Fundamentally, I am anti-war. I have studied the cold war some, and I am impressed at the anti-communist idealism. Each actor in this drama was self-motivated by a patriotic, logical, imperative to fight for what is right, good and worth preserving. It led us into the military industrial state. It diverted us from fighting just as hard to preserve our economic power. But I was perplexed as to why, when the communist threat eroded, when the Berlin wall fell, why did the military that was built to fight communism, why did it grow even larger? I propose this is the most important issue for America. As long as we spend a trillion or more per year, 1/2 our tax receipts and 1/3 our budget, as long as we are killing people overseas, this country will founder, both morally and economically. I propose if America wants to regain something lost, this would be a good time to stand down from world war two.
Origins of the Cold War
Bad news played across American newspapers in 1949-1950. Russia had set off its own atomic bomb. China was lost to communism. Alger Hiss was convicted of perjury and by inference a Soviet spy. Joe McCarthy began charging that Hiss was just the tip of the iceberg – the State Department was loaded with communists. In June 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea, and U.S. troops faced communist troops for the first time. Behind the headlines was a growing conviction that America was in a global war with Communism. Only 10 years before there had been a debate whether the U.S. should involve itself in a European war. Now, in 1950, the Truman administration committed to total long-term military superiority and active participation in regional conflicts all over the globe.
No war has ever destroyed so much, or changed the world so completely, as WW2. Fifty million people died. Much of Europe and Asia were in ruins. In a span of just 30 years, Europe had experienced the first world war, a depression, and now the most devastating war of all. Many of the world’s great cities were destroyed. Japan and Germany were in ruins and it was unclear what form of government and what kind of country they would become. Two powers emerged, Russia and America.
Robert Payne, British historian, wrote in 1949, “There never was a country more fabulous than America...the decisions of the American government affect the lives.. of the remotest people. Half the wealth of the world, more than half the productivity... are concentrated in American hands... She bestrides the world like a Colossus: no other power at any time in the world’s history has possessed so varied or so great an influence on other nations...” (qtd in McCullough 733)
Russia in WWII had twenty million dead. The German army had destroyed cities, towns, roads, rail lines, electric plants, bridges, farms and livestock. Michael Forrestal, son of the Navy Secretary, went to Moscow in April 1947. He reported after touring the countryside, “the standard of living and mental attitude brought about by the worst depression [in the U.S.] must be a kind of paradise unimagineable in comparison to official prosperity here.”(qtd in Leffler 6)
Many of the men who made American policy after WW2 had been young men after WW1. They had seen the toleration of Germany and Japan invading and controlling nearby countries. Appeasement, they called it. They had learned from WW2, that relatively small countries could control large areas by annexing the resources of other lands. War required industrial ability, resources and skilled populations. Near the end of WW2, American policy makers warned against any post-war entity controlling all the resources of Europe.(Leffler 11) This was at the heart of post-war American policy – Russia must not be allowed to bring all of Europe into her sphere of influence. This is also what drove Roosevelt in 1940 – a victorious Germany with all the resources of Europe would directly threaten America at a time of Germany’s choosing.(Leffler 22)
Sitting astride both Europe and Asia, Russia was a brutal totalitarian regime with a ground army dominating eastern Europe and northeast Asia. In the political chaos after WWII, leftist movements were on the rise in Greece, Italy, France, China, and Korea (Leffler 497). Communists might seize any of these countries by internal politics. With the colonial masters largely weakened, nationalist movements that might be attracted to Marxism were on the rise in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and North Africa.(Leffler 497) The devastation of Germany and Japan left a power vacuum that could have been filled by extreme nationalists or economic agreements with Russia. American planners were both the most powerful group in the world and tremendously concerned about possible scenarios. (Leffler 497)
Russia had been invaded twice by Germany in one generation, and feared a strengthened Germany as much as America feared a strong Russia. Roosevelt had made the best deal he could at Yalta. The Russian army was deployed across eastern Europe in superior numbers and unlikely to be removed by any action short of outright war. In 1948, fearing the loss of their buffer, the Russians sponsored a brutal overthrow of the democratic government in Czechoslovakia. This shocked the American public and pushed forward congressional approval of the Marshall plan (Leffler 205).
