Worry over no clear plan for closing schools – Daily Dispatch – Daily dispatch

Education lobby group Equal Education says they are concerned the departments of education and transport are failing to plan for pupils when rationalising schools.

The NGO said education was failing to carry out proper consultations in some areas, while transport openly admitted their budget would not meet the increased need for scholar transport.

The education lobby group yesterday hosted a seminar aimed at reflecting on the progress made on the school rationalisation and realignment programme in the province.

The seminar which saw discussions around the progress of rationalisation with the focus on provision of school infrastructure and scholar transport was held in King Williams Town.

The department is in the process of closing 1902 schools with fewer than 135 pupils and merging them with more viable schools that have more pupils. The department earlier this year announced plans to close 136 schools by the end of this year.

Attending the seminar was a representative from the National Treasurys government technical assistant centre (GTAC), Phaphama Mfenyana, EE and community members.

EE deputy head Masixole Booi said they supported the provinces school rationalism and realignment if it was done in a consultative, democratic manner and was aimed at fixing schools and realising the deadlines outlined by the norms and standards for school infrastructure.

According to the South African Schools Act, the MEC must complete a proper consultation process before closing a public school.

After a school is closed, all assets and liabilities of the school owned by the state must go back to the department of public works to serve other purposes.

The lobby group said community members had complained about a lack of consultation in this process. Early this year, community members, parents and teachers in different areas where their schools are rationalised have complained about the lack of consultation and community engagement from the department.

There is no clear plan about things such as scholar transport, which means pupils are forced to walk long distances from home to their new schools, said Booi.

The Dispatch last week reported about parents from Mhala Public School in Tsholomnqa, who said their children were dropped by the system when the education department closed their school and merged it with a school 7km away without providing them with transport.

Some pupils had no choice but to walk to their new school after the old one closed at the end of May.

The parents from Mhala said that even though they were aware the school was listed for closure, they were not informed when the school would close.

Booi said that at a meeting on education district configuration that was held in Port Elizabeth earlier this year, MEC Mandla Makupula had acknowledged that in some areas the process was not communicated well to affected parties.

This is particularly worrisome, given the immediate challenge of not only school infrastructure in the province but also scholar transport, said Booi.

Go here to see the original:

Worry over no clear plan for closing schools - Daily Dispatch - Daily dispatch

God has spoken through the Bible | Faith | frontiersman.com – Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman

Romans chapter 1 says that we can look at the world around us and know that God exists and that he is very, very powerful. In my backyard are chickens, ducks, swans, sandhill cranes and moose. All of this points to the glory of God. If there is a painting, there must be a painter. If there is a building, there must be a builder. If there is a creation, there must be a creator.

If God exists (and he does), has he spoken? Yes! God has spoken to you and me through the Bible. Unfortunately, there are many wrong attitudes toward the Bible. One wrong attitude toward the Bible is rationalism. Rationalism says that the mind is supreme. People say, I think or, The Bible doesnt make sense to me. Extreme Rationalism is atheism or agnosticism. Gods Word is supreme.

Another wrong attitude is mysticism. Mysticism says that experience is supreme. Mysticism claims that experience is the final authority. A mystic says, If it fits my experience, it is correct and valid but if it doesnt fit my experience, it is invalid. No. The Bible is the final authority and all our experiences must be judged by Scripture. Experience is not the final authority for determining what is true and what is false.

Another wrong attitude toward the Bible is that of the cults. The cults teach that the Bible plus some other writing is supreme. The key mark of a cult is that while they affirm that the Bible is the Word of God they also affirm another writing as having equal inspiration.

The right attitude is the orthodox attitude. The Bible alone is the final authority and must be obeyed. Why do we believe the Bible? We believe the Bible based upon evidence. There is both internal and external evidence that the Bible is supernatural. The internal evidence is that the Bible claims to be inspired by God. 2 Timothy 3:16 says, All Scripture is inspired by God. Inspired means God breathed. Scripture is the product of the breath of God. He is the source of the very words themselves.

Jesus said in Matthew 5:18, For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the law until all is fulfilled. Jesus said, The entire universe can go out of existence before the smallest letter or stroke of the Old Testament will fail. It is permanent. It is unchanging. It is unwavering. It is eternal. It has authority. It is forever relevant and forever authoritative.

We also believe the Bible because of external evidence. God used forty different authors over sixteen hundred years in three different languages in six different parts of the world to write the Bible and yet there are no errors and no contradictions. Take any other subject, such as science, and choose forty authors who wrote over sixteen hundred years. Would there be any real unity? Of course not! The Koran was written by only one author- Mohammed. The continuity of the Bible is evidence of its supernatural origin.

No other book contains fulfilled prophecy like the Bible. The Bible predicted the birth of the messiah in Bethlehem six hundred years before his birth (Micah 5). The Bible predicted the death of the messiah by crucifixion one thousand years before his death (Psalm 22). The Bible predicted the messiah, Jesus, would come from the tribe of Judah seventeen hundred years before he came (Genesis 49).

One person said, The Bible is not a book we could write if we would, nor is the Bible a book man would write if he could. Best of all, the Bible points to Jesus. Only the Bible spells out sin for what it really is- rebellion against God. Only the Bible presents a cure that truly and honestly works- the substitutionary atonement of Jesus. Many, many people have experienced the supernatural working of Scripture in their lives. Charles Spurgeon said, The Word of God is like a lion. You dont have to defend a lion. All you have to do is let the lion loose, and the lion will defend itself. Read the Bible, obey the Bible and watch the power of God flow through your life!

Ethan Hansen is the pastor of Faith Bible Fellowship in Big Lake.

Excerpt from:

God has spoken through the Bible | Faith | frontiersman.com - Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman

Worry over no clear plan for closing schools – GO! & Express – GO! and Express

Education lobby group Equal Education says they are concerned the departments of education and transport are failing to plan for pupils when rationalising schools.

The NGO said education was failing to carry out proper consultations in some areas, while transport openly admitted their budget would not meet the increased need for scholar transport.

The education lobby group yesterday hosted a seminar aimed at reflecting on the progress made on the school rationalisation and realignment programme in the province.

The seminar which saw discussions around the progress of rationalisation with the focus on provision of school infrastructure and scholar transport was held in King Williams Town.

The department is in the process of closing 1902 schools with fewer than 135 pupils and merging them with more viable schools that have more pupils. The department earlier this year announced plans to close 136 schools by the end of this year.

Attending the seminar was a representative from the National Treasurys government technical assistant centre (GTAC), Phaphama Mfenyana, EE and community members.

EE deputy head Masixole Booi said they supported the provinces school rationalism and realignment if it was done in a consultative, democratic manner and was aimed at fixing schools and realising the deadlines outlined by the norms and standards for school infrastructure.

No seat of learning

According to the South African Schools Act, the MEC must complete a proper consultation process before closing a public school.

After a school is closed, all assets and liabilities of the school owned by the state must go back to the department of public works to serve other purposes.

The lobby group said community members had complained about a lack of consultation in this process. Early this year, community members, parents and teachers in different areas where their schools are rationalised have complained about the lack of consultation and community engagement from the department.

There is no clear plan about things such as scholar transport, which means pupils are forced to walk long distances from home to their new schools, said Booi.

The Dispatch last week reported about parents from Mhala Public School in Tsholomnqa, who said their children were dropped by the system when the education department closed their school and merged it with a school 7km away without providing them with transport.

Drop-outs drag pass rate down

Some pupils had no choice but to walk to their new school after the old one closed at the end of May.

The parents from Mhala said that even though they were aware the school was listed for closure, they were not informed when the school would close.

Booi said that at a meeting on education district configuration that was held in Port Elizabeth earlier this year, MEC Mandla Makupula had acknowledged that in some areas the process was not communicated well to affected parties.

This is particularly worrisome, given the immediate challenge of not only school infrastructure in the province but also scholar transport, said Booi.

See the original post here:

Worry over no clear plan for closing schools - GO! & Express - GO! and Express

New President for new India – The Indian Express

Written by Dr Rakesh Sinha | Updated: June 16, 2017 1:13 am No one knows who the next President will be, but the likelihood of a contest based on entrenched positions certainly undermines the prestige of Rashtrapati Bhavan. (Illustration: C R Sasikumar)

The BJP has formed a three-member committee consisting of senior cabinet ministers, Rajnath Singh, Arun Jaitley and M Venkaiah Naidu to examine the possibility of a consensus candidate for the President of India. This marks a moral victory for the ruling party against forces in the Opposition, which include political parties and the predominantly left- liberal intelligentsia. Their quest for a presidential nominee is not based on the moral significance of this august office, but rather, on vendetta politics. It is no secret that they see the presidential election as an opportunity to fix both Narendra Modi and Hindutva politics.

No one knows who the next President will be, but the likelihood of a contest based on entrenched positions certainly undermines the prestige of Rashtrapati Bhavan. It is a truism that no presidential election has been without contest. But political binaries have led to the devaluation of the office. The 1969 election between Neelam Sanjiva Reddy and V.V. Giri was not merely a face-off between two individuals, but between two ideologies on the one hand, and the claim to be genuine heirs of the Indian National Congress, on the other. The election witnessed fierce public debate and unprecedented polarisation in the media. Giris victory vindicated Indira Gandhi and her ideology. But it did not add value to the presidency. Rather, it heralded the notion of a rubber stamp president. Since then, the choice of a candidate became a matter of political permutations and combinations, and the election, a game of dice.

This goes against the vision of the founding fathers of the Indian Constitution, who espoused that the President should not be a symbol of partisan politics. The first President of India, Rajendra Prasad, reaffirmed that the office ought not to be a reason for instability in our parliamentary democracy. During the political confrontations between the communist government in Kerala and the Congress party, Prasad made it clear in his letter to Gyanvati Darbar on July 10, 1959, that there had been a certain misunderstanding regarding the position of the President. Probably, many people feel that the President can intervene and exert influence on one side or the other. That is an incorrect view I cannot take sides I have to act on advice and cannot act on my own. Let me keep myself above all these differences I cannot have any viewpoint which is not for the country as a whole but for any group or party only.

Whomsoever becomes President, he or she cannot alter the requirements and prerequisites of the office, or the essential features of Indias parliamentary democracy. The office does, however, have the potential to circumvent unnecessary controversies, particularly so in the present context: The rise of an alternative ideology and leadership have yet to be reconciled to by the elites which enjoyed status and privileges and considered themselves authors of the destiny of modern India.

The current situation is a replica of 1922, when, for the first time, nationalists became ministers in the provinces under the Government of India Act 1919. The colonial bureaucracy, along with governors of the provinces, were not merely unsympathetic but also contemptuous of them. In contemporary India, secularist forces are not prepared to relate Hindutva with secular, liberal and democratic principles. They unfailingly cling to their self-made belief that it is communal, intolerant and fascist. They are victims of the ossification which has set in within Left-liberal ideologies, a solidification of the mind which keeps them dogmatic and unable to re-examine their own position.

Therefore, the presidential election assumes significance for more than one reason: The office is not merely a constitutional head. It becomes a decisive player in democratic causality. There are instances of such situations the fall of the Janata Party government in 1979 made the role of Rashtrapati Bhavan crucial. Yet, there is a definite limit of presidential adventurism, even in times of political crises. Its importance lies in appealing beyond conventional politics or constitutional morality. Free from political compulsions or executive burdens, the President can act as an agent of redefining the idea of India, which is essential to restore the post-colonial identity of the Indian people.

This process was initiated by Rajendra Prasad, which led to a great confrontation with the then-Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru. Prasad, who confirmed the President should not intervene in executive and legislative business, also unfolded his role in discovering the soul of India. His confrontation with Nehru was not a battle for power, but a battle of ideas to rebuild India.

