberal verses a social conservative, leaving out fiscal policy and trying our best to avoid religious undertones.

A social liberal is a person who is pro-change. These are people that want to see the evolution of our society by breaking the accepted social constructs. Conservatives on the other hand, believe the current sets of social construct are acceptable, if not overly liberal. In all my experiences with conservatives there has always been in similar pattern of argument, which can be grouped into three distinct buckets.

1. The way things are is what I know and change would be difficult to adjust to
2. I don’t believe in the new way of thinking you are advocating
3. Doing what these liberals are purposing will take us down a slippery slope, toward complete moral and civil collapse.

Interestingly these three arguments have been used throughout history and if history has proven anything, it is that liberals are generally (if not always) right. All it takes to prove this is for one to explore American history, to see the opposing stance on issues.

Pre-Revolution:

Conservative: We should be loyal to the British and continue to enjoy the protections afforded to us.
Liberal: British rule is wrong because they make laws and take taxes without allowing us to have a voice.

Pre-Civil War:

Conservative: Slavery allows our economy to thrive and provides an efficient way for our country to grow.
Liberals: It is wrong to enslave people, under any circumstance.

Pre-Suffrage:

Conservatives: Women are not smart enough to vote and allowing them to vote is a slippery slope – what’s next, animals voting?
Liberals: Women are equal members of our democracy and should be allowed to vote.

Pre-Civil Rights Movement:

Conservatives: Separate but equal is ok, this is how it has been and I am comfortable this way plus integration is a slippery slope.
Liberals: The current state of things are not equal and integration will make us a better country and allow us the finally realize the vision of this country.

Pre- Woman’s Lib Movement

Conservative: A woman’s place is in the house.
Liberal: A woman’s place is in the House AND Senate.

Gay Rights

Conservative (Moderate): If people choose to live that way it is there business but marriage is between a man and woman, period.
Liberal: We need to extend the same set of laws and protections afforded to straight couples to gay couples.

Immigration:

Conservative: Close our boarders protect our jobs, but man do I like the lifestyle afforded to me through cheap labor, just don’t change the ways things are today.
Liberal: Stop treating people like pawns and give them the right to be human and the dignity they deserve.

The list goes on and on, but the reality is social conservative will always be wrong because of one fundamental reason, all is not known. Our perception of reality is nothing more than a construct of the parameters we know to be true today. This is at its core the worst perceptions to base anything off of, because the realm of our understanding increases daily. Therefore, when a person in 1920s said going to the moon would be impossible they spoke based on the constructs of what they knew. Innovation made what was once impossible, possible. Socially I believe the same law applies, however in a social construct when we say things are impossible we don’t hurt an idea, we hurt people. As a people we often forget how far we have come in the short time. It was not long ago that is was impossible for a white man to marry a black woman, as inter-racial marriage was technically illegal. We made it impossible as a society because the construct of the day would not allow the majority of people to fathom the possibilities. In the process who knows how many lives were adversely affected. Today we realize that allowing people to marry who they want is a fundamental right, as long as they are of different sexes. As a society our construct has not moved far enough yet to take the next step.

Has America gotten worse over the years because we have allowed ourselves to fathom socially what was once taboo? Depending on how one defines worse, the answer will vary. One of the unfortunate side effects of human evolution is that all things are amplified, good and bad. Stronger weapons can be a deterrent to war and a threat to all humanity at the same time. Television can allow the mass proliferation of important content and news, but it can also shape a persons thinking at a young age. The amplified affect of anything will always make things seem more chaotic and “worse”.

What I believe conservatives fail to see is that social change isn’t about a singular person. The struggle is about making a society as free as possible, so people may be free to express themselves and ultimately be themselves. No one is advocating the gay lifestyle, or telling all women to go work, or forcing everyone to marry someone from a different race. All liberals are saying is that these possibilities should exist as choices for individuals to make on their own. What a person chooses to do is there own business. Ironically, liberals are perhaps the most “Christian” people out there, as they are willing to help others, even if the cause has no measurable personal gain and may even cause personal harm or suffering. On the flip side conservatives feel that any change in the freedoms granted to others is somehow a personal attack on them.

