democracy,  shmemocracy

I heard an Indian news anchor interviewed on the radio yesterday about the DNC. He made a comment about how Indians were "...wondering why, in the world's most powerful democracy, that there are only two political parties. In India, there are numerouse political parties."

Hmmm, could it be that we have a crappy democracy?

svaw chat

As most of you know, I work in the field of domestic violence. I also chair a local Violence Against Women (VAW) committee. Amnesty has a two year campaign on VAW that started this year. Yesterday they had an all-day online chat with one of their state coordinators. I had submitted a question prior to the chat, and Elizabeth responded to it. I thought it might be of interest to SAS’ers as it is about institutions and social change – I was curious to know how a non-sociologist would respond (and hoped it would give me SOME ideas). My question and her response is here:

Question Submitted by John:
Hello I am a sociologist and as such, see much of the continued incidence and prevalence of VAW as being rooted in our institutions and/or social structure. Institutions, by their very nature are quite stable, so the are very resistant to change. So, my question is, does anyone have any specific tactics on how to change our institutions? I think that we need all of the current tactics that we have PLUS ones that are specifically designed to change, modify and/or replace our current institutions. Are you aware of any tactics that are designed to do precisely that? Thanks much and thanks for this initiative.

Elizabeth Jennings answers:
Hi, John. You’re right: Changing institutions can be very difficult. Generally, it happens from three directions: From above (government laws and policies that force institutions to act in a non-discriminatory way), from below (grassroots pressure and cultural change to end gender-based discrimination), and from within (among staff and leaders in institutions that want to create a culture that respects all people). Ending violence against women in the U.S. military is just one example of a current effort to change an institution at all three levels. Through the AI Stop Violence Against Women Campaign, a grassroots effort is underway to pressure U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to develop a military-wide protocol to address domestic violence of service members and service members’ spouses, and to address sexual assault of female soldiers by their colleagues. AI’s top-down and bottom-up efforts to end violence against women in the U.S. military supports the long-standing work being done by U.S. military personnel (men and women, enlisted and officers) who are trying to change the culture and process of the armed services from the inside out in order to ensure that women may serve their country without fear of other soldiers. To learn how to take action on this particular institution-changing issue, go to http://www.amnestyusa.org/stopviolence/actions.do

The summary of the entire chat can be found here:
<http://www.amnestyusa.org/askamnesty/live/display.php?topic=17>

can i pick another planet to live on??????????

just sent this to the same sociology list...

I was listening to the radio about the 9-11 report and something struck me – made me think about my post last week on threshold and systems…

Essentially the 9-11 report blames the SYSTEM, not any individuals; if you recall, I think it was the Chairman (Kean) who said something to the effect of, “we are not in the blame business;” the report on the 94 incidences of abuse blames INDIVIDUALS (aberrations), not the system.

So…

9-11:                 system failure (no apparent individual failings)
94 abuses:        individual aberrations (no apparent systemic failing)

Makes even less sense now…one conclusion I can draw is that the farther up the food chain one is, the less likelihood there is for any accountability. Notice that not one elected official has been fired, removed, resigned, re-assigned, etc. for 9-11 (of if they have, it hasn’t made any of the news that I read, and I DO read a lot of it). I guess if one can successfully fault the “system” for a failing, there is no need for anything like that.

I seriously doubt, however that those military persons who committed those “aberrant” acts of abuse are going to be afforded such a defense.

This IS all a bad dream, right?

what's the threshold?

from a post i sent to an sociology list...

I have been reading about the 94 incidents of prisoner abuse and how these do not indicate a “systemic” problem. I find this very interesting as I wonder what is the threshold for # of incidents that WOULD trigger characterization as a systemic problem? Needless to say, their current characterization of it NOT being systemic doesn’t make sense to me. Despite the actual # of persons involved in the abuse, it was apparent in the Taguba report (and I believe he said so himself) that at least Abu Ghraib was a systemic problem in that it was a breakdown of the system which allowed the service personnel to commit the abuses.