In his letter to chief ministers on August 1, 1951, Nehru stated that: It is little realised here what great injuries to our credit abroad is done by the communal organisations of India because they represent just the things which a Western mind dislikes intensely and can not understand. The recent inauguration of [the] Somnath temple with pomp and ceremony created a very bad impression abroad about India and her professions.

Prasad, differing outright with the PM, wrote to him, saying, By rising from its ashes again, this temple of Somnath is proclaiming to the world that no man and no power in the world can destroy that for which people have boundless faith and love in their hearts. Today, our attempt is not to rectify history. Our only aim is to proclaim anew our attachment to the faith, convictions and the values on which our religion has rested since immemorial ages India being a civilisational nation cant be provincialised, its roots go to hundreds and thousands of years celebrating umpteen diversities. The present challenge is to regain Indias identity through contextualising her age-old past.

Prasads letter to Gyanvati Darbar on March 26, 1959, unravels the civilisational role of the President of India: In the age of rationalism, where everything smacking of anything like religion and spiritualism is looked at askance, and when a wave of scepticism is carrying everything before it, at any rate, in the so-called educated and advanced and progressive people, it will be no small service if anything could be done to catch up with the spirit which made greater India, of which we are all proud, and of which we could get a glimpse in Cambodia, in Japan and even in Indonesia in ceremonies not in India but someday, we shall certainly regain and recover our balance.

A new President of India has to begin where Prasad left his great ideological legacies. In this regard, the election is not merely a political game of dice, but also a battle of ideologies. The office should be filled not with sectarian or other narrow considerations, but with an intent to privilege it with a philosopher-king. He must represent the soul of India, not a secularist soul. She should address not merely the present but posterity too. Besides constitutional requirements, his words and actions should be indicative of civilisational imperatives.

Rajendra Prasad aptly said, the country may throw out the ministry, not the president, for views. It is essential that the presidential candidate is not compromised, or used for the rehabilitation of a tired politician, but rather, is a positive mind who embraces the arduous task of the decolonisation of the Indian mind.The opposition parties and their intellectuals have lost their gravity and are

The opposition parties and their intellectuals have lost their gravity and are now defined more by what they oppose than what they support. Prime Minister Modi has combined the spirit of cultural legacies in his speeches, which are an assertion of a genuine idea of India, in the midst of ceaseless opposition from secularist forces. Therefore, the Presidents election would be far more than merely a defeat of the Opposition; it would be the resurrection of the spirit of Rajendra Prasad.

For all the latest Opinion News, download Indian Express App

Excerpt from:

New President for new India - The Indian Express

"The Ornithologist," a groin-first film about Saint Anthony, at the Parkway this week – Baltimore City Paper

Nearly half a century after gay Marxist atheist Pier Paolo Pasolini shocked Italy by delivering a version of St. Matthew's Gospel that played the story relatively straight, director Joao Pedro Rodrigues offers a film about another saint, this time Anthony, though it's more in line with Derek Jarman's radically queer film about Saint Sebastian. Rodrigues takes key elements of Anthony's storyhe was born Fernando; he was shipwrecked on the way back from a mission; he held Jesus when he was an infant; "he had brought a young man back to life with a single magic breath"; and he had a "fascination with nature and animals"and irreverently reconfigures all of them into an erotic misadventure in which our hero is filled with the spirit groin-first.

Fernando (Paul Hamy), the titular ornithologist, is searching for black storks on a river when rapids send his kayak into some rocks around a nearby forest. Two Catholic pilgrims from China rescue him, but after he expresses doubts about malignant spirits in the forest and refuses to shepherd them through the evil, they decide to leave him tied to a tree, stripped to his underwear, bulging through the rope like a Gengoroh Tagame drawing. He escapes, but without a signal to reach his boyfriend back home, or anyone outside of the wooded hills, he descends further into limbo. Fernando's scientific rationalism, which at first treats his new surroundings and its inhabitants with a harried, anthropological remove, slowly gives way to a ramshackle spiritual immersion of grave historical import.

Director Rodrigues is contending with the lingering effects of Portuguese colonialism, pitting Fernando against the religious iconography his country once imprinted on its colonies. The story of Saint Anthony is thrust onto him, albeit in deliriously homoerotic fashion, whether it's getting urinated on by pagans or going skinny dipping with a deaf-mute goat herder named, you guessed it, Jesus. In a review of "Salo" and "Porcile," critic Jonathan Rosenbaum relays a friend's complaint that, "[t]he problem with Pasoliniis that he wants to be fucked by Jesus and Marx at the same time."

With "The Ornithologist," Rodrigues demonstrates how that's not a problem at all.

Directed by Joao Pedro Rodrigues, screening all week at the Parkway Theatre.

See original here:

"The Ornithologist," a groin-first film about Saint Anthony, at the Parkway this week - Baltimore City Paper

Poetry? What for? | The American Conservative – The American Conservative

A decline in English majors at universities demonstrates that the field is losing popularity amongst students. This decline might be the result of a perceived impracticality of literature, but it should be considered whether its the field itself that is erring. An example that illustrates how the teaching of literature is failing short comes from one of its most important constituents poetry.

Poetry is a paradox. It is the most complex and inimitable expression of thought and consciousness, but it is also the most natural and ancient. Although a form of oral and written tradition that has persisted throughout the years, poetry is dismissed as unnecessary and impractical in literary education. The problem with teaching poetry is not that the language is too difficult; it is that the questions that poetry explores are no longer considered valid. Literary critic Harold Bloom described poetry as the crown of literature because it is a prophetic mode. To be prophetic, however, poetry needs to contain a wise understanding of truths about man in order to provide a glimpse into the future. Perhaps a decline in the popularity of poetry in classrooms is related to an increasing rejection of universal truths as a guiding principle for undertaking studies in literature.

Whenever an English teacher or student is asked to defend the value of their (seemingly) leisurely field, the argument tends to turn into a defense of literature as a way to teach effective communication. Effect, however, is synonymous with persuasion rather than formation. Literature, then, is a means for a tactic acquired rather than an exercise of thought and inquiry, and all that poetry is within the field of literature is merely complicated and flowery language for what could otherwise be stated directly. Instead of teaching students that, through poetry, they can inquire about the world and their place in it, they are taught that through poetry they can convince others about their individualized truths and feelings. These feelings become the authority in a classroom that denies objective truth and universal human experience as a product of poetry.

In 1833, John Stuart Mill stated that the object of poetry is to act upon the emotions, which is what distinguishes it from fact and science. While math and science does its work by convincing or persuading, poetry does so by moving. But students are no longer being moved by poetry because its aim in classrooms seems to be more in line with Mills understanding of science. In other words, poetry no longer moves the soul, it persuades the mind. The postmodern rendering of literary analysis has made poetry a practice in understanding subjectivity, and now poetry is dismissed because we no longer view it as a serious mode of study: we use it either as a test for our level of literary comprehension, or as a medium for our own exaltation. Yet the inquiring nature of poetry geared towards understanding life is what results in the moving of our soul because it is what allows us to connect with a strangers sentiments on a personal level. Poetry acts upon our emotions, but it achieves this in no small part by searching for a truth and understanding that we all share that truth.

Still, Mill was right to mark the distinction between poetry and science. Poetry is a form of inquiry and corroboration for what we call true beyond what can be scientifically proven. But much like math and science, good inquiry ought to lead us to gaze outwards, not inwards. While we do not use poetry to question the chemical composition of a flower and the seasonal changes that affect its growth and withering, we do use it to contemplate beauty and death. To say that there are universal truths to humans is to say that forms of art and self-expression are ultimately attempts at discovering and understanding what we cannot unveil through epistemological means. By believing that there is a right and a real that we can discern, forms of art such as poetry become a universal language to relate commonalities in our experiences. But when right and real are rendered subjective, so is poetry. Poetry, then, loses its legitimacy as a form of philosophical inquiry about the soul to which all of us can relate, and instead becomes an amateur form of life sharing to which only some of us can relate.

Now that truth has been declared a myth in education, the methods for teaching the liberal artsof which poetry is a parthave naturally been pulled towards two ends: either a scientific method form of explanation of human phenomena, or an inane outpouring of sentiments to express how we feel regardless of facts or reality. Neither of these ends, however, makes for a proper reading and creation of poetry. The rationalist, who thinks that we can know everything through reason alone, and therefore do not need tradition, invalidates art as a serious form of inquisition for knowledge about the world. The post-modern absurdist, who thinks there is nothing that can be known universally, renders poetry and art at large into a subjective form of expression where anything goes and nothing is true because its contents are swayed by irrevocable culture, class, race, and gender politics.

Needless to say, literature has moved more towards the postmodern end, which is why it is being taken less and less seriously as a field of study. If or when poetry is taught for emotional effect, it is taught in a form that makes the reading and writing of poetry seem like a sentimental exercise, the academic equivalent of a visit to a therapist for which you didnt sign up: A poem is displayed on paper as one would place a strange lab animal on a tray, ready to be dissected with a knife until it is broken up and broken down into analyzed, rationalized bits and pieces about the author and his intention for writing the poem rather than what the work is actually saying. At least Derrida gave the process an honest name.

It cannot be overstated that the use of poetry is collective, not individualist, which is why its use is vital for the preservation and understanding of our human history. Neither poetry nor its readers are apt to tear down the towers that humans have been building from a foundation of literary tradition as old as our very existence. If taught as a form of inquiry, poetry inculcates the importance of humility and tradition in knowledge: its verses invoke nature, mythology, history, literature, and other important facets of our human experience because we cannot know anything alone. We rely on our past to form an understanding of who we are, so although poetry is an individual practice, it becomes part of a communal form of inquiry directed towards discovering universal truths. Reading poetry can add another level to our tower of what has been said before. Poetry, then, should not be used against itself to throw spears at what weve built as a collective understanding, fortified throughout ages, of what it means to be human.

We are teaching poetry upside down by making students break down poems before they can appreciate them and grow with them. As a result, students become critics for a realm they have not yet explored to its fullest, because they have not yet lived long enough to do so. The use of poetry in a classroom should be neither overly practical nor overly sentimental. As poetry is a form of expression that is inquisitive and formative, it ought to be used for that very purpose: to form the minds of people who will likely ponder about the same things that people before them did. An appreciation for poetry is foundand it really requires seeking and effortin the space between the rationalism and postmodernism that is prevalent in our lives. If we continue to teach poetry from a utilitarian angle geared towards persuasion and analysis of our own subjectivity rather than as an inquisition for truth, it will lose its true effect as a medium that inspires us to look beyond ourselveswhat poet Dana Gioia accurately called poetry as enchantment.

Poetry appreciation is a nobler task than poetry analysis of criticism, and it is a seed that can be planted in our early years of education. Successful teaching of poetry where students walk away having their interests piqued and with a sense of inquiry about the nature of being is possible insofar as they understand that through reading someone else, they are reading themselves; through reading about another time, they are reading about their time. Students will only find a purpose in poetry if poetry is directed towards a sense of truth about existence that outweighs other forms of subjectivity. A proper teaching of poetry will motivate students to read and re-read poetry, since reading poetry over and over allows us to get something new every time: Truth reveals itself gradually through experience, after all. When we learn to read a poem for the questions that it raises and its effort at seeking a form of truth about the obscurities of life, we gain the virtue of patience to learn about the world and ourselves.

Nayeli Riano is a freelance writer, poet, and essayist from New Jersey. Her work has been featured on National Review Online and the blogs of the National Association of Scholars (NAS) and the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA).

See the original post here:

Poetry? What for? | The American Conservative - The American Conservative

5 Big Things To Know And Celebrate About GK Chesterton – The Federalist

Reading G.K. Chestertons work is a bit like a personal encounter with the Ghost of Christmas Present, from Charles Dickenss A Christmas Carol. Hes a larger-than-life figure, with a writing style thats both jovial and cutting. He paints a picture of reality you want to embrace, and he depicts whats wrong with our world in a way that spurs the reader to action.