The struggle with Russia was not just political, but for many it was a religious war against godless communism. When the iron curtain came down on eastern Europe, the church lost territory it had felt was its own for centuries. Cardinal Francis Spellman, Archbishop of New York, in his annual St. Patrick’s day speech, 1948, warned of “civilization threatened with crucifixion by communism”. (Spellman)
In his inauguration speech, Jan 1949, Truman spoke only of foreign policy (McCullough 729). Communism is a false doctrine, he said. Communism believes mankind to be weak and unable to make its own decisions. Democracy believes mankind has the capacity and right to govern itself (McCullough 730). The NATO treaty, signed April 4, 1949, was the first peacetime military alliance since Washington had warned against entangling alliances. In 1949 the act unifying the armed forces and creating the Central Intelligence Agency was passed.
Chiang Kai-shek fled mainland China in December 1949, leaving behind the victorious and communist Mao Zedong in the most populous country in the world. The so-called China Lobby in America was an alliance consisting of religious, military figures and prominent republicans that had fought hard to keep China from becoming communist. MacArthur had written an article warning if China fell to the communists, it would imperil half the world. In August 1949, the Truman administration tried to counter the concern about losing China with a thousand page State Department report analyzing the entire record. The conclusion - China is a huge country with its own internal political reality. Despite more than $2 billion in aid, the Chiang Kai-shek Nationalist regime was incompetent and corrupt. “The civil war in China was beyond the control of the United States” (qtd in McCullough 743). It caused a sensation. The less restrained criticism called it a whitewash of the pro-communists in the State Department. The chief targets were Truman and Secretary of State Dean Acheson. McCullough says that Acheson was the target of “vilification such as few in American public life had ever known.”(756)
In September 1949 Truman received word that Russia had exploded its first atomic bomb. In October highly secret meetings were held in Washington to discuss a new theoretical super bomb, the hydrogen bomb. When fully briefed to the feasibility and magnitude, Acheson remarked, “what a depressing world” (qtd in McCullough 749). In January 1950 the Truman administration announced they would develop this new bomb. Einstein went on TV and spoke of atmospheric poisoning and the annihilation of life. A few days later the British spy Klaus Fuchs confessed to passing atomic secrets from the Americans to the Russians.
Alger Hiss was an American-born, high respected official in both the Truman and Roosevelt administraitions, and charged with being a Soviet spy. The drama played out on the front pages for a year and a half, from testimony before the House Un-American Committee, through two trials. During the first trial, Truman says to reporters, the country is not going to hell, read some history (McCullough 742). Because the statute of limitations had run out, on Jan 21, 1950, Alger Hiss was found guilty of perjury. Richard Nixon accused the Truman administration of deliberately trying to cover up the Hiss conspiracy. (McCullough 759). Secretary of State Dean Acheson was a personal friend of Hiss and did not accept the slim evidence presented. He said at a press conference that he will not turn his back on Alger Hiss. Joe McCarthy asked, will he not turn his back on other communists in the State Department as well? Richard Nixon called Acheson’s statement disgusting (McCullough 760). After decades of debate, historians have concluded that Hiss did indeed pass information to the Soviets (Uebelhor 241).
On Jan 7, 1950, Joe McCarthy had lunch with a Catholic priest, Father Edmund Walsh, dean of Georgetown’s foreign service school. Walsh, who had a long history as an anti-communist, suggested to McCarthy, who was Irish Catholic, that he make communist subversion in the U.S. an issue (McCullough 765). At a Lincoln day speech in 1950, just after the Alger Hiss conviction, McCarthy made the first of his wild charges, waving a list he said of 205 known communists in the State Department. The next week it was a list of 57 card carrying communists, and later it was 81. McCarthyism, defined today as exaggerated unsubstantiated character assassination, would last until his censure by the Senate in 1954.
In 1950, McCarthy was not up for re-election, but he helped campaign against Millard Tydings. Tydings had chaired hearings on McCarthy and called his charges a hoax. McCarthy circulated a faked photo of Tydings with Earl Browder, the head of the American Communist party (McCullough 814). Tydings lost the election. McCarthy -"You have to play rough if you are going to root out this motley crew.” (Time Magazine, Oct 22, 1951) Richard Nixon was first elected Senator in 1950. His opponent, Helen Douglas, he said, was “pink down to her underwear.” (McCullough 814) Republicans would sweep the elections in both 1950 and 1952.