The interesting thing and the thing which should give many people hope that have lost faith in this country recently, is that ultimately the liberal ideas win. Our history has shown that no liberal idea is immediately accepted and it is never implemented without a colossal struggle. But with every passing struggle and the sprouting of every new idea we continue as a nation to move forward and we have liberals to thank for it.

So please call me liberal, I wear it like a badge of honor.

Iran

2006-05-10T16:16:00.000-07:00

The current administrations policy on the Middle East can be summed up by the immortal words of Chung-Lee in Blood Sport, point to country and say “you’re next”. Apparently now Iran is on the radar screen, as the situation in Iraq continues to head down a slippery path towards total chaos and or civil war. We are told we should fear Iran because they have a leader that is unpredictable, lies to his people and is unpopular in the rest of the world. I am not sure where I have heard a leader described that way before, I know there was some guy with a similar rap who took his country to war over something, weapons of mass destruction says what? I am not going to defend Ahmadinejad, anyone who says things like the holocaust never occurred is not one to be trusted. But it is interesting to look at the situation from his point of view and better understand what a war with this country would mean.

Lets be clear about one thing, Iran isn’t Iraq in any sense of the word. Iran has a fairly powerful army that unlike the Iraqi army will put up a sizeable resistance. Iran is a theocracy, it isn’t a secular state, which Iraq was under Saddam. Iran is Shite controlled, there are no Sunni or Kurds here, they are united under one faith. Iran has a nuclear program, while many experts say that they are still 10-15 years away from being in the position to fire a war-head, there is no question as to their nuclear ambitions being more than civil.

It is interesting to consider Ahmadinejad current position as the leader of Iran. Geographically Iran sits between Iraq and Afghanistan, so he currently has US forces on both sides of his border. Iran is the second largest OPEC producer, but it also has a strong agricultural trade and has good trade relations all over Europe, Asia and Africa. Again, this isn’t an isolated nation the way Saddam was after the first Gulf war. So the president of Iran realizes he has American troops on both sides of his country and he wants to be considered a world power. The path taken by countries near Iran (India and Pakistan) was to develop nuclear weapons. India is a prime example, despite being a democracy since its inception with a growing middle class and friendly trade relations throughout the world, it was not taken seriously by anyone until it was able to assert itself as a nuclear power. Iran’s leader probably feels the same way. He realizes that developing these weapons will cause the US to potentially declare war with his country. If war is inevitable, one should make sure they have allies and hit the opponent anyway they can. In the Middle East there is one sure fire way to rally support and gain allies, say bad things about Israel. Ahmadinejad has employed this path with great success. He has rallied support by declaring any attack on Iran will result on an attack against Israel – if that was to happen, a number of countries or fighters in the region would join in, Israel would fight back with it’s full might, the US would be caught protecting Israel and attacking Iran. Europe would be forced to enter the fray and suddenly we would have the trigger for an all out war, potentially even a world war. Ahmadinejad has also made sure to highlight the US policy in the Middle East and portray America as outsider bent on colonizing the region. At the same time Iran has seized an opportunity in Iraq. The Shite population of Iraq has been repressed for many years. Suddenly the instability afforded by the US actions have given the Shite the ability to fight for power and exact revenge for their perceived repression. Iran has been quick to court this group and continues to openly support them. As this group gains control, Iran’s influence and power in the region will increase. Basically Ahmadinejad has done everything in his power to deter America from attacking while proactively preparing for that moment.

War with Iran would be a disaster simply put. Our military is stretched very thin at the moment. Some experts have stated a war with Iran could only be feasible if they re-instituted the draft. This war could also potentially be the fuse that leads a large number of countries into a much greater conflict. Above all though, it would be a clear indication that our ability as a nation to achieve anything through diplomatic means has been lost. It is bothersome to see our administration taking the same approach with Iran as we took with Iraq. It begins with a presentation to the UN, followed by our unilateral decision making. Iran is the perfect opportunity for the United States to show they can work with the global community to effectively deal with a situation without resorting to war. Most nations do not want to see a nuclear Iran, and it behooves our government to unite with these nations to pressure Iran into compliance. At the end of the day Ahmadinejad knows he can not win a war with the United States, but he knows that if he is given no option he can take on the US and make the world a much worse place in the process. The next few months will show if we as a nation can learn from our missteps and rise above or if we are headed further down the road to complete chaos.

