Bloggers Unite Post*: Better Read, by Wil Hough

Better Read

"Better dead than red," Fred's cry rose up in force. "Better dead than red," provoked the corporate course. Projections of a sea of red to sweep them from their rock, shook them to their very core, "We must protect our stock! It's time for us to go to war!" the actuary crazed. "Tear down the walls of private thought, with all their varied ways, and stick those left in cubicles, our prophets will a maze, "To obfuscate our predatory sacrificial ways." And as for time that's wasted by commuting workers, please turn any free will over to the corporate entities. There's just no cents to home apart that's not a part of Work, in our virtual family's workhouse, halo fiscal life - that's real. To compete, and win, to compete, again; there's just no time for feel."

Then wizened founder Uncle Ned, rose from his exile's plot; and called a halt with monkee wrench, "This ain't what life's about. There's more to this than profits, Fred, they're not worth killing for. And I control most of the stock, so kindly yield the floor. I've spent the last ten years or so, in study over this, and discovered Marx was really right. I've become a Cooperatist. True change works best when from the top, where sleeps the power to cure; it's time the parasite fed the host, conspicuous comp. stops here."


Ned ripped the rats' maze with its roots, and opened windows where the stench of yellowed atrophy was cleansed by common care. He then bought up the crashing shares, and shared them without fear. The galley slaves, now free to shine, could nest their profit's share. They pulled together, vollied time, with motivation hot. Inspired by pirates Macintosh, their uplook outward shot. See, more is seldom better, but better's always more. So,"Better Red Than Dead" was not a slogan to abhor; for freedom's only free when not enslaved by "Give me more!" Old Ned was better read than Fred, that's why he was so sure.


*Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Wil Hough is a Senior Editor at The Rose and Thorn. Before that, he was poetry editor and retains a love of verse, though this "Seuss-like" rhyming story/poem is uncharacteristic of his usual bebop free verse style

hough,hough,hough
Cooperatist not Communist

Bloggers Unite Post*: To Those Who Own the Press, by Wil Hough

Suddenly I feel like the lookout high in the rigging of the Santa Maria. On deck, far below, the dread of falling off the face of the earth has been replaced with anticipation as more and more land-based sea birds have filled the sky. Like that searcher, I have scoured the horizon until, at last, there it is. The future of publication; a brave new world of expression.

At least that’s how it appeared to me as I pondered the situation faced by Gwen Shamblin after Thomas Nelson canceled her latest book, and her work was booted from Lifeway for deviating from the accepted POV. I felt like that lookout with the future suddenly in sight. I remembered an old saying regarding freedom of the press being free as long as you owned a press.

Just consider how the gatekeepers have controlled free expression; then, think how everything can change with the Internet. Despite efforts to the contrary, her work is still available at her Web site.

This all reminds me of a Bible scripture located in the Book of the Apocalypse. In it, the apostle John is relating a vision revealed to him of the future. In Rev. 3:8: “behold, I have set before you an open door and no man can shut it.” Over the years, a number of events have been linked to this prophecy, not the least of which is the printed word. However, the large print houses have come to control publishing. This is best represented by how Murdoch Publishing has absorbed a number of houses formerly associated with intelligent works. Nowadays, Rupert Murdoch links print with his other endeavors such as Fox Broadcasting where sensuality is the key to profits.

The brave new world these days refers to the Jerry Springer Picture Book. Print houses once satisfied with a two- to four-percent profit margin are expected to attain the ten- to fifteen-percent profit margins associated with broadcast venues. The forecasts of Huxley, Orwell, and others regarding the “entertainment” of the masses at the expense of “dangerous mental stimulation” have all but come true. Works which do not promise a quick return face a difficult road indeed.

Of course, some houses offer self-publication—for a price. But of what value is that without the distribution and promotional means not often accessible to a maverick thought coyote? Nope, freedom of the press indeed is only free if you own the press.

The airwaves are free, proclaims the government, but who actually believes that? these days, freedom of speech is PCed and BSed as well as regulated by the Dead Presidents Society. Of course, you can always buy your own time. Guess who best fulfills the requirements for such “freedom of expression?” So what’s left?

Well, there’s churches. What about religion? Surely that's a bastion of freedom protected by our constitution, isn’t it? Well, soitenly as long as you remain within the confines of the cloister wherein heresy is dealt with in unpleasant manners for those who value social inclusion. The few heretics can be found shouting from the street corners, their access denied by the deacons of religious conformity. As a result, maverick thought has been free even in the pulpits of the Land of the Free.