The 1950 military budget was planned to be 13.5 billion (McCullough 759). More than that was set aside to pay WW2 bills. Truman still believed in balanced budgets, though he was planning a 5 billion deficit. After the deluge of bad news - Hiss, McCarthy, the Soviet bomb, the Chinese victory, and the belief that Russia was committted to worldwide aggression - Acheson argued that the 13.5 billion defense budget was no longer enough. Truman ordered a new review of military policy (McCullough 765).
National Security Council paper no. 68 (NSC-68) was given to Truman April 7, 1950. It was written by Paul Nitze, Dean Acheson and the Department of Defense. It was designed to shock - the United States was in deep peril. The U.S. was far behind the Soviets in conventional power. Nuclear power could not make up the difference, and regardless, Russia would achieve nuclear parity by 1954. A tremendous miltiary build-up was the only solution. Budget figures were discussed at 40-50 billion, 3 times the current defense spending. “The survival of the world is at stake.” The paper was set aside without action. (McCullough 771-772)
Communist North Korean troops attacked South Korea in June 1950. The Koreans, even the Chinese, were seen as agents of the Russians. The Chinese Communist armies we fight in Korea, Life magazine said, are “truly the armies of the Soviet Union as if they wore the uniform.”(qtd in McCullough 825) . In Korea, Russia was testing the U.S (McCullough 778) Truman on July 19, 1950, “Appeasement leads only to further aggression and ultimately to war.” (qtd in McCullough 784) The line must be held, or Japan and Southeast Asia could also fall. Omar Bradley and the Joint Chiefs thought Korea might be a decoy in a larger Russian strategy (McCullough 789). Korea was just one battle in the worldwide struggle with the Soviets.
In the first week of July 1950, MacArthur asked for 30,000 troops. A few days later, he asked for twice that many (McCullough 789). The war goes badly, then goes well, then goes badly again when the decision is made to chase the North Korean army to the Chinese border. Chinese troops enter the Korean peninsula with overwhelming numbers.
NSC-68 had not been adopted before the Korean War. In late summer 1950, Truman announced plans to double the men in uniform to 3 million, telling the American people this was the new reality which would have to be endured a long time. Congress raised military spending for 1950-51 to $48.2 billion, and 1951-52 to $60 billion (McCullough 792). The cold war was on and America would never again see defense spending like the $20 billion of 1948, much less the $2 billion of 1940.
MacArthur was fired by Truman in April 1951 for criticizing Truman’s conduct of the war, for giving the Chinese ultimatums, for making his views known we should take the war to China. In his penultimate moment, speaking before Congress after being recalled, MacArthur was unrestrained. The Washington politicians had brought a “new concept into military operations- the concept of appeasement...to go on indefinitely, indecisive, fighting with no mission.” “There is no subsitute for victory.”(McCullough 853) MacArthur if allowed to widen the war into China, said Bradley, “would involve us in the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and with the wrong enemy.” (McCullough 854) Russia was the enemy behind all the trouble, not China, and Europe was the most important region in the world to be protected.
After the dramatic firing of MacArthur, and during Truman’s lowest popularity ratings, McCarthy made his most vitriolic attack on General Marshall and Dean Acheson in June 1951. They were part of a conspiracy so immense it surpassed any in history (McCullough 859). McCarthy said it was Marshall that created the China policy and the military strategy in Korea. Truman was no longer in control. He was a part of a conspiracy that was being guided from Moscow. He talked for 3 hours. By the end, only 3 senators had not walked out. It would still be 2 and a half years before the Senate would censure him. (McCullough 860)
Backed by military and religious factions, Democrat and Republican political doctrine, America never stood down after WW2. The American response after WW2 would have been appropriate if Russia was intent on world domination. There was a threat, but American leaders overestimated the appeal of the Russian-Marxist system in a disrupted and dysfunctional world. American leaders saw Russian influence behind every local uprising and every case of Marxist appeal.(Leffler, 508) Fearful of the bomb, fearful that Marxism was a contagious disease, fearful of those who did not fear God, America fought and spent its way to security, from a $2 billion defense budget in 1940, to nearly $1000 billion in 2011. For sixty years we have quartered troops overseas during peacetime. Eisenhower, the victor of WW2, warned the American people of the self-perpetuating nature of military spending. Truman also regretted creating a secret CIA agency empowered and energized to fight communism, where not even the President knew what they were doing (Miller 391). It all began in the first few years after WW2.
photo of tydings and browder
http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2010/01/05/millard-tydings-case/
article Time 1951 on McCarthy (very good)
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,815585-1,00.html
article Life 1950, War can Come, on lack of military preparedness
http://books.google.com/books?id=_lIEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA19&ots=oiBYe49usb&dq=war%20can%20come%3B%20will%20we%20be%20ready%3F%20life&pg=PA19#v=onepage&q&f=false
Works Cited
Leffler, Melvyn. A Preponderance of Power: National Security, the Truman Administration, and the Cold War. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1992.