I also recall what W. Edwards Deming (“father” of TQM) posited as a truism…when you have a failing in an organization, 10% of the time it is due to individual failing, and 90% of the time it is due to the system failing. Ironically, when I first started looking into TQM some years ago, some of the best info on its utilization came from the military.

a noble man

i read Meeting Jesus again for the first time back in May. my first real thought was, "the bastards, all this time i have been thinking i am not worthy of God's love and in reality, i am simply because i am." i was ready to throw the book across the room. not because of what Borg was saying, but because of the implications of what he was saying and they relevance that they had for my life. i had been duped, tricked, manipulated by that rigid and authoritarian Catholic school structure all "in the name of God" and now Borg was telling me that I didn't need to be. the friggin "good news" is that Jesus lives in all of us -- we just need to realize that. it has nothing to do with earning His love or any other crap.

anyway, i emailed Borg and thanked him for the great book -- it allowed me to be a Christian again (BTW, Christians, look out, I'm back).

he emailed me back. he is a noble man. next to my Guru, he is the sanest spiritual person going right now for me.

to sleep or not to sleep...

i realized yesterday when "trying" to take a nap that I could fall asleep almost instantly if i could let go enough. let go and fall asleep. my usual pattern is to think, think, think, drift, think, think, drift, think, drift, drift...and then wake up.

i think the solution is to just let go and relax and sleep.

imagine that. anxiety being my middle (perhaps first) name, this comes as a great surprise and in some respects, no surprise at all.

friday morning analytical rant

Sorry, time for one of these again…

What prompted it was Powell “clarifying” the terrorism report that was apparently misrepresented by the President (Prez says terrorism has declined; Powell corrects that it has, indeed increased and done so dramatically). I am just wondering when people will get tired of this? The transparency of this administration is so apparent to me – their affront to an open, (Ashcroft telling the Senate Judiciary Committee under oath that he would not release memoranda about what the Justice department advised the administration about use of torture – note that he may be in contempt of congress for not giving a reason why he is withholding this information) democratic (what has come to light about the use of torture and the President is that he was advised that he could, essentially be outside the law, i.e., not be held accountable, for the use of torture if the argument could be made that his okaying it was to ensure national security – now, think about this…a national leader who, for all intents and purposes, is outside of the law…whom does this conjure up in your mind? What kind of leader?) society. Their pattern of misrepresentation, denying information until their feet are held to the fire, serious and grave miscalculations about Iraq…and this from a Prez who promised to “restore dignity and integrity to the White House.” What duplicity.

Okay, I think the rant is done, now one to some analysis (with, perhaps some rant still left)

9-11…the 9-11 commission heard testimony from many people – many said that “even if they were able to piece together all of the disparate (and this is in question too, just how disparate all of it was) information, they still wouldn’t have been able to stop 9-11 because it had already been planned.” Huh? This would be like saying, “Well, it looks like there is a fleet of hostile nuclear subs off our coast, but we’re not really sure, and ya know, it looks like this has been planned for a long time, so there really isn’t anything we can do about it now.” If this is the best argument that they could come up with for their failure(s), then we are really in trouble.

Reagan…yes, I know that man was warm, apparently sincere, etc. But, he stated publicly once that “the US was not selling arms for hostages,” then a couple of months later said, “well, in my heart, I still believe that we did not sell arms for hostages, but the evidence appears to indicate otherwise” and he is known as the “great communicator?” Now, what does his prevarication communicate? That it is okay to break the law, and lie to people just so long as, in your heart you really believe what you are doing is right, despite evidence to the contrary. Hmmm, I wonder if that defense would work in court? “Ya know, I held the gun, and pulled the trigger, and yup, he died, but in my heart I truly believe that it was not ME that killed him, it was the GUN that did.” Yeah, makes sense to me.

Ray Charles death…hmmm, a week long remembrance for Reagan and a blip for Ray Charles? Not right. Who has the much better story to tell and contributed much more to world peace and understanding? A blind, black man who overcame all kinds of obstacles to be successful, was not bitter about any of it, never complained, worked his butt off his entire life, and his primary concern was with making people happy or…RR. No question in my mind – we should have a week long celebration for Ray, a national day of mourning, and have hundreds of eulogies, etc, for him…and I would LOVE to see Ray on the $100 bill (his contribution to the world is worth waaaaay more than $10, IMO).

Elderly men in my Sunday school class…now, I know that none of you know these guys, but they are an inspiration to me. We have two men that are over 80 in our class – they come every Sunday (one with his wife of 60 years, the other a widower), one bakes muffins for all the Sunday school classes every Sunday, works serving food to the congregation on Wednesday night, spent time in a WWII German prison camp is funny, irascible, and very, very kind. The other is a former missionary, wrote an article on Christianity and homosexuality (essentially how it was NOT Christian to condemn homosexuality) and the other day when a 50- something member of class who has hepatitis came in, got up, and helped him to a chair. Amazing. (Now, we have women that are equally as amazing, too. I focus on the men because they are role models to me). Two men, living quiet lives, serving others selflessly, and they are both considered to be “irrelevant” in our society because of their age. I hope I am equally as “irrelevant” when I get to be their age (assuming that I do, that is).

