#236 / So Many People: Why?

  

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

The June 2026 edition of The Nation magazine included an article by Alex Shams. Shams' article was titled as follows: "Why Did So Many People Think This War Was A Good Idea?" The war referred to, initiated by our current president, is the War in Iran.

Shams' article is well worth reading, and focuses on support for the war inside Iran, and support from those Iranians living outside Iran. The article begins with a short summary of what the reader is going to be told. Here is what Shams says by way of his introduction to the article: "The story of how millions of Iranians fell for the regime-change fantasy." 

To let you in on at least one explanation advanced by Shams, many Iranians, both inside and outside Iran, apparently put a lot of faith in the guy who started the war, thinking that he truly was, as he has always claimed to be, really smart, and that he could certainly pull it all off. Hearing this, you probably don't immediately think of the following line from Bob Dylan, but I do (click the link for the lyrics to "Bob Dylan's 115th Dream"): 

I just said, "Good luck"

I will let anyone who becomes interested in the question addressed in this blog posting read the Shams' article themselves (I hope it will be available to non-subscribers). Here's the thought that I want to advance, both with specific reference to the War in Iran and with respect to war more generally (emphasis added): 

There was little discussion of how exactly military strikes would lead to the collapse of Iran’s government. But the possibility raised unrealistic expectations inside Iran. To millions of people still reeling from January’s mass killings, it offered a fantasy that the US could swoop in, remove the government, and replace it with something else—without touching the Iranian people. 

Almost overnight, Iranians who spoke out against war were accused of being “apologists” for the government. 

“Where were you when they massacred 40,000 people in January?” was one frequent refrain. (While the number of people killed in the crackdowns has been extensively debated, the reality is believed to be closer to a still-appalling 7,000 people.) 

“War will kill fewer people than the regime, so it will save lives in the long term. It’s simple math” was another. 

“What’s your alternative?” was yet a third. 

A quieter chorus warned against the lure of war. “We stand for peace,” Masoud Nikzadi, a historian in Tehran, wrote on Instagram. “We don’t need to explain a plan for why peace is necessary. Those who support war must explain how exactly it will bring freedom.” 

A collective of women from the Baloch minority, formed during the 2022 Woman Life Freedom protests, warned: “War should not be sold as an opportunity to people under oppression. Militarization…leads to social collapse and disintegration, just as happened in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria.” 

But these voices in Iran, lacking large social-media platforms, were drowned out by influencers and celebrities abroad, whose message was embraced by those within the country. 

 George Orwell got it right a long time ago.  "War" is NOT "Peace." And we don't achieve "peace" by pursuing "war."

Wouldn't it be great if we had a president who understood this fact?

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.thenation.com/article/world/iran-regime-change-fantasy/

#235 / Do You Want To Live To Be 100?

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

The New York Times is interested in hearing your thoughts about getting to live to be 100. Sound good? Or... do you have another thought? Here's the link, if you'd like to let The Times know what you think. Here's what I think:

I will be 83 years old on the day after Christmas, this year, and I have had a pretty significant and wonderful life. For twenty years, from 1975 to 1995, I served as an elected member of the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors, during a time of tumultuous politics in our local community. I was, in other words, elected five times in a row, retiring when I was fifty. At the end of 1999, the local newspaper (which never supported me politically) said that I was one of two people who had the most significant impact on Santa Cruz County during the 20th Century. That might actually be true! 

I went on to head up both a local and a statewide nonprofit corporation, both of them dedicated to the protection of California’s environment, and I taught for fourteen years in the Legal Studies Program at the University of California, Santa Cruz. For the last sixteen years, I have published this daily blog, called, “We Live In A Political World.” I have never missed a day!  My ideas about personal fulfilment (which The Times did want to hear about) do look a bit different now, from my current perspective, than they used to look when I was younger. Much more than I did before, I understand what a gift and a blessing it is to have been alive – and to be alive now. In a very real way, I now “Fear Not.” That is a change. 

Do I strive to live to be 100? I’d be glad to get there, but I am absolutely at peace with the reality of death, and my understanding of life is now more by way of celebration than striving. I have been married to a wonderful wife for fifty-seven years and have two children in their fifties - plus three grandchildren. Both my daughter and son, particularly, have helped me “appreciate,” not “strive,” as I look to the future adventures yet to come.