Thus today it seems fitting, especially considering the ideological rancor and spiritual disenchantment of our nation, to consider some of the best components of Chestertons workand to encourage contemporary readers to know him better, man.

Gilbert Keith Chesterton grew up in London, and was baptized into the Church of England, although he described himself as an agnostic throughout his teen years. He embraced Anglicanism after his marriage, then converted to Catholicism in 1922.

Chestertons literary career began while working for publishing houses in London. He became a journalist, an art and literary critic, and the Daily News gave him a weekly opinion column in 1902. He went on to produce regular radio broadcasts, as well.

Among his early works, Chestertons Father Brown mysteries are undoubtedly his most successful and well known. In them, a bumbling yet thoughtful priest uncovers crime via his deep understanding of human nature. Another of his famous novels, The Man Who Was Thursday, turns our pompous ideologies on their head, promising a truth too powerful, mysterious, and even jovial for us to imagine.

Chesterton was 64 and weighed nearly 300 pounds. He wore a crumpled hat and a cape, often walking about with a cigar in his mouth. He was an astoundingly prolific writercrafting thousands of essays, hundreds of poems and short stories, and 80 books throughout his lifetime. Theres perhaps no better introduction to his work than this, from James Parker writing for The Atlantic in 2015:

In his vastness and mobility, Chesterton continues to elude definition: He was a Catholic convert and an oracular man of letters, a pneumatic cultural presence, an aphorist with the production rate of a pulp novelist. Poetry, criticism, fiction, biography, columns, public debatethe phenomenon known to early-20th-century newspaper readers as GKC was half cornucopia, half content mill. If youve got a couple of days, read his impish, ageless, inside-out terrorist thrillerThe Man Who Was Thursday. If youve got an afternoon, read his masterpiece of Christian apologeticsOrthodoxy: ontological basics retailed with a blissful, zooming frivolity, Thomas Aquinas meets Eddie Van Halen. If youve got half an hour, read The Blue Cross, the first and most glitteringly perfect of his stories featuring the crime-busting village priest Father Brown. If youve got only 10 minutes, read his essay A Much Repeated Repetition. (Of a mechanical thing we have a full knowledge. Of a living thing we have a divine ignorance.)

Chesterton was a journalist; he was a metaphysician. He was a reactionary; he was a radical. He was a modernist, acutely alive to the rupture in consciousness that produced Eliots The Hollow Men; he was an anti-modernist (he hated Eliots The Hollow Men). He was a parochial Englishman and a post-Victorian gasbag; he was a mystic wedded to eternity. All of these cheerfully contradictory things are true, and none of them would matter in the slightest were it not for the final, resolving fact that he was a genius.

Chesterton shared a lifelong friendship with George Bernard Shaw, the renowned Irish playwright and critic whose theological bent was decidedly counter to Chestertons. Shaw opposed organized religion and promoted eugenics, admired Stalin and Lenin, and termed himself at times an atheist or a mystic. Yet Shaw called Chesterton a man of colossal genius, and the two enjoyed a strong camaraderie:

If I were as fat as you, I would hang myself, Shaw once told Chesterton.

If I were to hang myself, I would use you for the rope, Chesterton replied.

In the introduction to a biography he wrote about Shaw, Chesterton wrote, Most people say that they agree with Bernard Shaw or that they do not understand him. I am the only person who understands him, and I do not agree with him.

The two men declare to us, schismatic and prejudiced against the other as we often are, that there can be such a thing as friendly enemies. We can enjoy the company of those different from us, even of those doggedly opposed to us. To have such friendships, however, we need a hearty dose of Chestertonian mirth: the ability to laugh at and with others, and most of all, to laugh heartily at ourselves.

Last month Jesse Singal wrote a fascinating essay on the birth of the self-esteem movement in America. During this span [the 1980s and 1990s], just abouteveryone, from CEOs to welfare recipients, was told often by psychologists with serious credentials that improving their self-esteem could unlock the gates to more happiness, better performance, and every kind of success imaginable, Singal notes. He goes on:

It would be hard to overstate the long-term impact of these claims. The self-esteem craze changed how countless organizations were run, how an entire generation millenials was educated, and how that generation went on to perceive itself (quite favorably). As it turned out, the central claim underlying the trend, that theres a causal relationship between self-esteem and various positive outcomes, was almost certainly inaccurate. But that didnt matter: For millions of people, this was just too good and satisfying a story to check, and thats part of the reason the national focus on self-esteem never fully abated. Many peoplestillbelieve that fostering a sense of self-esteem is just about the most important thing one can do, mental healthwise.

But the self-esteem movement, although it may have catapulted into pop cultural acclaim during the 1980s and 90s, didnt begin there. When Chesterton wrote his classic book Orthodoxy in 1908, he wrote it primarily as a response to the claim that believing in yourself was key to success and happiness.

I know of men who believe in themselves more than Napoleon or Caesar, he writes in the first chapter. I know where flames the fixed star of certainty and success. I can guide you to the thrones of the Super-men. The men who really believe in themselves are all in lunatic asylums.

Chesterton argues that Complete self-confidence is not merely a sin; complete self-confidence is a weakness. One of my favorite quotes, from the books opening pages, is thisnot just a response to self-confident lunacy, but one which addresses our everyday temptations to self-centeredness:

But how much happier you would be if you only knew that these people cared nothing about you! How much larger your life would be if your self could become smaller in it; if you could really look at other men with common curiosity and pleasure; if you could see them walking as they are in their sunny selfishness and their virile indifference! You would begin to be interested in them, because they were not interested in you. You would break out of this tiny and tawdry theatre in which your own little plot is always being played, and you would find yourself under a freer sky, in a street full of splendid strangers.

Living as we do in a society of snowflakes and psychiatrists, such a prescription for happiness seems strange indeed. But the moment I see myself not as the most perfect snowflake in the world, but as one among many flawed, complicated human beings, Im set free from my tiny and tawdry theatre.

Chesterton, much like C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien, spoke overwhelmingly to our cultures increasing disenchantment, its imaginatively sterile and dour perception of the world. Chesterton prescribed mystery and enchantment as an antidote to this state of things, suggesting that we needed something more than logic in order to transcend madness and insanity: Mysticism keeps men sane, he writes in Orthodoxy.

As long as you have mystery you have health; when you destroy mystery you create morbidity. The ordinary man has always been sane because the ordinary man has always been a mystic. He has permitted the twilight. He has always had one foot in earth and the other in fairyland. He has always left himself free to doubt his gods; but (unlike the gnostic of today) free also to believe in them.

The fairy tale awakens our minds to the enchanted, mysterious nature of the real world we live in. It opens us to the possibility that mere atoms and molecules might be full of divine glory.

These tales say that apples were golden only to refresh the forgotten moment when we found that they were green. They make rivers run with wine only to make us remember, for one wild moment, that they run with water. We have all read in scientific books, and, indeed, in all romances, the story of the man who has forgotten his name. This man walks about the streets and can see and appreciate everything; only he cannot remember who he is. Well, every man is that man in the story. Every man has forgotten who he is. One may understand the cosmos, but never the ego; the self is more distant than any star. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God; but thou shalt not know thyself. We are all under the same mental calamity; we have all forgotten our names. We have all forgotten what we really are. All that we call common sense and rationality and practicality and positivism only means that for certain dead levels of our life we forget that we have forgotten. All that we call spirit and art and ecstasy only means that for one awful instant we remember what we forget.

Many of the best works of literatureGeorge MacDonalds Phantastes, Lewiss Out of the Silent Planet, Tolkiens Lord of the Rings, J.K. Rowlings Harry Potter, and countless othersfill us with a desperate longing for a moment, time, or feeling we havent fully encountered or experienced, but one that we want desperately.

Lewis described this as joy, a heaven-longing in our souls. He spent his entire life chasing it before he found it in Christianity. From the Norse mythologies of his youth to the wanderings and wonder of Narnia, Lewis wanted to capture this joy and hold on to it. But he found thatat least in this worldits a fleeting feeling. Chesterton suggests to us that this joy is a wild acknowledgement of mystery and meaning that floods us, then leaves us. Fairy tales make these moments possible.

Fairy tales founded in me two convictions, he writes. First, that this world is a wild and startling place, which might have been quite different, but which is quite delightful; second, that before this wildness and delight one may well be modest and submit to the queerest limitations of so queer a kindness.

Many picture Christianity as either two horrid things: the first, a sort of dour and austere asceticism, which eschews the joys and pleasures of this world and embraces instead a gray and joyless religion. The second is a hypocritical malevolence, in which we say all sorts of sympathetic things, but act in an authoritarian, graceless way (see The Handmaids Tale).

Chesterton crushes both of these conceptions of Christianity, and defies them as heresy. He makes obvious the joy and mirth in our God, in the way he works and in the world he created. But he also points out that true Christian virtues are consistent, grace-filled, and glorious.

As we have taken the circle as the symbol of reason and madness, we may very well take the cross as the symbol at once of mystery and health. Buddhism is centripetal, but Christianity is centrifugal: it breaks out. For the circle is perfect and infinite in its nature; but it is fixed for ever in its size; it can never be larger or smaller. But the cross, though it has at its heart a collision and a contradiction, can extend its four arms for ever without altering it shape. Because it has a paradox in its centre it can grow without changing. The circle returns upon itself and is bound. The cross opens its arms to the four winds; it is a signpost for free travellers.

Regardless of what you believe, I challenge you to read G.K. Chesterton this summer. Take to heart his thoughtful, incisive, jovial criticisms of our culture. Consider his critique of rationalism, and the way it strips our world of meaning and mystery.

As for me, tonight, Im going to read a fairy tale.

View post:

5 Big Things To Know And Celebrate About GK Chesterton - The Federalist

On the most delightfully strange match of this year’s Champions Trophy – The Express Tribune (blog)


The Express Tribune (blog)
On the most delightfully strange match of this year's Champions Trophy
The Express Tribune (blog)
This was proper hostile bowling (think session 1 of a test match with overcast conditions at Headingley). The reason I say Pakistani is because the attack was so sudden and so unexpected (not in keeping with the scientific rationalism of modern day ...

and more »

Visit link:

On the most delightfully strange match of this year's Champions Trophy - The Express Tribune (blog)

Why Paramore’s Riot! Rages On 10 Years Later – MTV – MTV.com

Scott Gries/Getty Images

The burning fire at the heart of a great band

Paramores second album, Riot!, which turns 10 this week, remains one of recent pop culture's truest, most potent guides for navigating teenage turbulence. Its an album that says its OK to care about your life, to admit to emotions beyond apathy even to act on them, and to shout them from towers made of your own stubbornness. Perhaps most notably, Riot! roars with the very ferocity most girls are disciplined out of. Hayley Williams sings with the sort of snarling conviction that sends us to the principals office at 12 and condemns us to internet harassment at 20 the stinging sorrows were not allowed to name lest we be dismissed as histrionic.

Throughout their decade-plus career, Paramore have identified emotional intensity as a strength, not a liability. This is the foundation of the double-platinum Riot!: Josh Farro's fervent guitar work elevates the songs into larger-than-life anthems; Zac Farros drumming is bold and heartbeat-steady; and Williamss incisive lyrics spin universes out of an inner unrest. Songs zoom in on fallouts and failings until they sound the way they feel: monumental, urgent, explosive.

Riot! is where Paramore perfected the art of crystallizing crises at their detonation point, using shrapnel from the wound to forge a sword, or a shield, or shelter. With their schoolyard origins and fierce commitment, the Paramore heard on this album sound like theyre taking on the world.

Misery Business, Riot!s bitter breakout single, still features in the bands folklore. Its central narrative the ruthless character assassination of a girl charged with manipulating Williamss friend turned love interest with her weaponized sexuality and misplaced morality have aged like milk. Once the soundtrack to countless mean-girl revenge fantasies, it's been the subject of more critical inspection in recent years, as discerning listeners have taken issue with the songs internalized misogyny.