The culture of make believe…this is actually the title of an incredible book by Derrick Jensenthat is more about racism and hatred in our country, but I think that it is apropos here, too. I think it is time that we let go of the myths about America – we are the moral leader of the world, we are the best country in the world, we are the strongest country in the world, etc., not so much because they are wrong, but because they are not useful to us. Make believe in general is not useful. It is delusional. What we need is reality, honesty, accountability, and compassion. The hubris, arrogance, and ignorance that has become our cultural export is so disappointing and it cheapens what we have to offer the world as Americans, but more importantly, as human beings. People might say, “gee, John you don’t like America” – nope, not true. I don’t like bullshit. I don’t like make-believe. I like reality because then I know what the hell is going on and what we need to do about it to make it better. That is why I am a social scientist – so I can reasonable know what they hell is going on so I can do something about it. You cannot do something about make-believe, except to get rid of it. Trying to improve things on the basis of make-believe is inherently flawed. I don’t dislike America – I dislike the myths about America. I would much prefer to acknowledge what is REALLY going on in America and with Americans than pretend all of the other crap. Hell, I just said that I admire two Americans (the guys in my Sunday school class – well, actually 3 if you include Ray). But what I admire about them is NOT that they are Americans, but that they live(d) what they believed – they are honest, they serve others, they are compassionate, they admit their faults…they are real. No make believe, no bullshit. Amen to that.

I was going to add something about terrorism, but I am too tired – this writing takes a lot out of me. If I get refreshed, I might post it later.

Live long and prosper…

so true, yet so hard to remember...

From Eknath Easwaran:

In the ultimate analysis, our resentments and hostilities are
not against others. They are against our own alienation from our
native state, which is cosmic consciousness, Christ-consciousness,
Krishna-consciousness. All the time we are being nudged by some
latent force within us, trying to remind us what our native state
is. Our senses are turned outwards and we are adepts at personal
profit and pleasure, so we do not like to hear these little
reminders; but the needling goes on.

our unconscious collective

couple of posts to a sociology list about our "sleeping" collective, that if awakened, we could really change the way things are...

posted on 6/2/04:

I try and get students to realize that simply by "going through the motions" each day they create the structure of our society...coming to class they maintain the institution of education, buying stuff, they maintain the institution of the economy, paying taxes, they maintain the institution of gov't, etc. I try and emphasize that WE are society, it is not something "out there."

I think that if a one-day national embargo against Exxon, Mobil, whomever worked, i.e., around the country NO ONE bought any gas from Exxon, Mobil, etc., people would have tangible evidence that it is US that is the economy, US that is "the market," etc. Getting this to occur is quite another matter, as evidenced by it not happening yet.

I do think that most people need to witness the effects of our collective behavior to truly get a sense of how we "create" society through all of our daily actions.

As such, IMO, we really CAN create any society that we want -- it is simple to do something different, but it is not easy. This is true for individuals and especially true for groups/cultures (the not being easy part).

I also get students to think about group arrangements that support human thriving (a "good" family, a Buddhist monastery, some schools, etc) and ask them to identify what it is about those arrangements, the cultural content of those structures, that consistently promotes and maintains human thriving. Once we identify those, then I say, "Well, all we got to do now is get those things going on a national/global basis..." How does that happen? Everyone acting in accordance with what we identified, creating that kind of social arrangement every day through their daily actions.

Simple, but not easy.

In short, we create the current structures, why not create some different ones? As sociologists, we know how structures are created, the question is, what KIND of structures should be created? This past weekend I presented a workshop on "Human Rights as Organizing Principles for Family/Community Life" at a home-schooling conference. Granted, they are eruo-centric and could use some updating, but IMO, the UDHR is one place to start.

posted on 6/3/04:

(My perspective was challenged as being naive and individualistic)

This is not what I was saying. I was saying something similar to Marx, actually, and that is, if we as a collective realize that we ARE a collective and we can use our collective power to create something (which is what we do anyway), why not create something that truly promotes human thriving?