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/04/well/longevity-callout.html

 

#234 / Who Knows What About Whom?

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

The title of a Consortium News commentary dated June 11, 2026, reads as follows: "A Requiem For Privacy." The following observation, immediately following that title, tells us this: "On the eve of America’s 250th anniversary, Americans are asked to accept and pay for a government that knows more about us than we do about it."

For about ten years or so, I taught a course at the University of California, Santa Cruz that was titled, "Privacy, Technology, And Freedom." I am writing this blog posting to confirm exactly what Andrew P. Napolitano is telling us in that commentary linked above. 

When someone knows more about you than you do about them, the one who "knows more" has the upper hand. If Napolitano is right (and I am confirming that I believe that he is right) then "government" has the upper hand over the citizens, who are supposed to be in charge. 

That this is true will not come as any surprise to those reading this blog posting. That's my bet! I think that most Americans would probably agree with Napolitano's assessment. However, I am not so sure that the citizens who will find this assessment accurate fully understand the implications of what we are being told. 

We cannot, as citizens, be "in charge" of a government that knows more about us, individually and collectively, than we know about it. 

Conclusion? We need to change this situation! The next two elections will provide us a chance to do that - the "midterms" scheduled for this upcoming November, and then the next general election (including picking our next president) scheduled for 2028. 

If you, reading this, are a citizen of the United States of America who wants to make real what our Declaration of Independence proclaimed, 250 years ago, then let it be known that you are going to have to get together with others who feel the same way, and you are going to have to devote a considerable amount of time and effort to retaking control of the United States of America. On its current path, the "government" is on course to take totalitarian control of us!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://consortiumnews.com/2026/06/11/a-requiem-for-privacy/

#233 / Sal Si Puedes?

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I follow the weekly, "Notes From Home" column published each week by Trudy Wischemann. Her column appears in the local newspapers of several Central Valley communities. If you click the link that I have provided in the next line of this blog posting, you should be able to read her column titled, "Sal Si Puedes." That means, "Get Out If You Can." Actually, Wischemann is urging her readers to stay put, dig in, and fight back. Small farmers in California's Central Valley are under incredible economic pressure, and many are getting discouraged. 

In the column I have linked, Wischemann cites to Peter Mat­th­iessen’s book, Sal Si Puedes: Cesar Chavez and the New Amer­ican Revolu­tion. Here's her comment: 

Early in the book, Mat­th­iessen held out this hope: “Before this cen­tury is done, there will be an evol­u­tion in our val­ues and the val­ues of human soci­ety, not because man has become more civ­il­ized but because, on a blighted earth, he will have no choice.” 

I think that this is an accurate statement of where global warming has put us. As I am typing out these comments, in mid July, virtually the entire nation faces a massive "heat wave" unlike anything that we have experienced before. Sure, it's been terribly hot, before, but you don't have to be a climate scientist to begin appreciating the fact that our "climate" is definitely "changing." We are all affected, and we, collectively, are causing the problem.

Could this problem be a "blessing in disguise"? Matthiesen's comment seems to indicate that this might be true. It is now clear, for those who hadn't grasped this before, that we, and I do mean all of us, are "in this together." It is more and more obvious that nationalistic rivalries and wars, and divisive prejudices of all kinds, are no longer something in which we can indulge. We must collaborate, and help ourselves to stop damaging, and start repairing, our natural environment. 

What glorious opportunities we have ahead! 

We do, however, have to "stick around" and join the effort, and not think we can make an "individual" escape. Wischemann is right. "Sal Si Puedes" is the very opposite of what we need to be trying to do. Let the billionaires give it their best shot (because it's clear that Peter Thiel and many of the world's other billionaires really do think they can make a personal escape, somehow). 

Wave goodbye to them, and join hands. Maybe we might get in the mood by raising our voices in this song, inspiring when first heard, and still capable of getting us in the mood for what we need to do, right now. 

Lyrics: "We Are The World"

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credits:

https://midvalleytimes.com/article/opinion/2026/07/01/land-that-i-love/

#232 / The "Undertow Of "Can't" (And "Cant")

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

The other day, as I was making the bed, a phrase popped into my mind, completely unbidden, the origins of which remain unknown to me, though I am now retaining the phrase in my memory. Here is that phrase, which I think is a useful one: "The Undertow of Can't." 