So, where’s this open door I mentioned? Where, indeed; right there before my gaze. Nowadays, true freedom of expression is but a click away. Borders have evaporated, race been annulled, the globe shrunk to the size of a keyboard. The veil has been torn, permitting access into the Holy of Holies. No longer are the cyberpriests in control of the gate to the Internet. Thanks to Al Gore, we are all capable of expressing our deepest convictions or inanities on Web sites, cyber domains, electronic newsletters, and chat rooms. All information is but a keyword away, communities of thought have sprung up, and the dream of Thomas Jefferson is upon us.

In the future, direct access will be possible no matter where we might be. No one will ever again be alone, unless they so desire (I hope). Eventually it may all come full circle. Even now, there are small publishing houses springing up inspired by the plethora of thought filling the web. The new generation Y becomes a question of why settle for the excesses of the Gen Xers. "We don’t need the trap of possession” is the growing concept. We have all we need to share and survive. Instead of a chicken in every pot, or four cars in every garage, the campaign slogan of the millennium will be “A printing press in every den.” It’s all there now—through that open door.


*Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Wil Hough, a Senior Editor of The Rose & Thorn still breathing and writing in the Chicago area, treats heretical iconoclasm as mental recreation.

Bloggers Unite Post*: Overthrow, A book report by Wil hough

Overthrow, A Century of American Regime Change
By Steven Kinzer
Publishers: Times Books / Henry Holt & Co.

Everybody knows the United States is interested in promoting democracy around the world. We are the ultimate supporters of properly elected governments, right? So, that being said, how many of you are aware that Britain and the United States, back in 1953, conspired to overthrow a popularly elected government and install a dictator in its place? Do you know where that occurred? No, not in South America—not even in Africa. It was President Mohammad Mossadegh of Iran, named Time Magazine's Man of the Year in 1952, whom we overthrew, after which we installed a dictator, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, in his place, setting the stage for the ultimate Islamic revolution in that country—a revolution that has led to our present troubles. What might have happened had we minded our own business and allowed Iran to prosper as a modern democracy? Might we have avoided the entire Islamic problem? Might the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York never have occurred? There is no way to know for sure, but it is certain that things would have progressed in a much different manner whatever the end result.

In his book, Overthrow, A Century of American Regime Change, Steven Kinzer, author of All the Shah’s Men, reveals how agents of our government have “deposed fourteen foreign governments in hardly more than a century, some for good reasons, more for bad reasons, with most dubious long-term consequences” (Arthur M. Schesinger, Jr.). “After reading this book, no American – not even President Bush—should any longer wonder why they hate us” (Chalmers Johnson). We have earned it. It is true that we Americans have done much good—more good than bad. The tragedy is that the good we do is overwritten by the arrogant policies of the power brokers funding our leaders. This is not an anti-American rant. However, before the faults of others can be dealt with, our own faults have to be corrected. And, like an alcoholic, before we can deal with our own faults, we have to recognize and admit them.

Kinzer proves an entertaining read as he exposes such flaws. From the overthrow of the Queen of Hawaii for the sake of the pineapple cartel, through our operations in Cuba, Peru, Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Honduras, among others, all of this leading through Vietnam to the present quagmire in Iraq , he provides fascinating insight into the thought processes behind our “catastrophic successes.”

Everyone interested in learning the dynamics fueling international terrorism needs to study this book. It is a primer for all interested in dealing with the abuse of human rights throughout the world. For those interested in writing about how right can go wrong, for whatever reason, the information in Kinzer’s book is an absolute necessity.


*Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Wil Hough, a Senior Editor of The Rose & Thorn, had been working towards a sociology degree with a minor in journalism when he became pregnant and had to go out and earn a living. Only now, as a grandfather, has he been freed to resume his first love.

Bloggers Unite Post*: Defeating Fear, by Wil Hough

I remember a favorite old American quote: “I may not agree with what you say but I will fight to the death for your right to say it.” I do not remember having heard that saying for quite some time now. Indeed, in this climate of political polarity, the opposite is more the rule. Why, I wonder, might that be?

Standing up for the rights of others is much easier if there is no fear that someone might be willing to knock you down. In the past, we Americans felt insulated from what others in the world have had to deal with on a day to day basis. We felt safe to point fingers and interfere with impunity—not that we accomplished much beyond supporting the wrong governments as a matter of business. Since the attack on the World Trade Center, however, everything has changed.