Williams has been handling the fallout ever since. In a 2015 Tumblr post, she addressed the controversy around the song, without seeking to dodge accountability. It wasnt really meant to be this big philosophical statement about anything, she wrote. It was quite literally a page in my diary about a singular moment I experienced as a high schooler. And thats the funny part about growing up in a band with any degree of success. People still have my diary. The past and the present. All the good AND bad and embarrassing of it! But Im not ashamed.

Ten years on from Riot!, Paramore have generated more than enough hits to justify striking Misery Business from their setlist altogether. Instead, theyve used it to build a tradition the bands devotees know well: Where the song should lurch into its vengeful bridge, the music enters a tense loop and Williams begins to spiel. She makes a show of scanning the audience for the right fan, one wholl know every word and would sing with a requisite zeal. When she makes her choice, she brings them onstage and hands them the mic, a spotlight, a moment ablaze. Instead of sweeping an unsavory mistake under the rug, Williams invites fans to work through their own scorn so they can unlearn it together.

Misery Business was a symptom, not the illness. It was the inevitable result of the noxious lies girls are fed about themselves beginning from birth. And sometimes, the only way to get rid of all that venom is to spit it back out.

The songs true triumph comes at the end of the second verse, when Williams snarls Its easy if you do it right / Well, I refuse, I refuse, I refuse! That sentiment ultimately marks refusal in this case, of face-saving selective amnesia, and of shame as one of Paramores central missions. Even when later albums (2013s self-titled record and last months After Laughter) pivot toward introspection, they maintain a crucial empathy for one's past selves. Williams learns and grows, but she understands that neither process is linear. She knows that a pristine image is a falsehood, and a story built on falsehood has no punch.

Paramore know what they believe in, beginning always with their own story: The whole story, with every ugly and vulnerable thing left intact.

Riot!s most essential declaration is the Thats What You Get bridge from which the album takes its name: Pain, make your way to me / And Ill always be just so inviting / If I ever start to think straight / This heart will start a riot in me.

Its easy to mistake for a cautionary tale, but its a spitfire celebration of a life lived headstrong and heart-first. Here is Paramores skeleton key, serrated edge scratching a promise into everything within reach: When you stop abiding by your heart, it will always find a way to return you to your truth. It will get you into trouble, but it will always point you north.

Much of Paramores ensuing discography unravels Riot! until it is more string than lifeline. But in that undoing, each thread becomes braided into something bigger, something stronger. Each Paramore album is better because of the ones before it. Each album renews old commitments, even through contradiction. Within Williamss ceaselessly self-referential lyrics, each callback acts as an expandable shorthand, telling a richer story to those who look for it.

Many recurring themes in Paramore's catalog love, loneliness, learning, leaving, letting go get this treatment, but none play quite the same role as fire. Where other concepts appear in occasional one-off lines, Riot!s exhausted fight song Let the Flames Begin earns a dedicated reprise in Paramores Part II. The arc identifies the fire that Paramore has carried through every inch of their story, and evinces the hard, endless work necessary to protect and nurture it. Williamss evident exhaustion is eclipsed by her belief-driven resolve. The first songs chorus proclaims This is how we dance / When they try to take us down / This is what will be. All these years later, on Part II and beyond it, Williams is still standing, still dancing, despite everything. Theres a heretic pride to that.

That, there, is Riot!s crux. Paramores ultimate allegiance isnt to any specific beliefs so much as to the ferocity with which they believe in things. Where girls are supposed to be pliable, Paramore centers Williamss stubbornness. Where girls are encouraged to replace instinct with detached rationalism, Williams refuses to think straight. Riot!s invincibility comes from its proximity to fragility.

These days, I listen to Riot! and want little more than to reach backward in time and shove the album into my younger selfs hands, guide her to this place where fire-hearted girls turbulent stories are front and center and first-person rather than the object of a mans intrigue. We can simplify Riot! until it provides only nostalgia: for hopping the broken fence between adolescence and adulthood, for the days we cared so much it could have consumed us. We can pretend that we dont still need its empowerment or its empathy. But then, who wins when we erase our history to save face? What do girls lose to facilitate that victory?

If we forget our hard-won unlearning, we forfeit the ability to guide others out of the labyrinth. I think Williams knows this too. She never apologized for being a teenage girl then, and she does not now. Offered the chance to trivialize her youthful messes and mistakes to earn present-day cool points, she refuses. When Williams sang Somewhere, weakness is a strength / And Ill die searching for it on Let the Flames Begin, she had already found it: She was building it.

2017 Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved. MTV and all related titles and logos are trademarks of Viacom International Inc.

More here:

Why Paramore's Riot! Rages On 10 Years Later - MTV - MTV.com

The Trinity Is Not Just for Trinity Sunday, But for Every Day of the Year – Patheos (blog)

The Trinity Is Not Just for Trinity Sunday, But for Every Day of the Year

The doctrine of the Trinity is not just for Trinity Sunday (June 11th, 2017), but for every day of the year. Unfortunately, according to Lesslie Newbigin, many Christians from the High Middle Ages up until the latter half of the twentieth century were averse to referencingthe Trinity, perhaps not even on Trinity Sunday:

It has been said that the question of the Trinity is the one theological question that has been really settled. It would, I think, be nearer to the truth to say that the Nicene formula has been so devoutly hallowed that it is effectively put out of circulation. It has been treated like the talent that was buried for safekeeping rather than risked in the commerce of discussion. The church continues to repeat the trinitarian formula butunless I am greatly mistakenthe ordinary Christian in the Western world who hears or reads the word God does not immediately and inevitably think of the Triune BeingFather, Son, and Spirit. He thinks of a supreme monad. Not many preachers, I suspect, look forward eagerly to Trinity Sunday. The working concept of God for most ordinary Christians isif one may venture a bold guessshaped more by the combination of Greek philosophy and Islamic theology that was powerfully injected in the thought of Christendom at the beginning of the High Middle Ages than by the thought of the fathers of the first four centuries.[1]

Why the aversion? Perhaps it was due to a growing and pervasive rationalism. Newbigin was not alone in lamenting the lack of Trinitarian thought forms in Western thought. Michael Buckleyhas alsonoted the lack of engagement of Trinitarian theology in Christian apologists engagement of budding atheists in the modern period.[2]While rationalism is an ongoing problem, other forces that wage war today againstrobust Trinitarian reflection in many circles areconsumerism and pragmatism. We easily settle for quick-fix, base commodityspirituality and short-term solutions to problems. However, quick fix spirituality and pragmatism cannot help us contend against impersonalism and materialism. The increasingly impersonal and materialistic view of the world in the modern age beckons us to give account once again to the Fathers interaction with the cosmosnot imposing his willfrom withoutbut entering into the world through his Son and Spirits interpersonal and communal engagement from within the historical process.

While the Trinity is not just for Trinity Sunday, but for every Sunday and every day of the year, it is not the case that any construal of the Trinity goes.Newbigin took issue with certain social Trinitarian constructs being developed in his day (for example, in Konrad Raisers ecumenical thought) in such a way that they dominated Christological categories and the gospel message in service to democratic notions of governance. Newbigin challenges this approach: What gives ground for anxiety here is the positing of a Trinitarian model against the model of Christocentric universalism. The doctrine of the Trinity was not developed in response to the human need for participatory democracy! It was developed in order to account for the facts that constitute the substance of the gospel.[3]

While needing to safeguard against excessive or abusive uses of the Trinity for our own ends, we should not throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater. One of the most striking features and implications of Trinitarian reflection for the gospel is that we are not alone. Thus, it would be short-sighted or narrow-minded to limit the Trinitys significance to Trinity Sunday. Jesus goes with us, even as he invites us to go into all the world, as reported in Matthew 28:18-20. The Great Commission is the Great Communion in which we participate in the life of the triune God while bearing witness to the good news of God calling all humanityto respond to his personal lovethrough faith in Jesus every day of the year across the globe. In Matthew 28:18-20, we find that we are called to baptize people into the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, teaching Jesus disciples to obey his commandments which are summed up in loving God with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves (Matthew 22:34-40). As Jesus goes with us, and the Spirit dwells in us and empowers us, we invite people to enter Gods community as members of the divine family.

Hierarchal, impersonal and materialistic constructs of reality that eclipse the triune God, on the one hand, and democratic notions imposed on the triune God, on the other hand, will never displace the longing we have for God to be our God and to dwell in his peoples midst as Immanuel until the end of the age (Matthew 1:23; Matthew 28:20). Only in this relational and mysterious manner can the church truly overcome the impersonal and secular mundane. The Trinity is not just for Trinity Sunday, assembly line spirituality, secular democracy, or theology then, but for every one and for every day of the year.

_______________

[1]Lesslie Newbigin, The Open Secret: An Introduction to the Theology of Mission, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), pages 2728.

[2]Michael J. Buckley, S.J.,At the Origins of Modern Atheism(New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987), page 33.

[3]See the full context of the quotation (page 7) inLesslie Newbigin, The Trinity as Public Truth, in Kevin J. Vanhoozer, ed., The Trinity in a Pluralistic Age: Theological Essays on Culture and Religion (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1997), pages 7-8. Never should relationality overshadow God as divine Trinity. Rather, the reverse should always remain the case. Paul Molnar critiques asocial-Trinitarianstate of affairs in which Relationality [has become] the subject, and God the predicate. Paul D. Molnar, Divine Freedom and the Doctrine of the Immanent Trinity: In Dialogue with Karl Barth and Contemporary Theology (London: T. & T. Clark, 2002), page 227.

View original post here:

The Trinity Is Not Just for Trinity Sunday, But for Every Day of the Year - Patheos (blog)

Bill Leonard: Don’t shoot the teacher – Winston-Salem Journal

In 1838 Ralph Waldo Emerson, part Plato, part Ichabod Crane, attacked the corpse cold rationalism of conservative and liberal alike in his classic Harvard Divinity School address, declaring, as any good Transcendentalist would, that: Truly speaking, it is not instruction, but provocation, that I can receive from another soul. What he announces, I must find true in me, or reject; and on his word, or as his second, be he who he may, I can accept nothing.

For Emerson, truth was discovered from deep within.

Not instruction, but provocation, lies at the heart of genuine education. From Socrates holding forth in the Athens marketplace to todays power-point-assisted-seminars, the classroom remains sacred space where opinions collide, interpretations vary, and learning prevails. When such intellectual provocation prevails, there is nothing like it.

Unless of course students and/or faculty are packing a piece, utilizing campus carry laws that usher guns into class, concealed in pockets, purses, or backpacks. When guns show up in school, provocation gains a whole new meaning. Learning is dangerous and transformative; it should never be life-threatening. After 42 years as professor, campus carry scares the Holy Socrates out of me.

When this century began, there were no laws permitting firearms on campus. As of 2017, eleven states offer such legal possibilities, including: Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Tennessee lets faculty, but not students, arm themselves. (Hopefully, faculty meetings are firearm free!)

Sixteen states ban concealed weapons on campus: California, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina and Wyoming. (NC legislators are moving toward admitting 18 year-olds to concealed carry.) Twenty-two states leave the decision of on-campus weapons to the discretion of specific institutions.

Campus carry options were significantly impacted by the 2007 Virginia Tech Massacre when a student gunned down 32 students and wounded 17 in a horrendous killing spree. Many insisted that the gunman might have been stopped had students/faculty been armed. The shooting prompted schools to tighten lockdown policies, increase campus police, and expand use of electronic alert warnings.

American colleges/universities have long reflected the social realities of their national, regional cultures. Alcohol excesses and burgeoning opioid epidemics continue to wreak havoc, often with violent implications. Sexual abuses take heavy tolls on secular and church-related schools alike. Hostile ideologies and politics often foster physical danger at institutions left and right of center. Will concealed weapons save us or merely deepen the danger to life and limb? Is our society itself so ideologically segregated, and intellectual provocation so hazardous, that firearms are a necessary defense?