The picture above accompanies an article on the Trip Advisor website about a bar named, "The Undertow." That's what came up when I first typed "Undertow" into my Internet search engine. I tried again, though I have, as you see, retained the picture that came up in my initial search. Another search on "undertow" got me the information I was looking for. Should you care to learn more about the dynamics of the offshore currents that exist under near-shore waves (as Wikipedia seems to define "undertow"), you can click right here. 

"Undertow" is, basically, not "visible," not even perceptible. You don't know it's out there, quite often, but it is out there, and if you are unlucky, and aren't really paying enough attention, it can suck you under and kill you. 

For someone who claims that "possibility" is "my category," the dangers of the "Undertow of Can't" are obvious. I have earlier told the story of how I was, as a young person, able to convince myself that I couldn't do things that I, actually, could do, but which I denied I could do. Read my description of how I got cured of this affliction in one of my "Father's Day Stories." I always want to say, "Thanks, Dad," for having hounded me into an understanding of how the "Undertow of Can't" can destroy your powers and possibilities before you even know they're gone.

Just to restate things, briefly, it is possible to convince yourself that you "can't" do something (that you quite probably actually "can" do), and this conviction - this "Undertow of Can't" - can come upon you unbidden, and suddenly, and kill the possibilities that ought to be inspiring you to the kind of action that can (and will) change the world. Change your world, and change the world. Both! 

Beware of "The Undertow of Can't"

Just as a kind of postscript to this thought, I realized, once I said that phrase out loud, that there is, in addition to an "Undertow of Can't," another kind, too. There is an "Undertow of Cant," where "cant" is what sometimes spills out of us, or over us, and of which there is a definite variety of "cant" that is "political" in content and context. 

Since we do, as I insist, "Live In A Political World," we need to be careful not to let our politics be carried away by unseen waves of "conventional or trite opinions or sentiments," as Merriam-Webster defines the word, "cant."

In the end, though, the real and significant danger I want to warn of, today, is the kind of "can't" that removes our ability to create the kind of world we need, and want. So, one more time: 

Beware of "The Undertow of Can't"

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credits:

https://www.tripadvisor.com/Attraction_Review-g34606-d1118423-Reviews-The_Undertow-St_Pete_Beach_Florida.html

#231 / NSPM-7 (My Statement)

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

The picture above, retrieved from an important article in The Nation magazine, shows our current president signing National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7). Please do click the link just provided, and read up on what Wikipedia has to say about this important document. Even better, click this link, for the actual text of NSPM-7. The following link will let you read that article in The Nation, which is titled, "The Chilling Trump Order Threatening All Americans."

"All Americans" includes you! And me, too, of course! 

This blog posting is my personal response to the potential "threat" against me, as identified in the article published in The Nation.

Essentially, what The Nation explains is that this new "National Security Presidential Memorandum," authored by our current president on September 25th of last year, may be utilized to charge and convict citizens (and others) with crimes, even when those prosecuted took no illegal action whatsoever. Such criminal prosecutions would be pursued based on court decisions that rely on a "so-called 'conspiracy doctrine,' which requires only agreement with the idea of an action, not action itself." In other words, "the government doesn't need to prove that anyone did anything, only that they talked about doing it, or associated with people who did."

As an example, if you or I were to join a peaceful protest demonstration, objecting to the conduct of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel in our local community, and then someone in the crowd did something illegal - like hitting a law enforcement officer over the head with a stick - all of those in the protest gathering might well be criminally prosecuted, even though they took no such action themselves, and were just exercising their First Amendment right to speak out on issues of concern to them, and to engage with others in a peaceful demonstration of their political views. The text of the Memorandum clearly suggests that the purpose of the Memorandum is to increase the prosecution of those who are exercising their First Amendment rights, as one way to discourage demonstrations in the first place. 

If you read all the materials highlighted in the first paragraph of this blog posting, you might well think twice about engaging in any kind of peaceful protest action. That, of course, seems to be one reason that our current president has promulgated NSPM-7, and has indicated that its objectives should be vigorously pursued by federal officials.