McCullough, David. Truman. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1992.
Miller, Merle. Plain Speaking: an Oral Biography of Harry S. Truman. New York: Berkley, 1973.
Spellman, Cardinal Francis. “Mankind’s Moment of Decision”. Vital Speeches March 17, 1948
Uebelhor, Tracy. Presidential Profiles: The Truman Years. New York: Facts on File, 2006
Saturday, December 11, 2010
Monday, September 06, 2010
random
the problem with college history textbooks is that they are such a condensation they are not true in any fundamental sense of the word.
besides draining all the blood out of the subject.
the left is dead. social issues are a red herring. the supposedly massively liberal administration is indistinguishable from the previous supposedly conservative administration on military, financial, and government powers.
on the playing board are abortion, gay rights, whether the capitalists give you 26 weeks unemployment or the socialists give you 52 weeks.
Obama cannot survive such a coordinated propaganda attack. The left is dead precisely because they are so indistinguishable from the right. They tried to implement the slightest social engineering, the decision has been made to replace him. The insanity of the socialism charge with the man who did not change anything fundamental seldom gets noticed by the left, and is levied by the right. The issues that have been building for a generation, militarism, insolvency, financial decline, governmental impotence and irrelevance, have been blamed on our two years of socialism.
besides draining all the blood out of the subject.
the left is dead. social issues are a red herring. the supposedly massively liberal administration is indistinguishable from the previous supposedly conservative administration on military, financial, and government powers.
on the playing board are abortion, gay rights, whether the capitalists give you 26 weeks unemployment or the socialists give you 52 weeks.
Obama cannot survive such a coordinated propaganda attack. The left is dead precisely because they are so indistinguishable from the right. They tried to implement the slightest social engineering, the decision has been made to replace him. The insanity of the socialism charge with the man who did not change anything fundamental seldom gets noticed by the left, and is levied by the right. The issues that have been building for a generation, militarism, insolvency, financial decline, governmental impotence and irrelevance, have been blamed on our two years of socialism.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Sunday, May 30, 2010
propaganda
the survival of america is dependent on the outcome of a war of propaganda. its hard not to, at times, be pessimistic. it seems that the most powerful are amoral. they have no moral compass, no moral creed, no overriding belief, no fear of hell, no assurance of retribution.
you can try to counter this with logic, but then, supposing, you come into a position of power and temptation, what are you going to use to guide you? what altruistic philosophy would you use?
since religion has been proven scientifically to be a bag of unlikely events, an official creed has not been universally in place. is a creed possible, or is the new religion so formless it cannot have a mass manifestation? right now i would say our religion is electronic entertainment. and pursuit of the dollar and power for the minority driven to rule.
a new religion, if valid, would really benefit and be helpful. what is it? what fate falls to the faithless? emptiness. what faith falls to the optimistic? surety.
should the newly and formlessly faithful fight the propaganda war, or should they pursue the way of manifestation?
you can try to counter this with logic, but then, supposing, you come into a position of power and temptation, what are you going to use to guide you? what altruistic philosophy would you use?
since religion has been proven scientifically to be a bag of unlikely events, an official creed has not been universally in place. is a creed possible, or is the new religion so formless it cannot have a mass manifestation? right now i would say our religion is electronic entertainment. and pursuit of the dollar and power for the minority driven to rule.
a new religion, if valid, would really benefit and be helpful. what is it? what fate falls to the faithless? emptiness. what faith falls to the optimistic? surety.
should the newly and formlessly faithful fight the propaganda war, or should they pursue the way of manifestation?