Advocates insist that the society is so violence-laden that citizens must arm themselves in every setting. Some suggest that increasing sexual violence is sufficient reason for females to take up arms. Others demand that Second Amendment rights be applied in every segment of society, colleges included. I fret over implied threats and symbolic implications. Should our syllabuses declare: Dont shoot! Youre all getting As?

What if campus carry is simply the most dangerous of an unceasing set of classroom distractions, including tweets, texts, Google, Wikipedia, and Face Book, diversions that thwart instruction and provocation, disengaging students from ideas that might form or re-form them? Whatever else the vulnerability of learning means perhaps it is this: try as we might to protect ourselves externally and internally, we can never insulate ourselves enough to escape the insolent idea, the banal diatribe, the suicidal bomber, or the AK47 sociopath.

For years, Ive thought (but never said aloud) that teaching means getting intellectually naked for the sake of ideas, and hoping that students gasp at the concepts, not the professors own conceptual weaknesses. Firearms that protect may become weapons that sidetrack from what learning must beour shared vulnerability to ideas and each other.

In Telling the Truth, the Gospel as Tragedy, Comedy, & Fairy Tale, Frederick Buechner tells about a high-school class that had gone better than usual the day they studied King Lear. Buechner concludes: The word out of the play strips them for a moment naked and strips their teacher with them and to that extent Shakespeare turns preacher because stripping us naked is part of what preaching is all about, the tragic part. In my academic and ministerial experience, provocation and spirituality are intricately related.

So dont come to my classes or lectures armed for anything but learning. Leave your guns outside, please. Go ahead, make my day.

Bill Leonard is Dunn professor of Baptist studies and church history at Wake Forest University. Portions of this column were previously published by Baptist News Global.

See the rest here:

Bill Leonard: Don't shoot the teacher - Winston-Salem Journal

Return to pragmatism – Republica

It is hard to believe Upendra Yadav once went to ex-Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav, bowl in hand, exhorting him to support the blockade.

The Federal Socialist Forum Nepal (FSFN) President Upendra Yadav left me in disbelief last week. He was frank and forthcoming. I had reached his Tinkune office half an hour later than the appointed timeof course due to frustrating trafficbut he did not seem to mind. This was unexpected. Even more unexpected was what he said.

Yadav said his decision to partake in all elections was a compromise for the people and the country, because national interest should be at the core of every political movement and that he was participating in local polls (both phases) so as to be a part of constitution implementation process. Protecting national interest, promoting feeling of nationalism and national unity is his key goal, he said. Focus of a political party should be on economic development as much as on political and civil rights. He cited examples from Liberia, Somalia and Kenya to explain how countries that focused only on identity and rights issues without taking care of economic agenda have fallen into ruins.

On the economy, he sounded like Ram Sharan Mahat, on ethnic identity issue he was a conciliator rather than a hardliner, and on nation, nationality and nationalism he echoed CPN-UML Chairman KP Oli. In many places I felt he was speaking my mind (see his interview: RJPN is a stranded ship that has lost its compass, Republica, June 8). This was not the Upendra Yadav I and my colleague Biswas Baral had met in September, 2016.

Back then Yadav responded to our queries with reservation and with a tinge of anger. He was dead against compromise of any kind and said there is a strong voice in Madhes for armed struggle and that the continued confrontation between Madhes and Kathmandu could lead the country to an unthinkable disaster. He was angry that local level units have not been put under provincial jurisdictions. He dismissed local election as a strategy of sasak barga (ruling class) to sabotage federal course. Unless the constitution is amended, there cannot be any election in Nepal, he warned. He sounded like he was wishing for the constitution that was already on a path to failure to fail absolutely. Yadav, we concluded, was not keen on constitution implementation.

That was ten months ago.

Upendra Yadav has come a long way since 2006. The 2006 Madhes Movement gave him a savior-like status in Tarai-Madhes. As someone who made to Singha Durbar only once (as a foreign minister in Pushpa Kamal Dahal government in 2009), Yadav, unlike many other Madhesi leaders, does not have baggage of corruption and abuse of power. But during 2015/16 blockade and Madhes protest, he demonstrated typical characteristics of racism and bigotry. He was one of those who delivered hate speech to incite local Tharus to retaliate against Pahades in Kalali. The National Human Rights Commission concluded in March 2017 that provocative speeches by leaders (one of them Yadav) had triggered Kailai carnage.

That is not the Upendra Yadav we have today. It is hard to believe he once went to ex-Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav, almost bowl in hand, exhorting him to support border blockade. Its hard to believe he once advocated and held the country hostage demanding complete separation of plains from hills in federal demarcation. Predictably, his colleagues in Rastriya Janata Party Nepal and Madhesi intellectuals have derided him as a revisionist and compromiser. They have accused him of submitting Madhes agenda to the racist state. He might have to bear with such vitriol for some time to come.

We dont know what actually triggered the change of heart in Yadav or how long he will stick to his nation first stand. In Nepal, politicians change color like chameleons. We dont know what led Yadav, who once presented himself as the symbol of divisive politics, to now prioritize hill-plain unity, development and prosperity.

Perhaps because those who are said to be providing funds to his party saw no future in investing in his cause, perhaps Yadav realized he was in the wrong direction, perhaps he thinks he will be able to make an impact in Nepali politics only when he can rise above regional politics, or perhaps he realized the actors and intelligentsia he had relied on in the past were bent on pushing the country to endless chaoswe wont know unless he comes clean on this himself. Whatever the reason, his U-turn at this point means a lot in national politics and for this he should be thanked.

For one, with FSFN on election board, he has left almost no option for RJPN leaders but to join the second phase. If they stay out, they might lose their political space to FSFN, Nepali Congress or even CPN-UML. The restlessness in RJPN rank and file is also apparent. While leaders are threatening obstruction, boycott and protests in Kathmandu, cadres on the ground are secretly campaigning.

RJPN has a difficult choice: come join election and be part of constitution implementation or collude with secessionists to fuel violence so that innocent people get killed, which in turn can be used as an excuse to defer election or can be sold for electoral gains or to justify their possible tilt towards secessionists. Lets believe RJPN leaders wont opt for this destabilizing and dangerous option.

RJPN leaders, like Upendra Yadav, will also have to come to a kind of compromise, sooner or later.

Broadly, Yadavs conciliatory gesture reflects whats fundamentally wrong with the way politicians in Nepal do politics.

Yadav and his colleagues in RJPN today had started 2015 Madhes Movement on the foundation of hate and propaganda. They promised to hive off entire Madhes from hills to create provinces, and projected hill dwellers, rather than those few at the helm, as enemies of Madhes. They interpreted remarks of few hill leaders in Kathmandu as collective voice of hill community towards Madhes. So their demands veered from one extreme to another. They later presented a 26-point demand as their bottom line, and next they came up with 11-point demand.

Today they have made declaration of martyrdom for those killed in police clash, compensation for the victims, and withdrawal of cases against their cadres minimum conditions for creating an environment for them to join the election. When you begin with wrong premises, you do not reach the right goal. When you start out with agendas founded on emotions rather than reasons, agendas which broader section of the society thinks are wrong, compromise is where every such movement ends.

Madhesi leaders have rightly said current amendment bill is flexible compared to what they had been demanding in 2015. For the foreseeable future nothing more may be done on citizenship (rather than tweaking provisions here and there) or letting Federal Commission to settle the federal boundaries.

Already they have interpreted it as a sign of the oppressive and affluent Khas Arya not conceding to genuine demands of oppressed Madhesis. But come to think of it: when certain Madhesi agendas cant even be met by a government amicable to Madhesi interests , and a compromise solution is opposed across party lines, rather than blaming those critical of those demands as enemies of Madhes, it would also be wise to review viability of those demands.

However high you climb the ladder of radicalism and emotionality, in politics, sooner or later you will have to come to real ground. Every radical and aggressive posture is finally tested on platform of rationalism and pragmatism. Anarchism has the power to wreck damage, sometimes irreversible, but it does not last.

Upendra Yadav seems to have taken this message to his heart. RJPN leaders should follow suit. Have faith in your followers and they will vote for you.

Twitter: @mahabirpaudyal

Read more from the original source:

Return to pragmatism - Republica

Simply affirming someone’s presence a great gift – Times Record News

The Rev. Father Peter Kavanaugh, St. Benedict Orthodox Church, Wichita Falls 12:02 a.m. CT June 10, 2017

Father Peter Kavanaugh is the priest at St. Benedict Orthodox Church in Wichita Falls.(Photo: Times Record News file)Buy Photo

I will never forget Susan. She was sitting in her wheelchair when I first met her. Her hair was disheveled. The expression on her face was confused. She looked into the distance with a vacant stare and waved her hand to and fro, senselessly. She did not recognize her family when they came to visit her. She did not remember the parents that raised her, the meal on which she dined that morning, nor the words spoken to her by the nurse only minutes before. Here, in the assisted living home, Susan spent the last several years of her life a frail, quiet, and for the most part, forgotten person.

The final season in life is full of profound changes. In some instances, this is a time of joy, forgiveness, revelation, and wisdom. When given the opportunity to reflect and share ones legacy with younger generations, some discover new perspectives on life, and may, for the first time, become concerned with the eternal and lasting. Unfortunately, old age can also be full of losses. Many suffer terribly when their bodies and minds slowly stop working. Old age may involve a loss of autonomy, self-respect, or even purpose. Susans situation is in no way unusual. Alzheimers and memory-loss often give rise to the most challenging situations in aging. In the light of these losses and changes, the Church cant be silent. We Christians have to look deep within our scriptures and traditions to find ways to reach out to our parents and family who are struggling with late old age.

One afternoon, I decided to spend a few minutes with Susan. She said hello and then became silent. I chatted about nothing in particular at first, and soon felt awkward and uncomfortable. So, not knowing what to do, I arose to exit. Immediately, Susan turned to me, and with words steeped in emotion and loneliness, asked me: Where are you going? I was taken aback thoroughly and sat down once again. This time I merely took her hand into mine and gazed into her eyes.

From there on, whenever I entered a room with Susan in it, her face lit up with joy and eagerness. She could not remember me on a cognitive level, but she certainly did on an entirely different level. I learned an invaluable lesson: how to be comfortable with silence, and to simply be present. In this way, we shared conversations through mere eye contact, and formed one of the most profound relationships I have known. I will never forget the brightness, transparency, and life of her eyes. There is no room for doubt, that underneath the disease, underneath the quiet, vacant, and wrinkled face, there was a living person needing love.

What does it mean to be a person? The world has all kinds of answers to this. Today, we tend to define ourselves by our accomplishments, possessions, or our social status, and on and on. But old age forces us to reexamine. A gerontologist named Glen Weaver writes, The cruelest irony of contemporary culture may be that many who thought they had found their identities in the individualism, rationalism, romanticism, and materialism of western modernity now find these foundations crumbling beneath them. While I worked as a chaplain in a memory-care center, I often heard family saying, She is no longer the same person, The spouse I married has disappeared, or We lost him years before he died. What do we say?

Perhaps the churchs greatest gift to us when faced with these trials is its affirmation of personhood. We are not, in fact, defined by our accomplishments or even our memories. Each and every one of us is a unique person made in the image of God, with a body and a soul. Paul writes, Therefore we do not lose heart, but though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner man is being renewed day by day (2 Cor. 4:16). In Christ, we trust that no matter how much the body fades and no matter what we lose in this life, the core of who we are is eternal and infinitely valuable.

What does happen to a person when they seem swallowed up by a disease? Christians have asked this for hundreds of years. In fact, in the sixth century, a church leader in Jerusalem, known as John the Solitary, also faced the question. He suggested that we can think of the soul as a musician, and the body as the musicians instrument. When a cord in a zither, or a pipe in an organ is damaged, it is not the finger that plays upon them that is at fault, but rather it is the artistic activity of the finger that is impeded from sounding forth by the zithers cords or the organs pipe because the defects are in the instrument. In other words, when the body stops working correctly, the soul remains alive and present, but is unable to communicate effectively.