If you are not willing to give up your First Amendment right to engage in peaceful demonstrations and peaceful protests, it might well make sense to try to insulate yourself from the kind of prosecutions highlighted by The Nation. If the federal government carries through on its implied plan to prosecute people who "associate" with people who engage in arguably criminal conduct, and who support the "idea of an action," as opposed to being involved in any potentially criminal conduct themselves, it will be important to make clear in advance (to the greatest degree you can do so) that you do not "agree" with any kind of criminal conduct that might occur during a peaceful protest in which you are engaged.

Let me say, I do believe that our courts will not, ultimately, let the government convict and then penalize people who don't "do" anything that is illegal, themselves, but who merely exercise their right to assemble and to speak out about their political views. Nonetheless, as The Nation's article makes clear, the federal government may adopt a strategy of prosecuting people not guilty of any illegal "action," but who just hold views that are the same as someone who did do something illegal. 

I, personally, do not intend to curtail my First Amendment right to speak out on issues of concern to me, and to join, with others, to express my views. I want to repudiate any idea that I think I should be able to take any illegal action, myself, without facing possible prosecution for things that I actually do. "Action,"  however, is what might be grounds for criminal prosecution. If my actions are consistent with the law - and I understand that the law absolutely respects and includes my Constitutional right to assemble with others and to speak out on things I care about - then I should not be subjected to prosecution because someone else has done something that, arguably, violates the law. 

So, let me say the following, as clearly as I can: As of the date and time this blog posting is published, I want the following to be understood: I do not support, or advocate violent or illegal actions as a way to "make a statement," or as a way to achieve some political goal that I support. If someone whose political positions are consistent with my own political positions does something that is arguably illegal, the fact that I share their political positions, or was in the same geographic location that they were during some kind of protest or demonstration, is absolutely not my "agreement" to support their actions, whatever they may be, or may have been. I should be prosecuted for crimes only when I act against the law. 

And that's true for everyone!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/trump-nspm-7-repression/

#230 / The Winning Formula

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Ben Rhodes, an Obama Administration insider, is a person whose ideas about politics can be taken seriously. That's my judgment, at least. 

In the August 14, 2026, edition of The New York Times, Rhodes outlines what he calls "The Winning Formula For Democrats In "Red States." This is the hardcopy headline on his August 14th opinion column. When you click either that link, or the following link, and read Rhodes' column online, you'll run into a different headline: "He’s Young and Thoughtful, With Kennedyesque Good Looks. Can He Break the Republican Grip on His State?" The state at issue, incidentally, is Iowa. 

If you pay close attention, you will immediately note that the two headlines are incompatible - unless, that is, the "winning formula" for Democrats, in the upcoming midterm elections, is for all Democratic candidates to be "young," and "thoughtful," and to possess "Kennedyesque Good Looks." That doesn't, really, seem like a "formula," does it?

In fact, Rhodes isn't really betting on "good looks." Here is the "formula" he is advocating (emphasis added): 

For all our obsession with national politics and policies, the path out of corrupt, one-party government starts at the local level. That’s where you can take advantage of a party that has become lazy in power, build organizing muscle and test approaches that can be repurposed for other states or scaled up nationally.

As a former local government official (in a "non-partisan" office, by the way), I think the "formula" just highlighted is, in fact, a very real way forward towards political achievement and success, in a time in which our "partisan" politics is both perceived as, and actually is, "corrupt." 

Of course, while it is a lot easier to get people engaged in the thrilling adventure of "self-government" when they are operating at the "local" level, in the communities in which they live, the "formula" identified by Rhodes won't work at the "local" level any more than at the state or national level, if ordinary men and women don't get involved in politics themselves. 

I'm telling you (and I know about this), getting together with your friends, forming some kind of political "club," and working at the local level for political change (the kind of change that can transform our "political world" to achieve what we decide we want) is not only the high road to effective political power, it's a lot of fun!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/10/opinion/rob-sand-democrats-iowa.html

#229 / No Further Explanation Is Required

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I have been writing blog postings for a long time. I put up one blog posting per day, and I am now in my 16th year of doing that. During all that time, I have frequently found myself posting photos with a title along the lines of "1,000 Words." A picture, it is sometimes said, is "worth 1,000 words." You can "Google" the phrase if you think you need to verify how extensively this claim is made.