Sunday, May 02, 2010
Obama has finally realized the implosion of the economy is a bad thing
It seems that president Obama has finally discovered that it is a problem when the country's economy implodes. In the meantime he has wasted his first year. Most of his policies, surely well-meaning, would have made the economy worse - cap and trade, enlarging healthcare, taking over GM while bailing out banks. Perhaps now he or his advisors have realized that difficult or not, all these dreams of lowering the ocean, providing universal quality healthcare for the least of these, they all rest or fall on the foundation of the strength of the American economy, an economy whose basic soundness is taken for granted, but for which signs of a long term decline seem unmistakable. What are people supposed to do for a living in the American future? Farming? Manufacturing? What comes next?
In World War 2, America outproduced industrially the rest of the world combined (according to the PBS series WW2). How far we are from that. The iron age started around 1000 BC. The cultures that could work iron were able to conquer or prosper over those who were slower. America won two world wars with its know-how and ability. For too long, we are throwing that culture away. We have been told that we are in a post-industrial society, an information age, a service economy. These are just as insubstantial as selling mortgages, collecting them into abstract packages, marking them up, selling them again, insuring them to fail - everybody making a lot of money, then adding that whole enterprise to the gross national product, and saying our economy grew.
We face this basic problem of national debt and insolvency with a poisoned atmosphere. Has there been hatred of any president like this? It’s scary. I hear on public airwaves that Obama is ruining this country on purpose. I have heard that he wants to usher in 100 years of tyranny. What would be the proper treatment of an elected official sworn to uphold the constitution who is ruining the country on purpose and wants to usher in 100 years of tyranny? The right seems to have it in their hands now for the power to swing back their way, yet they seem to feed on propaganda. I don't see Obama winning another term, but we may be beyond the point where one political party or the other is going to lead us out of this. We need a post-political society. The propaganda war is for political and economic control. The society itself is not served by allowing the two parties to manufacture the debate terms. Candidates take cheap shots and elect themselves with 30 second attack ads. It is in the country's best interest for both sides to acknowledge the honor and good intentions of their opponent, and have a real debate on the real problem. I do not care who is worse, Clinton or Bush or Obama. They represent factions and personalities, the simplification of the political argument - the dress, the dolt, socialism - not the real issues. It would be constructive if the media would also realize that the implosion of the American economy is an important issue. Pundits - we have a problem. We are the inheritors of a 600-year industrial revolution, from Leonardo down to Edison and Ford, a remarkable succession of wise men and scientists who built the western world. It would be foolish not to take some pride in that, but also to realize the drive for new things is human, has nothing to do with government, and why now is it so hard to manufacture the very things we need? How long can an economy prosper when everything comes from overseas? What do you do?
In World War 2, America outproduced industrially the rest of the world combined (according to the PBS series WW2). How far we are from that. The iron age started around 1000 BC. The cultures that could work iron were able to conquer or prosper over those who were slower. America won two world wars with its know-how and ability. For too long, we are throwing that culture away. We have been told that we are in a post-industrial society, an information age, a service economy. These are just as insubstantial as selling mortgages, collecting them into abstract packages, marking them up, selling them again, insuring them to fail - everybody making a lot of money, then adding that whole enterprise to the gross national product, and saying our economy grew.
We face this basic problem of national debt and insolvency with a poisoned atmosphere. Has there been hatred of any president like this? It’s scary. I hear on public airwaves that Obama is ruining this country on purpose. I have heard that he wants to usher in 100 years of tyranny. What would be the proper treatment of an elected official sworn to uphold the constitution who is ruining the country on purpose and wants to usher in 100 years of tyranny? The right seems to have it in their hands now for the power to swing back their way, yet they seem to feed on propaganda. I don't see Obama winning another term, but we may be beyond the point where one political party or the other is going to lead us out of this. We need a post-political society. The propaganda war is for political and economic control. The society itself is not served by allowing the two parties to manufacture the debate terms. Candidates take cheap shots and elect themselves with 30 second attack ads. It is in the country's best interest for both sides to acknowledge the honor and good intentions of their opponent, and have a real debate on the real problem. I do not care who is worse, Clinton or Bush or Obama. They represent factions and personalities, the simplification of the political argument - the dress, the dolt, socialism - not the real issues. It would be constructive if the media would also realize that the implosion of the American economy is an important issue. Pundits - we have a problem. We are the inheritors of a 600-year industrial revolution, from Leonardo down to Edison and Ford, a remarkable succession of wise men and scientists who built the western world. It would be foolish not to take some pride in that, but also to realize the drive for new things is human, has nothing to do with government, and why now is it so hard to manufacture the very things we need? How long can an economy prosper when everything comes from overseas? What do you do?