No matter what happens to a person, the person is still alive and still with us. We can all help our parents, or siblings, or loved ones by simply loving them as they are. This is what Susan taught me. We didnt need to talk. We didnt need to do anything. All she yearned for was to be seen and loved as a person. All I needed to do was to slow down and be present with her. Ill never forget Susan, and I look forward to getting to know her better in the life to come.

Read or Share this story: http://wtrne.ws/2s76SBA

Continue reading here:

Simply affirming someone's presence a great gift - Times Record News

The Real Bane of the Humanities: Critical Reading – Ricochet.com

I have a BA in Philosophy and MA in Theology. The more I read in my fields, the more I find that my training is outside the norm. In both programs that I was involved in, almost all of my professors would hammer any paper they got if it didnt adhere to the Principle of Charity. For them it was important that you assumed that the people you were studying (Locke, Plato, Sartre, Calvin, Frame, etc) were at least as smart as you, a lowly and ignorant student. If you found a supposed contradiction in their writings you had to do your best to find a way to reconcile the contradiction before attacking it. It was assumed that they were smart enough to see obvious problems and avoid them if possible. We also read the primary texts of each of these writers foremost, not commentaries.

This led to actual learning on my part. Looking so hard at a text of Rousseau (who I despise as a thinker), and trying to see what he was saying from his point of view made me understand what he was trying to say, and taught me a lot about the French Revolution, and the Romantic and Socialist thought which sprang from him. It also allowed me to be influenced and to argue better against those that agreed with him far more than I did. This goes for all the works that I read in my education.

It turns out that isnt how most students in humanities were and are being taught. Rather, they are following the path laid out by the Higher Critics of the Bible from the 18th century. They are taught to find a supposed contradiction and amplify it without any attempt to reconcile it. (1 Kings says that 26,357 people died here and 1 Chronicles says only 26,000! The Bible is false!) When the supposed contradiction is found, you amplify it to the point where you either dismiss the entire work, or to dismiss it as authoritative in any way that challenges yourself and your preconceptions.

This is the end game of Post-Modernism, which is an outgrowth of Existentialism, which is an outgrowth of Romantic thought, which is an outgrowth of Kantianism, which is an outgrowth of Rationalism, which is an outgrowth of Nominalism, so it goes back a ways. The hope was that this would demystify texts and foster the self-discovery of the reader, to lower the text and raise the reader. But what it really does is impoverish the reader.

So many people in my circles (and it is getting worse) will have read Plato (or more likely, a commentary on him), but will have no idea what he actually said. They get to the first hard passage, superficially compare that with an earlier passage, find a simple change in what was said and then reject the whole body of his work.

They are never taught Irony, Hyperbole, Rhetorical Nuance, or anything that leads one to be a good reader. As a result, they dont marinate in the good and the bad of Plato, and have learned nothing from him. A good reader of this type will be able to dismiss everyone that could teach them anything apart from the self and its preconceptions. As a result of this type of reading, we have very well read people that are incredibly dumb. (Dumb, not stupid or ignorant. The stupid and ignorant can still be taught, but dumb cuts them off from learning because they have the material but have rejected it so thoroughly that they can never be reached with its knowledge.)

These are our elites! They can intimidate with the long list of books and articles they have read, but they havent learned anything from that list. Well read imbeciles that shut down an argument by saying you sound like Hobbes, have you read him? No? well I have so you need to shut up. This is what Ben Sasse is talking about in his new book. They have looked at words, but they have never been taught how to read.

Read the original here:

The Real Bane of the Humanities: Critical Reading - Ricochet.com

From Japanese Gardens to New York Towers: Transcending Borders With an Iranian Photographer – HuffPost

With millions of people posting photos online every day, many people believe that professional photography is in jeopardy. But fine art photographer Mehrdad Naraghi is not one of them.

The simplification of photography provides more chances for artists to use the medium to express themselves, says Naraghi, whose project, Japanese Gardens, was the recipient of the 2014 PHOTOQUAI Residencies Award supported by Muse du Quai Branly in Paris.

Yet the ubiquitous of digital technology does carry its own dangers, notes Naraghi. If a photographer is preoccupied with technique more than an internal search and a meaningful way to express him or herself, things become difficult, Naraghi, who was born and raised in Tehran, told me in a recent interview in New York City.

With his blurring of geographical markers and dreamlike imagery, Naragahi's photography is the visual embodiment of Gabriel Garcia Marquez's magical realism. We dont have any borders in dreamswe can be anywhere in our dreams, he says.

Naraghis quiet, still and opaque images, often seen only through slivers of light, demand the viewers studied attention. The quick visual impact common and expected in Western art is not to be found in his work, which invites the viewer to explore and wander slowly through his evocative images.

Naraghis photos have been exhibited in galleries in China, France, Iran, the Netherlands, the UAE, the US and the UK, and published in prominent art magazines and books, including Different Sames: New Perspectives in Iranian Contemporary Art, Connaissance des Arts (No 21) and La Photographie Iranienne, (Un regard Sur la Creation Contemporaine en Iran).

Excerpts from the interview follow:

One of the characteristics of your work is the blurred geographical traces in your photos, to the point where it is not clear at all in which city or country the photographs were taken. Once geographical identifiers are lost, viewers of your photographs face a global space. What should the viewer be looking for in this space?

The atmosphere of my work is dreamlike, and we dont have any borders in dreamswe can be anywhere in our dreams. In order to create this atmosphere, I avoid using elements that have specific geographic markers.

Just as people outside Iran cannot tell my nationality only from my appearance, this is also true about my art. We live at a time when our differences are no longer as visible on the surface, but found in deeper layers, layers that are formed from history, collective memory and the political conditions of our individual geographies.

Your photographs have been exhibited in countries such as China, the Netherlands, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and France, and you are in the U.S. now. What differences have you observed in the way this diverse audience has viewed your work?

By Mehrdad Naraghi

When I work within the realm of dreams, borders disappear, including those among my audience. I work in a realm that is shared by all human beings. In this respect, my work is similar to that of Andrei Tarkovsky, whose films depict a Russian location but have global audience, or Hayo Miyasaki, whose animations reflect Japan but have followers all over the world.

Perhaps the only border that can be defined is between Eastern and Western audiences. Subjects that are not based on rationalism or logic but instead rely more on intuition are more easily accepted by Eastern audiences. Eastern audiences have a different sensibility that allows time for study and reflection. Of course, this is a generalization and it is not possible to separate the two audiences with certainty. The only thing I can say with certainty is that audiences who are not dreamers relate less to my work.

I have also come to realize that as an artist from the Middle East, an artist who carries with him the memory of revolution and war, I feel closer to pain and am drawn to artwork that reflects this pain. This is something shared by many Iranian artists. Recently, after attending a Roger Waters concert in New York (he is a legend in Iran!), I realized that Iranians relate to his music on such a deep level because the issues he addresses, such as dictatorship, war and resistance, are a part of our daily lives, not an abstract or historical memory.

In a recent visit to the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, I viewed works by Andy Warhol and Anselm Kiefer, and my identification with political upheaval was reinforced. I saw that as much as Warhols pop art is foreign to me, the pain and destruction in Kiefers works is familiar to me.

In the Fairyland collection, we face a labyrinth-like atmosphere. Although the photos are of accessible subjects, the lines, colors, and objects do not allow the audience to move easily between the pieces. The viewer needs to linger and search for other layers. This is complex simplicity. Fairyland feels like Japanese Haiku or Hafez poetry. Each time we approach it, we face a different perception of the piece. What kind of professional or artistic experiences led to this collection?

This collection (and my other collections) were not developed with a pre-defined plan. I see myself more as a member of the audience to my works, than as its creator. When I am faced with questions about my work it often takes a long time before I find answers to those questions, and even then, they are tentative answers! In effect, I review my own works just as I would other artists works, and I ponder them. I can only say that in the formation of this collection, the secretive aspect of nature, as well as the collective depression of Iranians, played roles.

In Zen teaching, it is said that the sound of one hand clapping exists. According to this teaching, the sound exists in the atmosphere and through clapping we only hear it. I believe that more than creating an art piece, the artist is just a transmitter, like a radio that makes the waves audible, but does not produce the sounds we hear!

Photo by: Mehrdad Naraghi

In several of your photography collections, there are very few humans present. Why is that?

I believe that the presence of humanstheir clothing, facial expression and even the way they stand, can completely affect and dominate the frame and dictate a direction to the audience which distances the work from the atmosphere I had in mind.

I also feel that when people get in front of a camera, they often start acting and become unnatural and consequently the work becomes unnatural and cheapened, too. This problem pops up more in cinema and stage photography (a field which is of interest to many Iranian photographers these days). Film directors either use professional actors who are able to act naturally in front of a camera, or, like Abbas Kiarostami, obtain excellent acting out of non-actors.

Photographers such as Sally Mann or Emmet Gowin, tend to photograph individuals who are very close to them, individuals who dont feel like a stranger around the camera; or, like Jeff Wall, they photograph arranged stages in such a way that they appear natural, and both of these are very difficult to manage. Very few photographers have explored different things in this area.

As I am interested in the work of painters, I follow and photograph the subjects used in the paintings, such as nature. Nevertheless I hope to work on humans and figures too someday, although it will be a difficult challenge.

In all your five collections available on your website (Work, Home, Fairyland, Japanese Gardens and City), the imagery is reminiscent of the supernatural literary style used by writers such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez, or the poetic literature used in the German poet Hermann Hesses poems. How much has your photography been affected by literature and poetry?

Poetry, fiction, cinema and music that disconnects us from the world of reality even for a few moments have entirely affected and continue to affect my work. For me, poetry holds a special place. As an Iranian, I feel closer to the realm of poetry, as this is a distinctive aspect of Iranian culture, and one which runs through our daily lives.

When I talk about my interest in dreamlike spaces in art or literature, I am not talking about entirely imaginative and fantasy spaces, such as what we see in Harry Potter stories. Rather, I am talking about building a channel between reality and dreams, like in Haruki Murakami works, where the real and unreal worlds run in parallel, and they meet at some points but the reader does not recognize whether the events are unfolding in reality, or in ones imagination. Its a pendulum-like motion between reality and imagination.

photo by: Mehrdad Naraghi

What limitations do you see for expressing your feelings, thoughts and artistic creativity in photography? Have you ever been in a situation where you put your camera aside, because you thought it could not do justice to the situation?

Photography is the most limited artistic medium for showing dream-like spaces. As a painter or sculptor, you can create a piece 100% based on your imagination. But photography is based on reality; it documents, and you can never photograph nothing! On the other hand, this characteristic makes photography very interesting to meputting the audience in limbo between reality and dream. Looking at my works, the audience knows that because these are photographs, this space must have existed in real life, but due to lighting and color conditions, they dont see anything reflective of reality in them. The audience is put in a position where the line between reality and dream is minimized.

To what extent are photography and camera a means and to what extent an end? Is it possible that someday you might choose forms of artistic expression other than photography?

The camera and photography are only a medium of expression for me. Due to my deep interest in paintings, I have always created photographs with a painting-like quality and this method is in contradiction with the realistic nature of photography. I also use photographic errorssome intentional, others notto create the imagery and evoke the effects I am seeking.

Any form of artistic expression brings its own limitations, which are in contrast with the imaginations lack of borders. An artist who possesses different skills can constantly create new artistic works and be freed from repetition. As Abbas Kiarostami said in one of his interviews, I never think about what my next film would be, because if an idea is suitable for the medium of cinema, I would make a film. Otherwise, I would either paint, photograph, or write poetry.