The Price of Oil

2006-05-10T12:27:00.003-07:00

The Price of Oil

It’s a bad time to be me. I drive an SUV 100 miles a day round trip, and I live in the Bay Area. I am now the official poster child for the American most effected by the recent surge in gas prices. It is virtually impossible for me to find gas cheaper that $3.30 a gallon, which means it now roughly costs me about $65 to fill up my oil tanker. Like most Americans I did my best to not think about gas prices as they climbed slowly for the last 10-15 years. Finally though, like many Americans, I have reached my break point. I have begun to make changes in my day to day life that will allow me to function normally without having to go without.

While our adicition to oil is well documented, we generally do not talk about the root causes of this phenomina, nor do we discuss the solutions, because there is no quick fix. While the pro-oil pundits continue to tell us that the price of gas in the US is still lower than in many other countries around the world or that the current climate in the Middle East is to blame for our woes, the truth lies deeper. In order to understand this issue we must explore the history of how we became the nation addicted to oil and examine how oil has shaped the climate of the world. Ultimately this will allow us to consider some solutions.

History

I don’t believe that oil was implemented as fuel for our nation with any sinister motives. No one had a hidden agenda, there was no conspiracy. In fact, one could argue that oil fueled the greatest invention of the last 150 years, the automobile. Throughout history people had to rely on living in centrilized locations, which lead to over crowding, the spread of disease and crime. The automobile allowed people to spread out, buy homes and create opportunities across the nation. Our government motivated this model through the building of one of the best highway systems in world. For years this model worked very well and allowed for the rapid development of the entire nation. However as the need for oil grew it became incumbent upon our government to ensure a reliable and cost effect source for this vital resource. While any first year business student can expand on the need to have a diversified portfolio, our government decided it would be wise to proceed forward with just one primary source of fuel. The discovery of oil beneath the barren deserts of the Middle East gave the US government what they needed to push their polices while setting the stage for one of the largest hypocrisies in American policy history. The greatest hypocrisy in American policy is slavery, hands down. Not far behind it though is the policy of the government to support any government regardless of how brutal, evil and undemocratic it is, if that nation is willing to supply oil to the United States. In fact, the US has gone out of its way to support these countries, giving rise to the “petro-state”.

Petro-State – changing the landscape of the world

Saudi Arabia is a prime example of the Petro State, as described by Thomas Friedman. Friedman contends that there is an inverse relationship between the amount of oil possessed by a state and the ability for a democratic political system to exist. It is a policy which makes sense, from an economical stand point. The government in the United States needs tax dollars to function, people and corporations pay those taxes, thus it makes sense for the government to listen to the people, which is in essence what a democracy is, rule by the people. In a Petro-State, the government functions on oil revenues, thus the people are not given any power. In the case of Petro-States, which exist primarily in the Middle East, governments can employ Islamic Law as a way to justify a strict moral order which limits any questioning of the governments authority, which is in fact nothing more than a control mechanism. Since the people are not being taxed heavily, there is no centralized issue for them to revolt on. In America the call to action was “taxation without representation” – no such battle cry exists in a Petro-State. Saudi Arabia is perhaps the most brutal government regime this side of Liberia or Sudan. The rights of the people are limited beyond belief, there is no trial system, and public executions are common place. Experts across the world have for years said Saudi Arabia is and always has been a more brutal regime than Saddam Hussein’s ever was. However, far from invading this country to “spread democracy” the US government praises its leaders and opens military installations to offer protection to this regime. In return, the Saudi government has been very friendly to the US and has increased oil production to keep prices down. The policy of repressing people is evil enough, but the worst part is what the Petro-State has created as a dirty by-product - terrorism.

Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers from 9/11 were of Saudi descent. The leader of the group which masterminded the plot was of Saudi descent as well. Why is it that this country has given rise to such individuals? The truth is it takes three things to build a successful terrorist network: money, ideology, and willing foot soldiers. The rise of the Petro-State has put un-godly sums of money into the hands of individuals who are willing to fund these types of activities. The use of radical Islam to support the regime has allowed the ideology to be cultivated and finally the massive inequity of the distribution of wealth has created a legion of foot soldiers. While our president would like us to believe that “they hate us for our freedoms” the reality is that our hypocritical polices and inability to diversify our fuel needs has given rise to a perfect storm of elements which have created chaos around the world.

Solution

It is unfortunate that we as a society have the attention span of a five year old. This makes implementing changes which will take 10-15 years to be felt very difficult. Ultimately the solution to our problems is a long term one. As the price of oil continues to rise, people will adjust their behavior in the short run, however these are not solutions, they are bandaids. Simply economics tells us that the rising price of oil will finally make alternative energy sources more appealing. It will also drive the investment and research into developing better types of fuel. Eventually even the government will be forced to get into the act and regulate and legislate our energy needs. But the solution ultimate lies with the people. Real behavior changes over the course of the next 10-15 years will be the true drivers of change. As people shift to hybrid vehicles and increase the demand for bio-diesels and ethanol (sugar based not corn based which is 8 time less efficient) and look to decrease commutes, we will be able to break our dependency on oil. Now if you will excuse me, my jeep needs a fill-up.

Overcoming the Culture of Hate

2005-12-07T15:35:00.000-08:00

As much as we would like to hide it through the veil of PC that encompasses our country these days, America has a history of hate. Starting with the treatment of the indigenous population, to slavery, to the treatment of women, to the Asian Exclusion act, to Jim Crow, to racial profiling – it’s safe to say if you are part of a minority group or female in this country you have been discriminated against. It is unfair to say hate is the sole domain of the United States, every country both new and old, have some skeletons in their closets. The only difference is that the America was the first country founded on the basis that “all men [and women] are created equal”, but when these words were written by a slave owner, one should have assumed it would take some time to be proven true. America prides it self as a melting pot of people and cultures, and while it is not perfect, it does work to acheieve that.

Hate is an interesting emotion. Ironically the strong passionate feelings felt when you hate someone are possibly only matched by those felt when you love someone. But what creates hate? I don’t believe anyone is born with hatred, it is an acquired emotion. Love or the need for affection and closeness is innate. Some years ago they did a study with baby monkeys, that were taken away from there mothers at birth. They were put in a room with a large barren metal pole, that was cold and uninviting, but had food attached to it. The other pole in the room had carpet that was warm and inviting. The baby monkeys took to the pole with the carpet and in most cases did not even leave the carpet pole to get food – love and caring was more important to them. Then how is it that we let Hate not only drive the politics of our country but the agenda of the world? I believe hate is typically the result of two things, ignorance and under education. The people most suspectible to becoming hate filled are those who are ignorant of the diversity in the world and those who are not educated enough to discern the truth for themselves.

Ignorance arises from a lack of exposure. For example, in NYC most people have eaten Indian food. In SF most people are friends with or know someone who is gay. In LA most people know a number of Mexican immigrants. This exposure to people, food and cultures that are different from their own, makes people aware. Awareness typically leads to understanding. Exposure also increases ones ability to realize it is possible to co-exist with people of different backgrounds. It also makes them less likely to believe hate filled rhetoric. When a politican claims that gays are destroying the fabric of America, or that Mexican’s are taking our best jobs they will know these things are just not true.

Under Education is also a breeding ground for hate. When President Bush and the current administration made a link between Saddam and Osama, most people in the USA bought it. Those with education and experience in this area knew that nothing was farther from the true. The ideologies, motivations and tactics of the men differ completely, not to mention they openly disliked each other. But to simple minds the only thing that resonated was that they had names which sounded similar and came from regions that were close to each other. Those who lack the ability and knowledge to question things which are said, tend to believe them if they hear them enough. These people can be easily manipulated and turned to hate. And it is not just in the US – most of the young men joining militant groups in the Middle East lack a formal education in anything outside of the Koran and have never even seen an American up close (under education and ignorance at it’s worst).