I do, however, think that individual actions can and do make a difference. Do they radically change the social structure? Guess it depends on whom the person is that is acting. I suspect that ANY action could have a profound effect given the right circumstances. I am surely not going to stop doing things that I think are beneficial simply because I think they won't make a difference -- isn't this characteristic of the apathetic malaise that infects our culture currently to some extent?

I think that if there is naiveté in this perspective it lies with all of us whom think that we can do nothing and so we don't. Again, the issue is the "class consciousness" that needs to occur -- doesn't really matter what the trigger is, what matters is that it arises.

I certainly don't think that classroom teaching is the sole way of getting the world to be different. In fact, I think that "education" has little effect in making things different. The factors that I am familiar with, that, IMO, DO have an influence are desire and motivation.

Right now, many folks' desire and motivation are purely self-centered -- "Gotta get what I want and need and make sure no one gets it before me or takes it away once I get it" -- this is the American way, yes?

Hard to think about others and making the world a better place when you are obsessed with getting all you can before you die (and rising gas prices, the threat of terrorism forever on the horizon, etc.)

Education can only have so much effect on this kind of orientation to life.

Sanity

Spent this last weekend here -- what a wonderful oasis from the (sur)real world we currently inhabit. To be surrounded by sane, caring, parents who actually are interested in trying to do what is best for their children is inspiring. The kids are just incredible...an anecdote...

I was walking through the lobby on Sunday, late afternoon and noticed this tween boy putting up his laptop. I asked him if the wi-fi was working in that area. He said it was. I told him how it hadn't worked for me, blah, blah, blah. Then he asked me how he could organize a session to teach other kids how to write computer games. Now, this was on Sunday, the second (and last full day) into the conference. I told him to talk to the two organizers, tell them what he wanted to do, get a room and then let people know about it. I mentioned that the talent show was coming up that night and that the MC could announce all the details then. He said okay, thanked me, and we parted company.

I saw him again at the talent show, pointed out one of the organizers to him, and he said that had decided to just invite people by word of mouth.

Twenty minutes later, he is walking around the dance floor on his hands -- one of his many talents that he received much applause for.

At midnight, I went to the auditorium to watch a horror film by one the presenters at the conference. I had attended his session on Saturday entitled, "How to make a movie for under $1,000" and had wanted to see one of his features.

I go into the room, and here is the tween whom I had spoken to earlier, with a handful of other kids, and he has his laptop hooked up to an LCD projector and is holding a class on how to create computer games.

Fortunately, the movie director didn't show up -- if he had, I would have told him that the kids got here first and we were out of luck.

amazing what kids can do if given some support, space, and opportunity.

empathy, fear and neo-cons (oh, my!)

my response to a colleague's post about the need for us to be more empathetic to other cultures (and anyone other than ourselves, for that matter):

Interesting idea…distribution of empathy, access to empathy…seems like we are bankrupt of the product (empathy), despite the fact that the lines of distribution are in place. Of course, being empathetic means being vulnerable, Lord knows ‘merikans aren’t really keen on doing that right now. The neo-cons are really good at force-feeding fear to all of us. I also think that they are really good at tapping into our cultural conditioning of being abused…they act just like those authoritarian care-givers that many of us were raised with. When someone is confronted with similar behavior as an adult, it is not uncommon for them to just respond like they did all those many years growing up…”I know nothing, the authority is always right, the authority is like God, etc.” I know that despite the fact that intellectually I know that they are lying, self-serving bastards, when they start talking, there is a part of me (emotional) that just goes into some kind of automatic fear of challenging them, conceding that I AM stupid and that they are right.

Alice Miller has written some great material on this.

surprise, surprise

It doesn't (nor did it) take a Ph.D. to figure this one out BEFORE the war started. The consequences of a radically, fundamentalist run government (OURS, that is).

Jesus, the bummer

I was at our local Satsang for Ammachi on Friday night. Typically, we sing songs, chat, meditate and pray. While singing a song about Krsna, I realized how different the Hindu religion is from mainstream Christianity. The Krsna story is a happy one, the songs about Krsna are happy, light, playful. The Jesus story (as typically told) is a bummer. Not because of Jesus, nor because of what happened, but because of the emphasis on the story. the whole thing about the cross and dying for our sins, is, IMO, not the main story. The main story is that here was this realized soul, living in a human body, who loved, loved, loved and died because he loved so much.