These days we still point fingers and interfere, but we do so in the name of our own perceived national interests. We have an avowed Christian administration supported by various religious organizations that is willing to resort to extreme violence at the drop of a hat while, at the same time, proclaiming to do so in the name of god. Mostly it is the innocent who suffer as a result of our actions. Osama bin Laden is still free, Al Qaeda is stronger than ever, and the world view of America as a champion of freedom is at an all-time low. As a writer who happens to be Christian, I find the contradiction between what we say and what we do quite disturbing.

Now, I understand the need to defend oneself—even the desire to strike back in retribution. When Israel finds it necessary to oppress troublesome groups like the Palestinians, I understand why. When Islamists suppress and attack those they view as threats to Allah, I am not at all surprised. However, when Christians react with the Old Testament concept of an eye for an eye, I am more than a bit troubled.

Christians have been called to a higher standard. Jesus has taught that we are not to respond to violence with violence. None of His teachings justify warring to protect our interests. He has proclaimed, “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” But, what is that truth? With His own life on the line, he gives us a strong hint: “My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight. However, henceforth is my kingdom not of this world.” When Peter asked what Jesus wished him to do, Jesus answered, “(if) you love me, feed my sheep."

Now such a command can be, and has been, taken many ways. But, the main focus of what we Christians are to be about appears to be caring for the needs of others with a lack of concern for our own worldly needs and safety. Just imagine what kind of world it could be if Christians understood and fulfilled this calling. There might actually be fewer Christians. However, I cannot imagine Islam, which is programmed to resist perceived evil, calling forth Jihad against us. At the very least, terrorists would find it counterproductive to attack those who had no fear of harm. Governments would find it impossible to resist the tidal waves of these same people surging forward, without fear of retribution, to bring amnesty and aid to the innocent victims of this world. Fear would lose its hold.

Indeed, knowing this truth could set the entire world free.


*Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Wil Hough is a senior editor at The Rose & Thorn who is delighted to finally have a forum for his "annoying" religious/social observations.

Bloggers Unite Post*: A Foundation of Tolerance by Wil Hough

My soon-to-be wife, who had grown up in the shadow of the University of Chicago, fixed me with a penetrating stare and asked, “Coming from your background, how is it you turned out the way you have?” At the time I was unable to provide answer to her query. Indeed, as the offspring of a West Virginia Irish hillbilly and German immigrant, I didn’t even understand the point of the question.

“What do you mean by that?” was all I could manage in reply. I have always preferred answering a question with one or two more of my own.

Her gaze never wavered. My non-answer did not faze her in the least. It was as if she had expected it. “Look,” she said in clarification (sort of), "your father is the German equivalent of Archie Bunker and your mom’s a chain-smoking, over-achieving, Irish drunk—and, they’re the cream of your family tree from what I’ve seen.”

“My dad’s younger brother has a Ph.D.,” I protested, feeling more than a little ambushed at the moment.

“Whatever,” she said waving off my interruption. “That exception makes my point even stronger. You behave, think, and speak more like the son of a liberal Ph.D. than that of narrow-minded—”

“Don’t say it!” I interrupted once again. “They are my parents, whatever you might think.”

“See; there you go again. That is just what I mean. It doesn’t matter that they think you’re an idiot. You still won’t put them in their place.”

“They are what they are,” I answered sadly, “and I am what I am.”

“But, why?”

As I have grown old and watched my own son struggle with the natural state of protective Conservativism most young parents rely on while raising families, I have spent lots of time focused on my wife’s original question. It’s not as if I hadn’t passed through the same Valley of the Shadow of Death myself. I was just as religiously conservative as my son, if not more so to the point of social exclusion. But, I was not there long. Those looming cliffs were too constraining for me, so I hurried on through and climbed the highest ridge to broaden my perspective. But, it was an equally clear retrospective that provided an answer for how I developed a personal acceptance of the beliefs and needs of others despite my social background—an answer that can work for all those interested in promoting civil liberty and tolerance.