So it seems the solution is simple. Spread education and make everyone meet people from different cultures, backgrounds, sexual orientations (heck in Saudi Arabia people of the other sex even!). Clearly this would help a lot of our problems. When I think of the two major movements in the US that helped reduce hate, I think of the civil rights movement and the gay rights movement. In many ways they choose to go the path of reducing ignorance and increasing education. After movies like “Birth of a Nation” – a majority of white America saw the depiction of black men as thieves bent on having sex with white women. And for a lot of white America that was what they knew, as Black Americans were not really spread out across the country (as Chris Rock so well put it – “Black people only live in like 5 cities, the rest of the country is broke ass white people”). It took years of marches, demonstrations and speeches for many in Americans to see how similar white and black families and people were. It took the brutiality of the killing of 4 innocent black teenage girls at a church for many to realize how ridulous the silent adherence to hate was. In many ways it wasn’t till the Cosby Show in the 80’s that most of white America got to see a successful black family – the results were the highest rated show of a generation. People are more accepting then we sometimes give them credit for – you just have to let them experience somethings for themselves. The gay rights movement took a similar approach. For many years gays were thought of as liminal members of society – living on the fringes. The coming out strategy showed the nation that there were gay doctors, lawyers, teachers, parents, brothers, sisters, atheletes – it moved them back into the mainstream and created awareness and acceptance. Education has also been key. As people are able to study history, they can see how hate destroys nations and leads to chaos. The problem is, creating awareness and making education available for everyone is a difficult task. Despite everything though, America is moving in the right direction. The proliferation of people from different backgrounds across the country, an increased focus on diversity training and education has lead to tangible gains. It has also given rise of the religious right – in my next entry I will talk about the new force of hate in America.

Hope

2005-11-03T11:20:00.000-08:00

Hope is an interesting concept. Hope doesn’t have to be bought, it is free. Hope can’t really be manufactured, it comes from within. Hope can be lost, but it can also be regained. Above all, hope makes everything more digestible as people. Watching your favorite team, that might be the worst in the league, square off against the best team in the land, is an event that can be made fun by the hope of victory. Going to a bar for the thousandth time can be made exciting by the feeling of hope that perhaps you will meet someone this evening that will alter your life. Hoping a sick friend or relative makes it through a tough illness, or hoping you get the job of your dreams – all make life more bearable, more worth living. Then why is it, as a country, we appear to have lost the hope that this nation can rise above the malaise which seems to consume our existence these days?

I think hope is lost when you feel that the outcome can no longer be changed. It’s that feeling you get at the end of the football game when the other team begins to take a knee and you can only watch the seconds tick away. Why is it that in America today, so many people feel that the outcome of where we are headed as a nation can not be changed? I think it is because we watch in horror as a war that the majority of Americans oppose continues to go on with no end in sight. I think it is because we see that politicians are lying or simply toeing the party line, and it feels that that has become the status quo. I think we see a looming energy and environment crisis and feel that big business and the government have partnered up to make sure nothing is done to address it. I think it is because we see the hate logic – that once fueled race wars, now being channeled to fuel wars between people with different life styles. All of these factors combined, along with a host of other issues have made it hard for many of us to believe that the outcome of anything can be changed, and that feeling, that hopelessness consumes us. Hopelessness is extremely dangerous, because eventually it fuels detachment which eventually leads to apathy. And once the majority of Americans become apathetic – more interested in pop culture than the looming oil crisis, the powerful in this country have them right where they want them.