Essentially, the statement that "a picture is worth 1,000 Words" is a statement that the picture alone is enough. No further explanation is required. I last discussed the "1,000 Words" phenomenon in April of this year, and you can click right here to review that blog posting, which chronicles and links some of my past "1,000 Words" items. Here is the picture that went along with that April blog posting (I really like it):

That picture, I'm thinking, could be an advertisement for Wallace Baine's recent book, Founding Daughter. As for the picture at the top (no commentary, of course, is needed), it comes from a New York Times' opinion column, by a Canadian novelist, Stephen Marche, which is headlined, "The Zombification Of The United States." You can read Marche's column, which I would certainly encourage, by clicking that link, but there's a real message in the photo that accompanied Marche's column (the photo reproduced at the top of this blog posting), and I don't think that any further explanation is required, to make clear its meaning!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credits:

(1) - https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/09/opinion/america-world-us-isolation.html
(2) - https://www.gapatton.net/2026/04/96-another-1000-words-item.html

#228 / Lo Nuestro Es Pasar

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Here is what Wikipedia says about Antonio Machado, who is pictured above: 

Antonio Machado was a Spanish poet and one of the leading figures of the Spanish literary movement known as the Generation of '98. His work, initially modernist, evolved towards an intimate form of symbolism with romantic traits. He gradually developed a style characterized by both a commitment with humanity on one side and an almost Taoist contemplation of existence on the other, a synthesis that, according to Machado, echoed the most ancient popular wisdom. 

I know Machado mainly through his poem, "Caminante," which might be translated as "Traveler." "Caminante" is a rather short poem:

Caminante, son tus huellas el camino y nada más;
Caminante, no hay camino, se hace camino al andar.
Al andar se hace el camino, y al volver la vista atrás
se ve la senda que nunca se ha de volver a pisar.
Caminante, no hay camino sino estelas en la mar.

I would translate Machado's poem this way:

Traveler, your footsteps are the path, and nothing more. 

Traveler, there isn't any path; we make our path by walking. 

By walking, we make our path, and when we look back, 

We see a path that we will never be able to return to and walk again. 

Traveler, there isn't any path, just the traces of our footsteps on the sea.

While I have just said that I know Machado mainly through this poem, "Caminante," I actually know the poem through a song. To read the lyrics to the song, the only song on my "Memorial Playlist" that was not written by Bob Dylan, just click this link, and scroll down to that last song. That will get you to the lyrics, in Spanish, with my imperfect translation. 

Click right here to listen to Machado's poem, as sung by Joan Manuel Serrat! 

I hope you will. I think it is rather beautiful. 

In the longer, "song" version of Machado's poem, here is the beginning verse:

Todo pasa y todo queda,        Everything passes and everything remains,

Pero lo nuestro es pasar,        But our fate is to pass on.

Pasar haciendo caminos,       We pass on as we make pathways,

Caminos sobre la mar.           Pathways over the sea.

Truly an inspired poem, and song! Come fellow traveler, and sing it with me. And with Machado!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.modernfrescopaintings.com/antonio-machado-caminante/

#227 / One Of Those Rare, Historic Moments

  

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

America faces one of those rare, historic moments when government, business, schools and families could be working together to meet a truly generational challenge... So far, we’re blowing it.

The quote I have provided, above, comes from an article published in the July 11-12, 2026, edition of The Wall Street Journal. Click right here to read the article.

The article I have just linked is about AI, "Artificial Intelligence," and this article - typical of so much that we read, nowadays - talks about the challenges and opportunities involved in phasing out human ("real") intelligence, in favor of the "artificial" brand, which is, purportedly, so much better than the normal kind. 

I always remember the story of the Golden Calf when I read about the wonderful benefits in store for us, as we leave behind our own, natural intelligence, and begin to worship at the altar of one of our own, human creations, preferring what WE have made over what a "religious" person would say is the intelligence that God has given us. 

At any rate, I am featuring the bolded quote, above, not because it is about AI (the ellipsis marks the elimination of a reference to AI), but because I think this quote perfectly states a REAL historic moment in which we find ourselves, and a REAL "generational challenge" that we face. 