In recent years, I have started experimenting with poetry, painting and film, and I hope I will be able to present works in these areas in the coming years.

By Mehrdad Naraghi

New York is a seductive city for photography. Do you have any photography projects focused on New York? Has your experiences with the city and your relationships with its people and photographers affected your work?

New York has a unique character. My work here has become closer to documentary photography. New York is a city where reality has a solid presence and this constricts the atmosphere for poetic thinking and dreaming. The hardships of living in New York may be one of the reasons why one is constantly faced with reality in this city and not allowed to daydream too much. I have only lived in this city for six months, but I hope to stay longer to develop a deeper experience with it. I publish my experiences with New York through daily postings of photographs and videos on my Instagram page.

At a time when everyone has a high quality digital camera on his or her cell phone, and considering the democratization of photography and existence of hundreds of millions of photographers, where do you see the role and place of fine art photography?

In my opinion, while the space has become more difficult and restricted for photographers, for many artists who use photography as their medium, this has also made things easier. An artist always uses artistic media for expressing his personal views, and for this reason, the simplification of photography provides more chances for the artists to use the medium to express themselves. Conversely, if a photographer is preoccupied with technique and the medium of photography more than an internal search and a meaningful way to express him or herself, things become difficult.

In the past, the difficult part of photography lay in the utilization of a camera; now the difficult part has shifted to the editing and selection of photographs. With digital capabilities, you can have tens of frames from each scene, and with software capabilities, you can make hundreds of changes on each frame. Under these circumstances, if the photographer does not know what he or she wants or is trying to express, they will be lost in a labyrinth of images.

This is not only limited to photography. It is now possible to make a cinematic film with a cell phone. With the reduction in the prices of 3D printers, it is also now easy to create sculptures. This happened to graphic designers years ago, where PhotoShop provided graphics skills to the masses. At the time, many graphic designers resisted computer graphics. But technological advancements create restrictions only for individuals who rely solely on technique for their creations. Some may believe the time for certain media such as photography or painting has ended, but this is true only for artists who have nothing else to say. No media is ever finished. It is only an artist who may be finished.

By Mehrdad Naraghi

*A version of this story was published on GlobalVoices.org

Start your workday the right way with the news that matters most.

Original post:

From Japanese Gardens to New York Towers: Transcending Borders With an Iranian Photographer - HuffPost

The Troubled History of Horse Meat in America – The Atlantic

President Donald Trump wants to cut a budget the Bureau of Land Management uses to care for wild horses. Instead of paying to feed them, he has proposed lifting restrictions preventing the sale of American mustangs to horse meat dealers who supply Canadian and Mexican slaughterhouses.

Horse meat, or chevaline, as its supporters have rebranded it, looks like beef, but darker, with coarser grain and yellow fat. It seems healthy enough, boasting almost as much omega-3 fatty acids as farmed salmon and twice as much iron as steak. But horse meat has always lurked in the shadow of beef in the United States. Its supply and demand are irregular, and its regulation is minimal. Horse meats cheapness and resemblance to beef make it easy to sneak into sausages and ground meat. Horse lovers are committed and formidable opponents of the industry, too.

The management of wild horse herds is a complex issue, which might create difficulty for Trump. Horse meat has a long history of causing problems for American politicians.

* * *

Horses originated in North America. They departed for Eurasia when the climate cooled in the Pleistocene, only to return thousands of years later with the conquistadors. Horses became a taboo meat in the ancient Middle East, possibly because they were associated with companionship, royalty, and war. The Book of Leviticus rules out eating horse, and in 732 Pope Gregory III instructed his subjects to stop eating horse because it was an impure and detestable pagan meat. As butchers formed guilds, they too strengthened the distinction between their work and that of the knacker, who broke down old horses into unclean meat and parts. By the 16th century, hippophagythe practice of eating horse meathad become a capital offense in France.

However, a combination of Enlightenment rationalism, the Napoleonic Wars, and a rising population of urban working horses led European nations to experiment with horse meat in the 19th century. Gradually, the taboo fell. Horses were killed in specialist abattoirs, and their meat was sold in separate butcher shops, where it remained marginalized. Britain alone rejected hippophagy, perhaps because it could source adequate red meat from its empire.

America also needed no horse meat. For one part, the Pilgrims had brought the European prohibition on eating horse flesh, inherited from the pre-Christian tradition. But for another, by the 1700s the New World was a place of carnivorous abundance. Even the Civil War caused beef prices to fall, thanks to a wartime surplus and new access to Western cattle ranges. Innovations in meat production, from transport by rail to packing plants and refrigeration, further increased the sense of plenty. Periodic rises in the price of beef were never enough to put horse on the American plate.

Besides, horse meat was considered un-American. Nineteenth-century newspapers abound with ghoulish accounts of the rise of hippophagy in the Old World. In these narratives, horse meat is the food of poverty, war, social breakdown, and revolutioneverything new migrants had left behind. Nihilists share horse carcasses in Russia; wretched Frenchmen gnaw on cab horses in besieged Paris; poor Berliners slurp on horse soup.

But in the 1890s, a new American horse meat industry arose, if awkwardly. With the appearance of the electric street car and the battery-powered automobile, the era of the horse as a transportation technology was ending. American entrepreneurs proposed canning unwanted horses for sale in the Old World, paying hefty bonds to guarantee they wouldnt sell their goods at home. But Europe had higher standards and didnt like the intrusion of American meat onto its home market. U.S. aversion to regulation had led to food scares and poisonings. When French and German consuls visited a Chicago abattoir suspected of selling diseased horse to Europe, opponents tried to smear the U.S. Agriculture secretary, who had previously intervened. By 1896, the fledgling industry was faltering: Belgium barred U.S. horse meat, Chicagoans were rumored to be eating chevaline unwittingly, and the price of horses had fallen so drastically that their flesh was being fed to chickens because it was cheaper than corn.

In 1899, horse meat was dragged into one of the highest-profile food scandals of the century: the notorious Beef Court investigating how American soldiers fighting in the Spanish-American War ended up poisoned by their own corned meat. Many speculated wrongly that the contaminated beef was in fact horse meat. The first decade of Americas horse meat industry had been an unprofitable, ill-regulated disaster for the countrys reputation. The new regulations put in place in the 1906 Pure Food Act could not reverse this overnight.

* * *

When beef prices rose as canners shipped it abroad during World War I, Americans finally discovered horse steak. By 1919, Congress was persuaded to authorize the Department of Agriculture to provide official inspections and stamps for American horse meat, although as soon as beef returned after the war, most citizens abandoned chevaline.

The end of the war meant another drop in demand for range-bred horses no longer needed on the Western Front. A dealer, Philip Chappel, found a new use for them: Ken-L-Ration, the first commercial canned dog food. His success attracted perhaps the first direct action in the name of animal liberation: A miner named Frank Litts twice attempted to dynamite his Rockford, Illinois packing plant.

During World War II food shortages, horse meat once again found its way to American tables, but the post-war backlash was rapid. Horse meat became a political insult. You dont want your administration to be known as a horse meat administration, do you? the former New York Mayor Fiorello La Guardia demanded of his successor William ODwyer. President Truman was nicknamed Horse meat Harry by Republicans during food shortages in the run up to the 1948 Beefsteak Election. In 1951, reporters asked if there would be a Horse meat Congress, one that put the old gray mare on the family dinner table. When Adlai Stevenson ran for president in 1952, he was also taunted as Horse meat Adlai thanks to a Mafia scam uncovered in Illinois when he was governor.

Although work horses vanished by the 1970s and mustangs were finally under federal protection, the growing number of leisure horses led to another surge in horse slaughter. The 1973 oil crisis pushed up the price of beef and, inevitably, domestic horse meat sales rose. Protestors picketed stores on horseback, and Pennsylvania Senator Paul S. Schweiker floated a bill banning the sale of horse meat for human consumption.

But once again the bubble burst. Competition sent beef prices into freefall. Even poor Americans didnt need to buy the poor mans beef, so U.S. manufacturers continued to export horse meat to Europe and Asia. Politicians began to apply pressure. In the early 1980s, Montana and Texas senators shamed the Navy into removing horse meat from commissary stores. The few remaining horse-packing plants dwindled during a market squeeze that also drove down welfare standards. Sick, injured, or distressed horses were driven long distances to slaughter under poor conditions.

In 1997, the Los Angeles Times broke the news that 90 percent of the mustangs removed from the range by the Bureau of Land Management had been sold on for meat by their supposed adopters. An Oregon horse abattoir called Cavel West was named in the report. It burned down that July, in an attack claimed by the Animal Liberation Front on behalf of the mustangs. The members of the ALF cell responsible were tried for terrorism, but Cavel West was never rebuilt. Nonviolent activists also applied pressure to the horse meat business, with California banning the transport and sale of horses for meat.

Activists and politicians worked to shut down the remaining abattoirs in the years that followed. In early September 2006, the Horse Slaughter Prevention Act passed the U.S. House, with Republican John Sweeney calling the horse meat business one of the most inhumane, brutal and shady practices going on in the United States today. Horse slaughter was not outlawed, but both federal and commercial funding for inspections was canceled, effectively shutting down the business.

Meanwhile, the town of Kaufman, Texas, mobilized against the Belgian-owned abattoir on their outskirts that paid little tax but spilled blood into the sewage system. The plant, along with another in Fort Worth, were closed. In DeKalb, Illinois, the only remaining American horse meat plant burned down in unexplained circumstances. The owners were prevented from rebuilding, as Illinois once more passed a law to stop the horse meat business. Horse slaughter ceased on U.S. soil, at least for domestic use as food. Even so, American horses were still being transported long distance to Mexican and Canadian abattoirs.

* * *

The 2009 financial crisis dealt the equestrian industry a heavy blow. The pro-slaughter lobby, backed by a 2011 GAO study, suggested that American horses had suffered, as owners no longer receiving meat money would not pay to dispose of them. Groups like United Horsemen coopted Tea Party rhetoric to compare animal-welfare campaigners to the Nazis. Opponents pointed out that poor paperwork meant many slaughter-bound horses had been treated by drugs that should have ruled them out of the food chain. Across America, both sides clashed when Obama signed a new law lifting the ban on funding for inspections. New abattoirs were proposed, but town after town blocked the measures. The 2014 Obama budget once more ruled out a revival. Meanwhile, the horses continued to be shipped to Mexico and Canada.

Today, all the familiar contradictions of the American horse meat business are playing out again, as Trump looks toward horse meat as a cost-cutting measure. Ranges are overflowing with mustangs. Animal-welfare information has disappeared from government websites, and the administration is rumored to have called on the GAO to launch another study into the benefits of building domestic abattoirs.

And yet, without adequate funding for proper inspections in a reborn U.S. horse meat industry, the market might languish. Europe is already skeptical of Mexican and Canadian exports sourced from the United States, making horse meat less profitable anyway.

Forever marginal, always unsteady, the business of packing and selling the poor mans beef could boom and crash again in America. If it does, Trump might find himself sporting a new political epithet: Horse-Meat Donny.

This article appears courtesy of Object Lessons.

See the original post:

The Troubled History of Horse Meat in America - The Atlantic

Letters to Editor June 7 – Curry Coastal Pilot

A-A+

Suicide intervention

What would you do if you were driving across Thomas Creek Bridge and saw a distressed person standing on the rail about to jump?

If a close friend suffering from depression called you late at night and said they intended to end their life before morning, would you know what to say? Would you know what to do?

AllCare Health is sponsoring an award-winning two-day workshop that answers those questions. ASIST (Applied Suicide Intervention Skills Training) teaches participants the skills to recognize when someone is at risk of suicide and how to provide for their immediate safety. The workshop will be held in the library at Brookings-Harbor High School, June 28 and 29. No formal training is necessary to learn suicide first aid skills, anyone over 16 may attend the workshop.