The irony is we live in a democracy, which is supposed to be rule by the majority. While our government structure doesn’t represent that (the Senate affords equal representation to every state regardless of population) the founding principles of this country do. We the people – not we the powerful men writing this document, not we the religious right, not we the media – we the people run this country. Then why is it that legalized abortion, which is supported by over 65% of the people, is still under such debate? Why is it that the majority of people favor major restrictions on gun ownership and use, but the NRA still yields so much clout? Why is it that 50% of this country is female and we have 14 female senators out of 100 – and have yet to have a serious female contender for the presidency? The reality is, we the people has become we the powerful few, and the people have allowed it to happen. The hopelessness that has consumed our country over the years has had its desired effect. Americans have grown increasingly apathetic and ignorant about major issues. We believe the words “tax cut” means everyone gets to keep more money; we don’t take the time to see the discrepancies with which it is applied. We think all people from the Middle East are the same – Saddam and Osama must have been boys right? We think its ok for cars to not have mandated fuel efficiency measures. When Jimmy Carter left office in 1980, 27mpg was a law to be followed by automakers – today there is nothing, we are moving backwards. Yet as Americans we continue to ask for bigger cars, as gas prices skyrocket. We don’t flinch when gas companies report record profits. We think people of the same sex getting married is the end of the world, but a 50% divorce rate doesn’t scare us as long as it’s people of different sexes. Religion and religious figures don’t have to earn respect they just get it, even if they molest children and then set up a network to escape prosecution. Our ignorance makes us easily manipulate able, and makes us easy to govern through polling and reiteration of the same message – even if it’s wrong. We don’t take the time or make the effort to question our leaders – the basis of any democracy. Instead we march on, like ants.

Clearly it is important to restore hope if we plan to restore this nation to the great place it could and should be. But how do we accomplish this? How do we make people and more importantly, make over selves believe that we can still affect the outcome. I have a simple solution, it’s the same solution that motivates us to continue to cheer for our team down 14 points with 2 minutes left and no time outs, we know it has happened before. There is precedence to give us reason for hope. History has taught us there are teams that have been able to come back under even worse conditions and win, and we believe thus our team can do it. We have to translate the same idea back into the people when it comes to change in our country. American has always been a place historically where we have over come the odds and done what was inconceivable. We must educate people to that history and re-light the hope which has fade away.

Next time I will talk about historical events we can learn from and use to give hope to us today.

State of Things - Why it is worse than 1968

2005-11-01T15:17:00.000-08:00

I am sure that I am not the only one who is disheartened by the current state of affairs in our country. It is hard not to be when you consider all that is going on, with seemingly no end in sight.

The War

The war in Iraq continue to claim the life of innocent people on both sides. While over 2,000 service women and men have been killed, it pails in comparison to the number of innocent Iraqis' that have been killed since the being of this war. A study done last year, which was not given much air time, (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/29/iraq.deaths/) put the death toll at over 100,000 people. And remember this was before the bloody summer of 2005, which claimed thousands of more lives. While most media outlets tend to focus little attention to the war now, it’s not going away anytime soon. You can't blame the media all together though, the American people bare a lot of the blame. Over the last few years, as international news has become more relevant to us here, subscriptions of newspapers and news related magazines have dwindled, while gossipy star chasing magazines have seen an explosion in readership. The sad fact is as a country we are more concerned with how Jennifer Anniston is doing post break up (word on the street is she is doing well - in case you were wondering you sorry sap) then we are with 50 dead children in Iraq. As a country we have seemed to loose focus on how we have no exit strategy, let alone the fact our reasons for going to war were false to begin with.