My mother led me to books. I was seven years old and still not reading. I was going to flunk the second grade. It wasn’t lack of ability; it was lack of want-to. I saw no sense in it. So she began with comic books. And not just any comics. She found the great classics in comic book form. The pictures caught my attention, giving import to the words. Then, it was Penrod and Sam, The Hardy Boys, and finally the complete works of Mark Twain. But, as effective as Tom Sawyer might have been as a teacher of social mores, it was one particular author that really ingrained in me the social conscience I didn’t recognize till later in life. That author was Robert Heinlein, a social reformer who found putting dull lectures into the form of exciting science fiction novels proved more effective in building and maintaining an audience for his views. So, you see, in answer to that long-ago question from my wife, I have not been raised only by parents with a limited social perspective. I have been raised by a whole host of “experts” in life. No wonder despots fear writers and poets!

Lately, I have found a series that has caught my attention by author Eric Flint based on the cosmic relocation of a section of West Virginia, complete with an entire local chapter of the Mine Workers of America, into the middle of the Thirty Years War in seventeenth-century Germany. As these invaders from the future have arrived in 1632 (the title of the initial book) to teach freedom, justice, and the art of positive negotiation to a world based on the right of kings, I have experienced an exponential growth in my own fund of knowledge and understanding of the how and why of despotic government of social intolerance.

So, the point of this rambling dissertation is not about why I am who I am. It is about how to improve the lot of humanity. In this age of instant gratification through video means, reading is still the only truly free means of information sharing. What we may watch on Big Brother’s video screen is too limited and subject to outside control. The libraries and book stalls, in comparison, are treasure troves of social instruction and guidance. But, much as I once believed, the bulk of humanity sees no value in reading. Certainly, many of those who do value books believe there is little value in fiction. But it is through the enjoyment of fiction that I learned the social conscience that has guided me through life.

Everyone has their place in the grand scheme of things. As scripture points out, the body is made up of many parts all working together. There are readers and there are writers. In this time of political infighting, it is time for writers to focus all available resources on repairing the foundation of human rights. It is time for readers to demand that writers begin demanding that government to be accountable for building upon this foundation—not just wasting air over it. A single pamphlet once provided oppressed American visionaries with the common sense to act upon those rights. It begins one word at a time.

Write on!


*Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Wil Hough, a senior editor at The Rose & Thorn, is doing what he can to follow in the social writing style of Robert Heinlein and annoying friends and family by promoting the agenda of Amnesty International.

Bloggers Unite Post*: UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by Nannette Croce

On September 13, 2007, the UN General Assembly adopted the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This unprecedented document represents over two decades of work and “is the most comprehensive statement of the rights of indigenous peoples ever developed.”

Only four member nations voted against the adoption: Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States. All four of these nations have large indigenous populations and very similar histories in their treatment of those populations. This includes land grabs, forced removal of children from their families to attend boarding/residential schools, forced assimilation policies, and depriving indigenous peoples of their rights to self-determination and religious and cultural practices.

Since September, the Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has issued a formal apology to Aborigines by motion passed unanimously by Australian MPs. The session was shown live on television, and Australia is considering reversing its position on the Declaration. On April 8, the Canadian Parliament voted to endorse the Declaration.

So what are the chances the US government might ease up on its opposition? Probably little to none, the main reason being they are under no pressure to do so. While the coverage Indigenous issues receive in those other countries might be mixed, in the U.S., American Indian issues receive hardly any coverage at all. What press they do get is often biased or downright inaccurate.

Here are links to a very few issues you may not be aware of because they are generally not being reported:

• Cobell v Kempthorne. A lawsuit filed in 1996 by Elouise Cobell and 500 American Indians for billions of dollars owed them by the US Government for inaccurate accounting of Individual Indian Money accounts.

• The UN Committee on Racial Discrimination’s (CERD) call for the U.S. to halt land-use practices on land claimed by the Western Shoshone under the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863. You can scroll to the bottom of this page to read more about the Western Shoshone Defense Project and the Ruby Valley Treaty.
  
• Maze of Injustice Amnesty International’s report on the epidemic of sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women and the confusing maze of law enforcement that often allows perpetrators to go free.

• Southwest tribes' fight against uranium mining.

At some point the Cobell plaintiffs will most likely reach a settlement with the government to bring an end to a trial that has lasted more than a decade. The smallest settlement amount put forth so far is $7 billion but claims have gone as high as $75 billion and it is unlikely the settlement would be less than $20 billion. How could something like this go unreported in the news and how will the facts be distorted once the you-know-what finally hits the fan? Will this be characterized as an Indian demand for reparations instead of lease money the plaintiffs are owed?