Monday, April 12, 2010
why are people wrong?
this is not exactly art, but in its own screwy way its got something to say.
i am struck by how often people divide themselves into two camps and both sides think the other is absolutely nuts. thats the observation, now the attempted explanation...
Why are people wrong?
Never mind that some people are right, they are in the minority. Most people are wrong. Ask anybody. Those guys, they don’t have a clue.
Politics is religion. All sides, all creeds, have their faithful and true believers. It colors how they see things. Their way is right, and they will fight and argue for it. The stupidity and calumny of the other side is scarcely to be comprehended.
Religion is religion (no argument there) .
Science is religion.
Art is religion.
Each have their adherents who cling to it as the truth, as the important, the relevant. It informs and shapes their perceptions, their actions, their wishes and desires.
People look for recognition. They are motivated by recognition. Whether it be hitting the most home runs, writing the best book, being elected to the highest office in the land, or quietly being a good accountant.
The first impulse is that somebody out there has figured this all out. And so you become a follower. Somebody is worthy and can teach or lead. Whether it be politics, art, religion.
People who have religion have figured out the most important questions in life. Never mind that different religions have completely different practices. In some you sit in the dark and try to see inside your mind. In others you kill other people who don’t follow your rules, like communists. Others you cant play cards, or dance. Some you cant wear short skirts.
Some young people do as they are told. They cross themselves. They believe that adam and eve were our first parents. Sometimes they have doubts. Maybe those who tell me what to believe are wrong. its called free will. Its very inefficient. Everyone has to grapple with the same problems and reinvent the mental solutions. That’s where teachers come in, but sooner or later, they all are wrong. maybe in a subtle way, or a gross way, but what great student has not differed with his teacher?
But that’s putting the best light on it. Even plato was wrong. what never seems to change, is putting belief into the next big thing. I guess people cant motivate themselves unless they believe in something. Art, politics, science, the children, the environment, baseball. When religion goes away, something has to come in to fill that need. Atheism is a religion. They have meetings, they pass the hat, they say hallelujah, they have a building fund. everybody has a religion. If they are a republican, a democrat, a monetary acquisition specialist, that’s it, that’s what they do, that’s who they are, that’s what they believe in. getting mine, getting yours, becoming known, getting respect, finding love, being secure in the search for the answer, the formula , finding your own individualized code that brings satisfaction.
Why are people wrong? why do other people not get it? Why do other peoples religion look wrong? why do other people on a different path leave you cold? look at the way she fixes her hair. look at him suck up. the bosses in this place are stupid. the workers in this place are stupid. the president is an idiot.
In search of something they can hang onto to help them know who they are and what they do, in search of a code that brings mental sureness, they have adopted a core belief that necessarily must oversimplify the problem/solution so as to be possible to follow. It may even be false, but it’s a motivating belief. For some reason, people must have beliefs to function. They cant walk without legs, and they cant function without beliefs, but it blinds them. Their evidence always points to the same conclusion. Whatever side they are on, they only see the evidence that supports their beliefs, and the other side thinks they are crazy and shortsighted, and living in error. Their beliefs predict how they will see new evidence. that’s what I believe. I cant understand why you wouldn’t agree with me.
This religion can be art, politics, sport, or even religion. But if religion falls, and fall it must if they want you to believe what science or your own experience can easily disprove, then the next big belief will fill the cavity.
People will believe in something, they have a belief spot that cannot be empty, but they also cannot see it or easily examine it. Its like looking at your own eyes. We can see these big beliefs easier in other people if we do not share them. Believing in the republican or democrat party, Catholicism, scientology, nationalism, fundamental Christianity, anti-communism, science, atheism, the pursuit of money or power, technology. It doesn’t matter what core belief people have, by definition, if its not really, really the truth, they will eventually come into a situation where it does not help them. Some of them will cling to what they know, some will abandon hope, most will start the process over of coming into a new or more complex, nuanced belief.