The Administration

The current administration - George Bush and the Texas Revolution - is basically taking apart in 8 years what it took many years to build. As Mr. Bush continues to appoint every friend he ever had to any position available, legitimate agencies are turning into shells of their old selves. The FDA refuses to approve RU486 because the Bush appointed head of the agency decided that 100's of scientist can't be right when they said the drug was safe and effective. FEMA - well that's one that everyone knows, but it is worth mentioning. Public Broadcasting, Immigration and the Justice Department are just a few more examples were experienced people are quitting because the new bosses are that bad. Those who aren't destroying government agencies are busy outing CIA agents and or using illegal funds to run campaigns. It's hard to imagine a more dishonest, inept and corrupt bunch of guys getting together and looting and destroying the country. Eight billion dollars went missing in Iraq - missing? Contracts to rebuild Katrina ravaged New Orleans went to Halliburton and other pro-Bush contractor groups. Back in the day, Texas wanted to be an independent country, is it to late to vote on that one? Clearly nothing I have stated is new to anyone. I feel there are three camps of people in this country now:
1. People who don't support the president and are disgusted at what is happening in the America these days
2. People who support the president and feel the war is ok because "we have to fight them over there so we don't fight them here" - and are pleased at how things are going
3. People who support the president but after a series of events - Iraq, Katrina, Supreme Court Appointments, Appointments in General, ect., feel this country is headed in the wrong direction
Sadly groups 1&3 have no leader or solution that can challenge group 2. So while less than 40% of Americans thing this country is headed in right direction - we continue to go head first down this path.

1968

To me 1968 remains the most pivotal year in America since 1865. While most of us would point to 2001 as the most pivotal year, I would argue outside of 2,000+ innocent people dying, little that happened on 9/11 changed much in history. This administration would have gone to war with Iraq regardless of 9/11 happening or not - it just let them do it quicker. While it introduced new words into the lexicon of American language, like Jihad, terror cell, or Osama, most Americans didn't take the time to understand the root causes of the event, and thus remain as ignorant about these issue as they were before 9/11. How else would 60% of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11? However, 1968 was different. It was a time that it seemed America, and more importantly young people, seemed to not only care but they also seemed to get it - whatever it was (you can also get IT on eBay). The Civil Rights movement, the women’s movements had proven that protest, resistance and bold leadership could cause change. Above all those leaders were gathering momentum like never before. Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King were two leaders that were inspiring greatness and people were listening and reacting. However, in 1968, both of these men were gunned down, and the nation has in my mind never recovered.

RFK

RKF understood the power structure in this country. He saw how war was designed to make the rich richer by using and abusing the poor in this country. He saw how big business was marrying itself to government and wanted to fix that as well. He essentially wanted to correct all the things which we lament about today, and he had the support of so many people from so many different backgrounds you have to believe he could have gotten it done. I think one of the best and saddest moments in this country's history is the train carrying RFK's body making it's way through all parts of the nation and people just coming out of no where to stand along the tracks to pay their respects.

MLK

I could write more than a book about all the great things this man did. He had a vision that was years ahead of his time, and the way he took Gandhi's approach and made it relevant in this country was amazing. Had he lived, civil rights would have stayed in the forefront on our minds for a long time. His death derailed a movement that has been searching to finding it's footing since and America is weaker as a nation for it. I think all the great ones seem to know when their time on Earth is almost up, and MLK was no exception to that. While his I have a dream speech is clearly his best known and most recited speech, I am a big fan of his last speech, given just hours before his death. The final few lines of which go:

"Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it doesn't matter with me now. Because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the promised land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people will get to the promised land. And I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord." - MLK

Why Are things Worse than 1968

Even with the loss of MLK and RFK this country still had hope. The movements of the 60's had proven that change could happen, and that sprit continued to carry through to the early 70's. The early 70's saw large gains for women's rights and civil rights with the passage of the affirmative action bill. But the war in Vietnam continued, Watergate happened and suddenly the country was reminded of the ugly side of this country.

I think today as a country we lack leaders. We lack leaders that can inspire and lead by example. We lack leaders that have the greater good of the country at heart. Leaders today understand the system and fight for power so they can be in the best position to play the system to fleece the country. We are now run by corporations, and our policies are not based on just causes, but on what is good for business. In essence, the normal people of this country have no reason to have hope. The years since 1968 have exposed to many things that are wrong with this country for a common person to think they can change things, make things right.
Next time

I write next time about how we can try and change the hopelessness and what can be done to turn the clock back to the kind of hope and energy this country had in 1968.

Welcome

2005-11-01T15:04:00.000-08:00

I will be posting my daily thoughts on this blog - so check back often - as I will tackle everything from the current administration to the BSC.

-Aashish