Felix Cohen, the father of American Indian Law, said in 1953

Like the miner’s canary, the Indian marks the
shifts from fresh air to poison gas in our political atmosphere; and our
treatment of Indians, even more than our treatment of other minorities,
reflects the rise and fall in our democratic faith. **

Indigenous Peoples in the US have served as the miner’s canary in predicting how our press has come to ignore human rights violations at home.Today many will be blogging about journalists imprisoned or murdered for exposing truths their government did not want known. Yet in the U.S., where journalists enjoy Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms, there is a wealth of under-reported news, a focus on sensation over truth, and simply lazy reporting with no "digging" for facts.

Bloggers can bring these issues to the forefront. Choose a human rights issue that is not getting enough press and blog till you drop.

In addition to the sites listed above, bloggers interested in learning more about Indigenous issues in the US can start by checking out these sites.

Indian Country Today

Indianz.com

Native American Rights Fund

Native Wiki

Tribal Clearinghouse



**Felix S. Cohen, The Erosion of Indian Rights, 1950-53: A Case Study in
Bureaucracy, 62 YALE L.J. 348, 390 (1953).


*Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Nannette Croce is Co-Managing Editor of The Rose & Thorn. A history major in college, she has done independent study and research over the past ten years on the history of the American Indian Wars, which expanded to an interest in current issues in Indian Country. Some of her articles on the historical background of current issues like Cobell can be found at Suite 101.com

Bloggers Unite Post*: What’s Your Problem, Myanmar Junta? By Yu-Han Chao

When devastating tsunamis along the Indian Ocean killed 230,000 people in eleven countries in 2004, the worldwide community donated more than $7 billion in humanitarian aid. Governments, humanitarian organizations, and individuals around the world eagerly provided food, supplies, aid and technical support. U.S. helicopters from the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln provided especially significant help in their relief missions to isolated communities along the Indonesian coast.

Cut to 2008: five days after Cyclone Nargis hit Myanmar (formerly known as Burma), the death toll is close to 100,000 and will most likely escalate if a significant amount of aid does not arrive. Over one million are homeless and malaria outbreaks have been reported. Yet Myanmar's military regime rejects U.S. aid offers and stalls on visas for U.N. teams and foreign aid workers anxious to deliver supplies and medicine. The USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team and Air Force transport planes and helicopters packed with supplies wait in Thailand for the Myanmar government to let them in; meanwhile, cyclone victims die from lack of food, clean water and medical supplies. What is wrong with this picture?

We may have heard the news about uprisings and protests against the Myanmar military government and perhaps even read Amy Tan’s Saving Fish From Drowning, which touches on the subject, but who would have imagined any government in the world would refuse foreign aid desperately needed to help its people survive in the face of a devastating natural disaster? We’re not even going as far as talking about democracy, equality or political rights here—what about the right to survive as a human being? What is your problem, Myanmar junta, that you would rather watch your people die rather than let foreign aid workers into your country?

While the U.S. government has strongly criticized the junta's suppression of pro-democracy activists in the past, their refusal of U.S. aid in this situation remains baffling. Who knows exactly what they are worried about or afraid of—that outspoken Americans will find out what anti-human-rights atrocities are going on in their country and blog about it (we’ve already heard about child labor, human trafficking, slow killing of the Karen ethnic minority)? Or are they worried that American troops, after delivering food, water and supplies, after transporting victims out of danger zones and to hospitals and shelters, will stay a bit longer in Myanmar to overthrow the military government while they’re there (that is not on America or the American military’s agenda)? There seems to be no real logical explanation to Myanmar’s decision to reject foreign aid, though there has been speculation regarding the superstitious beliefs (involving fortunetellers) of those in power. Surely the Myanmar military government is not on such a power trip or so superstitious that they are more interested in denying foreigners visas than preserving the lives of tens of thousands, potentially hundreds of thousands of their own people? When do political affairs ever outweigh the value of human life?

About:

Myanmar, or Union of Myanmar, formerly known as Burma, is the largest country by geographical area in mainland Southeast Asia, and also one of the poorest.

Myanmar junta, officially the SPDC (State Peace and Development Council), formerly known as SLORC (State Law and Order Restoration Council), seized power in 1988. The regime is widely accused of brutal persecutions of minority ethnic groups, opposition groups, students and human-rights activists.

**Today Roses & Thorns is departing from its purely writing-related format to participate in BlogCatalog’s Blogger’s Unite with Amnesty International. We hope you will visit the Blog Catalog site for a list of other participating blogs.

Yu-Han Chao is blog manager at the Rose & Thorn. Visit her writing and artwork at her website.