The workshops full value of $220 per person, which includes lunch both days and all training materials, is available to Curry County residents for only $65, with the remainder of the fee paid by AllCare Health.

Scholarships are available to help cover the $65 registration fee if needed. For professionals, 12 hours of Continuing Education (CEU) credits are available.

To register for workshop, go to http://bit.ly/2pbnvri.

For more info about ASIST, a program of LivingWorks, visit http://www.livingworks.net/asist.

If you have questions about the workshop, contact me at Kevin Roeckl at (541) 469-7673 or email: oregonboy1@charter.net

Kevin Roeckl

spokesperson for the Curry ASIST workshop Planning Team, AllCare Healths Community Advisory Council

Global warning hoax

Buddhas rejection of self, made sense to Pyrrho of Greece, who traveled to India with Alexander the Great and interacted with Buddhist philosophers.

Pyrrho taught that nothing is truly knowable and as a result, education, philosophy, and science declined in Greece. Bacon and Galileo believed in the scientific method and Gods word. Modern science was born in critique of Aristotelian rationalism. The scientific method is subservient to observed facts. One contrary observed fact can destroy any theory. Religious zealots who suppress true science and the Bible are not true Christians.

Bill Clinton, Al Gore and former United Nations IPPC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Chief Rajendra Pachauri all promote Michael Manns hockey stick graphic, which shows 1,500 years of stable global temperature and then a sharp increase in temperature due to increased CO2 caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

However, peer review panels showed Manns conclusions are not supported by data.

The Cambria and Medieval warm periods were warmer than today. The 1990s are not the warmest decade ever. In previous periods, elephants and tigers lived in tropical forests in the Arctic, north of Siberia. Human activity contributes only 3.4 percent to CO2 levels. Nature create

96.6 percent of the increase or decrease CO2 levels. Rising levels of carbon dioxide follow higher global temperatures, as oceans release carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Progressive liberals created human-caused global warming as their method of attacking free enterprise and capitalism. Clinton, Gore and Pachauri preach the evils of over-consumption, over-population and capitalism. However, elite liberals seem to live lavish lifestyles with private jets, big homes and consumption of as much capital and promiscuity as they can.

Dr. Steve Johnston

Brookings

17426776

See the original post here:

Letters to Editor June 7 - Curry Coastal Pilot

A labyrinth is coming to Washington – Observer-Reporter

Washington Health Systems Wilfred R. Cameron Wellness Center is about to open a new labyrinth, thanks to Scott Township resident Dorit Brauer, labyrinth creator and owner of The Brauer Institute for Holistic Medicine.

Designing this particular labyrinth was remarkably special for Brauer, as it is the first hospital-affiliated labyrinth in Western Pennsylvania, though she also has designed labyrinths in several other locations, too, including Ohio, California and even Germany and Israel.

I love every labyrinth Ive created because the experiences it generated and the connections to the people who walked it are always profound, Brauer says of her work. It is an enriching experience, and every single labyrinth walk has the potential to change how you see the world. It is a spiritual transformation power tool and therefore, every experience contains its own special gift.

Labyrinths are considered sacred circles found in every culture around the globe and date back thousands of years the circle has no beginning and no end. It is a doorway to another dimension, and it allows us to become whole and experience oneness, fulfilling the deepest yearning of the human soul, says Brauer, who also authored the book Girls Dont Ride Motorbikes A Spiritual Adventure Into Lifes Labyrinth. The sacred circle represents our origin and final destination, our divine essence that exists beyond time and space.

Though labyrinths may appear similar to mazes, which became popular during the period of rationalism in the 15th century while emphasizing reasoning and thinking, Brauer says there are distinct differences.

A maze forces you to make choices and reach dead ends, she says, but a labyrinth allows you to reach states of clarity, particularly during troubled times and turmoil, and its single-winding path invites you to give up control and relax.

As you walk through a labyrinth, Brauer suggests considering the three Rs:

Release: Release everything that does not serve your highest good. Exhale all concerns, worries, painful memories, aches from your body and beliefs and perceptions that do not resonate with the light.

Receive: As for guidance to lifes challenges. Be assured that the answers to your questions will emerge in the days following your labyrinth walk. Visualize breathing in and breathing out the light. Let your light shine bright and radiant.

Reflect: Trace your steps back out of the labyrinth. Count your blessings and all the good that you have received throughout your life. Focus on happy memories, moments of joy and love. Reflect and embrace everything that is good and nourishes your soul.

Walking through a labyrinth offers many benefits, Brauer notes. Individuals have noticed stress reduction, clarity, inner peace, self-discovery and much more. Since it is essentially a walking meditation, the positive benefits associated to meditation also apply to labyrinth walking. Labyrinths are even becoming increasingly popular in hospital settings, such as the new one at the Cameron Wellness Center.

Brauer says she first learned about labyrinths when she was growing up in Europe, but became more involved with them when she was planning a cross-country road trip for her 40th birthday in 2006.

I knew that I was embarking on a spiritual journey and that I wanted to write a book to share what I had learned, she says. Then I discovered the Labyrinth Locator and found very interesting labyrinths along my itinerary. I wanted to learn more and participated in a labyrinth facilitator training with Dr. Lauren Artress, who was then the Canon of Grace Cathedral in San Francisco and author of Walking a Sacred Path: Rediscovering the Labyrinth as a Spiritual Practice.

Since then, Brauer has created more than 100 labyrinths, many of them temporary that could be found in nature, at churches, or for childrens birthday parties and other events such as Farm to Table Pittsburgh, the Healthy Womens Expo at the David L. Lawrence Convention Center and in corporate settings for team building workshops.

She advises that the best way to find local labyrinths is to visit the World Wide Labyrinth Locator at labyrinthlocator.com and enter your zip code.

To see the new labyrinth that she designed on the walking trail behind the Cameron Wellness Center, stop by the opening ceremony scheduled for 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. on June 10.

More:

A labyrinth is coming to Washington - Observer-Reporter

Modi governments greatest trick: Hate the intellectual – DailyO

In a recent debate over Kashmir, the Twitter handle of the Republic TV, a reliable guide to the dominant state-supported narrative on any issue, belted out: Why intellectualise the problem? Tweet using #NationFirstNoCompromise and speak out.

In another debate, headlined as "Indian against Anti-Nationals", an RSS functionary noted that anti-nationals are of two types: Those who terrorise and those who provide intellectual justification."

Major Gaurav Arya, an in-house expert of the Republic TV, asserted that stone-pelters ought to be declared as terrorists, but are protected by the intellectual ideology weaved around them.

This deliberate opposition between intellectual opinion and "national interest" is not only a constant trope of the Republic TV, but also that of government spokesmen (although, lately, it has been hard to discern the difference between the two).

For almost every major problem Kashmir, Maoism, communalism, Pakistan the government and its enablers have devised a way to deflect all responsibility from its own failures towards a cabal of intellectual insurgents JNU type academics, "Lutyens' journalists", human rights activists, liberal writers, pro-pakistan peaceniks and so forth.

The term intellectual that relates to the ability to think and understand complicated things has itself become somewhat of a slur today. The popular demons in the dominant narrative academics, journalists, human rights activists, writers, rationalists are all persons engaged in professions that require them to think critically and rationally about issues of society and culture.

'This unwillingness or inability to compromise almost always leads to violence, witness the unending violence and repression in Kashmir.'

Unsurprisingly, the views of these groups of people often collide with the worldview of the Sangh Parivar, an institution whose value system is diametrically opposite to the values held by them. The Sangh and their millions of followers privilege values of obedience, loyalty, hierarchy and suspect values of individualism, rationalism and critical thinking. The rise of the Sangh Parivar as the pre-eminent force in Indian culture and politics has therefore inexorably reduced intellectuals from an object of respect to an object of popular loathing.

Richard Hofstadter, historian and author of the acclaimed book, Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, defined intellectualism as the understanding of human society in terms of balance of forces and interests based upon the continuing process of compromise. Intellectualism, Hofstadter writes, is sensitive to nuances and sees things in degrees, and is essentially relativist and sceptical.

The present government represents one of our most anti-intellectual governments ever not merely because of its zealous devotion to its (right-wing) ideology, but because of its imperviousness to nuanced thinking and utter rejection of compromise as an essential tool of politics.

The discourse of the government, and the dominant media, is stepped in absolute moral terms, of right and wrong, where compromise is seen as weakness, or worse. The latest illustration is the discourse on Kashmir, where both the government and dominant TV channnels such as Times Now and Republic, have painted the separatists as evil traitors, with whom talks are an unforgivable compromise.

This unwillingness or inability to compromise almost always leads to violence, witness the unending violence and repression in Kashmir. Or look at the recurring episodes of vigilante violence all over the country, a natural consequence of taking an absolutist moral stance on beef eating, one that leaves no room for individual choice.

The violence and the hatred are but the sordid consequences of the fundamental vice a dominant mood of anti-intellectualism. As the Financial Times famously commented in the aftermath of Brexit: When (British Conservative, pro-Brexit politician) Michael Gove said the British people are sick of experts he was right. But can anybody tell me the last time a prevailing culture if anti-intellectualism has lead to anything other than bigotry?."

We have had a right-wing government before, under whom we did not experience a widespread surge of ideologically driven violence as we are witnessing today. Thats because Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a broader-minded person than Modi, had the ability to compromise, and understood that imposing a singular-ideological vision on a diverse country would only lead to violence and instability.

His repeated attempts at talks with Pakistan despite major betrayals, and his outreach and talks with Hurriyat would surely have been characetrised as anti-national treachery in the current atmosphere.

Indeed, Arun Shourie, a prominent member of Vajpayees cabinet, has famously termed the present government as not just anti-intellectual, but anti-intellect.

When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross, Sinclair Lewis had warned. While it would be a stretch to label it fascism, the current atmosphere of overbearing authoritarianism in our country is certainly wrapped in the flag and carries a trishul. The flag is used not to only muzzle dissenting voices, but to smother the very act of critical thinking.

Unquestioning obedience is demanded, any doubts or questions raised over the dominant narrative on Kashmir, Pakistan, Maoists, beef, academic freedom automatically consigns one to the detestable camp of anti-nationals.

Conformity is viewed as a sign of patriotism, while critical thinking is seen as tantamount to treachery.

Demonetisation was a perfect illustration of the morality play our rulers weave. In a digital version of Freudian slip, the word is sometimes autocorrected on the phone as demonisation, which is perhaps not altogether far from what the exercise was intended to accomplish, as it did with great success.

It not only painted the entire opposition as corrupt and self-serving, but more broadly tarnished anyone questioning the rationale or effectiveness of the move as selfish and unpatriotic. The trope of evoking soldiers to make us happily stand in endless lines was telling; for at that moment we were all conscripted as soldiers for the nation, and like good soldiers we were meant to obey and sacrifice without any questions or complaints.

In this militaristic view of society order and discipline is paramount, thinking and rational inquiry are signs of weakness and liberal decadence. Hard work, the PM suggested , was superior to Harvard.

It must be noted that of all the appeals made by the PM to the citizens to gather support for demonetisation, almost every argument was aimed towards the heart, to emotions and morality; none to reason or economic logic. Inevitably, while the economics of demonetisation failed miserably, the politics of it won handsomely.

HL Mencken noted that the most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. The most dangerous prevailing superstition in our country is the unthinking devotion to a narrow-minded concept of nationalism. The fact that many of us today justify things such as the beating up or killing of humans in the name of a scared animal, or tying up a citizen to a jeep and parading him around, or the demonisation of academics, journalists and minorities, or the elevation of a hate-spewing priest to lead a state, is evidence enough that many of us have, in Menckens words, stopped thinking things out for ourselves.

That is the greatest political triumph of the government of the day, as well as the greatest tragedy for the health of our democracy.

Also read: Tough times ahead: Anti-Modi is the new 'intellectual'

Continue reading here:

Modi governments greatest trick: Hate the intellectual - DailyO