How many religions and core beliefs has there been since history began and how many of them were right? Most of them were wrong. people are wrong. we are still wrong. we are trying to get it right. Its not easy. Our beliefs prevent us from seeing things as they are. Rather than try to figure things out, figure out what you believe. Religion has many forms. If we didn’t have one though, what would we do with ourselves? I believe in…that’s what motivates me. Everything else is secondary.
i am struck by how often people divide themselves into two camps and both sides think the other is absolutely nuts. thats the observation, now the attempted explanation...
Why are people wrong?
Never mind that some people are right, they are in the minority. Most people are wrong. Ask anybody. Those guys, they don’t have a clue.
Politics is religion. All sides, all creeds, have their faithful and true believers. It colors how they see things. Their way is right, and they will fight and argue for it. The stupidity and calumny of the other side is scarcely to be comprehended.
Religion is religion (no argument there) .
Science is religion.
Art is religion.
Each have their adherents who cling to it as the truth, as the important, the relevant. It informs and shapes their perceptions, their actions, their wishes and desires.
People look for recognition. They are motivated by recognition. Whether it be hitting the most home runs, writing the best book, being elected to the highest office in the land, or quietly being a good accountant.
The first impulse is that somebody out there has figured this all out. And so you become a follower. Somebody is worthy and can teach or lead. Whether it be politics, art, religion.
People who have religion have figured out the most important questions in life. Never mind that different religions have completely different practices. In some you sit in the dark and try to see inside your mind. In others you kill other people who don’t follow your rules, like communists. Others you cant play cards, or dance. Some you cant wear short skirts.
Some young people do as they are told. They cross themselves. They believe that adam and eve were our first parents. Sometimes they have doubts. Maybe those who tell me what to believe are wrong. its called free will. Its very inefficient. Everyone has to grapple with the same problems and reinvent the mental solutions. That’s where teachers come in, but sooner or later, they all are wrong. maybe in a subtle way, or a gross way, but what great student has not differed with his teacher?
But that’s putting the best light on it. Even plato was wrong. what never seems to change, is putting belief into the next big thing. I guess people cant motivate themselves unless they believe in something. Art, politics, science, the children, the environment, baseball. When religion goes away, something has to come in to fill that need. Atheism is a religion. They have meetings, they pass the hat, they say hallelujah, they have a building fund. everybody has a religion. If they are a republican, a democrat, a monetary acquisition specialist, that’s it, that’s what they do, that’s who they are, that’s what they believe in. getting mine, getting yours, becoming known, getting respect, finding love, being secure in the search for the answer, the formula , finding your own individualized code that brings satisfaction.
Why are people wrong? why do other people not get it? Why do other peoples religion look wrong? why do other people on a different path leave you cold? look at the way she fixes her hair. look at him suck up. the bosses in this place are stupid. the workers in this place are stupid. the president is an idiot.
In search of something they can hang onto to help them know who they are and what they do, in search of a code that brings mental sureness, they have adopted a core belief that necessarily must oversimplify the problem/solution so as to be possible to follow. It may even be false, but it’s a motivating belief. For some reason, people must have beliefs to function. They cant walk without legs, and they cant function without beliefs, but it blinds them. Their evidence always points to the same conclusion. Whatever side they are on, they only see the evidence that supports their beliefs, and the other side thinks they are crazy and shortsighted, and living in error. Their beliefs predict how they will see new evidence. that’s what I believe. I cant understand why you wouldn’t agree with me.
This religion can be art, politics, sport, or even religion. But if religion falls, and fall it must if they want you to believe what science or your own experience can easily disprove, then the next big belief will fill the cavity.
People will believe in something, they have a belief spot that cannot be empty, but they also cannot see it or easily examine it. Its like looking at your own eyes. We can see these big beliefs easier in other people if we do not share them. Believing in the republican or democrat party, Catholicism, scientology, nationalism, fundamental Christianity, anti-communism, science, atheism, the pursuit of money or power, technology. It doesn’t matter what core belief people have, by definition, if its not really, really the truth, they will eventually come into a situation where it does not help them. Some of them will cling to what they know, some will abandon hope, most will start the process over of coming into a new or more complex, nuanced belief.
How many religions and core beliefs has there been since history began and how many of them were right? Most of them were wrong. people are wrong. we are still wrong. we are trying to get it right. Its not easy. Our beliefs prevent us from seeing things as they are. Rather than try to figure things out, figure out what you believe. Religion has many forms. If we didn’t have one though, what would we do with ourselves? I believe in…that’s what motivates me. Everything else is secondary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)