While growing up Catholic, I never understood the whole cross thing and I still don't -- it seems like a side note to the entire message. More reason to agonize about our humanity, more reason to fight against some group of people, etc. Again, the Jesus story is about love and ignorance...His love, our collective ignorance about His love.

So, what about we re-write the Jesus story and transform it from a bummer to a hummer (not the H2 kind)?

Watch out, The Republicans Are Coming!!!

See here for the announcement...

a bumper sticker i gotta make

Ignorant and Unethical! Hell, if its good enough for our President, its good enough for me!

Documentary on Republican Women

In case you haven't heard, there is a shocking, "tell all" documentary about Republican women coming out in June. Details here.

Yowza!

The Jim Crow Museum of Racist Memorabilia

Now this is great applied sociology.

God Bless America, Goddamn it!!!!

Using those current events skills I learned in seventh grade, I offer the following:

In case you haven’t been following the Ahmed Chalabi story, allow me to briefly summarize who this guy is and why this is so ironic (and truly frightening in how it reflects the leadership of our country)

Ahmed Chalabi:

* Is a convicted felon (in absentia) in Jordan
* Was one of the prime sources of info for the Pentagon on the alleged WMD stockpiles in Iraq
* Was a prime source of info on WMD’s and “all things bad in Iraq” to Judith Miller, star NY Times reporter
* Has been on the Pentagon payroll for years
* Has been discredited by the CIA and the State department
* Was flown into Iraq by the Pentagon days after Saddam lost leadership
* Is a current member of the Interim Iraqi gov’t
* Told a reporter that it didn’t matter if Saddam didn’t have WMD’s, what was relevant was that Saddam was gone (note that he made this statement after Iraq fell and after he allegedly told everyone and their brother unequivocally that Saddam HAD WMD’s)
* Is the uncle of the lawyer assigned the task of prosecuting Saddam for crimes against humanity
* Has recently been charged with making side deals in Iran about the future of Iraq

Oh, and ALL of this has been reported far and wide in the mainstream media, so if that little voice in your head says, “john is just overreacting” please note that I have simply gathered existing longitudinal data on this guy.

So, if the enemy of your enemy is your friend, and then turns out to not be your friend, what does that make him? And more importantly, YOU?

Damn, this international relations stuff REALLY is hard to follow – good thing we are the moral leaders of the entire world and that our morality is not based on self-serving situations and exigencies...and monkeys really DO fly out of my butt regularly!

SIN

not what you think, or, maybe not, check it out.

more temporary-emergent meaning...

My response on a sociology list I subscribe to:

To clarify my statement about empiricism a bit…(consequence for writing in haste)…

I don’t see a distinction between empiricism and humanism, although I would hazard a guess that committed positivists/empiricists would. I personally base my use of empiricism as an epistemology on humanistic values – I do not see it as an end in itself. I suspect that some, if not all, positivists would disagree with this and argue that positivism is value-free and objective (despite that fact that ALL IRB approved research is based on humanistic values).

I think that this strikes at the heart of the recent discussion. The notion that empiricism is somehow trans-cultural and therefore demonstrably universal and “objective” is intellectually untenable, IMO. Again, I refer to our inability to know, through the use of symbolic systems, anything that allegedly exists independently. I think it is absurd to consider that this kind of knowing is possible (a symbolic system – language – is an inherently CLOSED system – it is bounded). “Knowledge” of anything is inherently cultural – anything that is inherently cultural is not, by definition universal and/or objective. Again, I think that ethno points this out in spades (as does feminist literature – at least feminist sociological literature).

So, I see the limitations of empiricism and truly do not believe that the application of the scientific method, sans values leads anywhere – especially since it is not possible in the first place. The application of empiricism is a value-based action (valuing sensory data over some other kind of data).

I think that this is the distinction that needs to be acknowledged, i.e., the ridiculousness of claiming some kind of knowledge is objective and exists independent of culture. I am very much in favor of using empirical methods. I do not see then as producing knowledge, however, but UNDERSTANDING. I think that this is another crucial distinction that we neglect in social science. Again, I value verstehen as a methodology. Is it empirical? Of course. Is it objective and does it produce objective knowledge? Nope. Can and does it further understanding of self and others? If done properly, yes.

I see any type of methodology as being an iterative process that never arrives at any REAL (i.e., independent) solution. Can we as humans grow in the process of applying the scientific method and the values that underlie it? I think so…and I think that this is the true value of our discipline. Not some ridiculous notion that we are creating independent knowledge about the social world.