I am referring to the challenge of Global Warming. Click right here for an earlier blog posting highlighting how fraught this current, "historic moment" really is. Global Warming has put the whole world in danger. We are causing it, and we need to meet what is, in fact, a "generational" challenge, and devote ourselves, collectively, to doing everything we can to reverse what we have put in motion, and to limit the damage that is coming upon us. 

How are we doing, so far? Though written to address another issue entirely, that quote from The Wall Street Journal, as I have presented it at the start of this blog posting, perfectly sums up the status of our current response to the generational challenge of Global Warming: 

So far, we're blowing it!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/ai-doomerism-jim-vandehei-axios-9163dfd3

#226 / The Spectre Of Gen-Z Socialism

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

I find that some of the best political analysis available on American politics - analysis that really "tells it like it is" about politics in the United States - comes from The Guardian, which is published in Great Britain. Awhile back, for instance, The Guardian carried a story by Norman Solomon, entitled, "The Spectre Of Gen Z Socialism Is Haunting The World … According To The Economist." 

The article from The Economist, referenced in Solomon's story in The Guardian, was titled, "How To Fight Back Against Gen-Z Socialism." That was a cover story in The Economist, apparently, and here's the image that graced the cover: 

Solomon summarized The Economist's argument this way (emphasis added): 

“The first step,” the Economist urges, “is for free-market liberals to stop apologising. A series of popular criticisms of capitalism, each containing a grain of truth, has in aggregate obscured the fundamental wisdom that private enterprise is at the root of human prosperity.”

What is my reaction to the idea advanced by The Economist, and the claim that Gen-Z socialism is "haunting the world"? Here's my reaction: "Don't I wish!" Unfortunately, I am not seeing much of a Gen-Z revolt against the way the billionaires have preempted self-government in our fair country, cutting back on general social benefits while lowering taxes for the very rich. We can, however, hope! 

Norman Solomon seems equally unimpressed with the concerns raised by The Economist. I will quote, below, what Solomon says in response to The Economist's complaint that Gen-Z criticisms miss all the great benefits of capitalism (benefits, however, that don't extend to everyone, thus making problematic any claim that private enterprise is the cause of human prosperity, since "human" does seem to be an all-inclusive category.

Solomon's response follows (emphasis added): 

  

So come on, you free-market liberals. Recognize the danger that the youngest adult generation on both sides of the Atlantic is being swayed by the siren songs of socialism just because they don’t like vast income inequality and all the human suffering that comes with it. The Economist has sounded the alarm. Now it’s up to you to rescue us from the clear and present threat of social equity.

 

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credits:

(1) - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jun/09/gen-z-socialism-the-economist

(2) - https://www.economist.com/leaders/2026/06/04/how-to-fight-back-against-gen-z-socialism

#225 / August (And I Don't Mean The Month)

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Click here to learn something about August Wilson, who is the person pictured above.  He was a playwright. Heck, click right here to learn even more. 

This August (the month), I got to see TWO plays by Wilson, "Fences" and "King Hedley II." Both of these plays were packaged as part of programs that announced themselves as dedicated to Shakespeare. I'd put Wilson right up there! I want to recommend the two plays I just named. 

If you live in or near Santa Cruz County, consider going to the Santa Cruz Shakespeare website, and trying to get a ticket for "Fences." Click that link to see if you'll be lucky enough to be able to do that. Last chance will be on Friday, August 28th. 

I saw "King Hedley II" in Ashland, Oregon, where it was performed by the Oregon Shakespeare Festival. If you are up in that area, or are willing to make the drive (if you're not already up in that area), here's a link that will let you book a ticket. The OSF will be performing "King Hedley II" through October 24th. 

I really can't overstate how powerful and moving these two plays are. 

They're recommended!

They're worth a nice long drive!!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2023/aug/10/august-wilson-playwright-biography-film

#224 / Happiness Guru

 

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Laurie Santos, pictured above, does not call herself a "Happiness Guru." However, Santos does teach a class on happiness at Yale University, and her course is the most popular class in Yale's history - at least if a story in The New York Times Magazine can be believed. Luckily, you don't have to go to Yale to benefit from Santos' wisdom. She has a free online course called, "The Science of Well-Being." She also produces a podcast that she calls, "The Happiness Lab." 

So far, I am only familiar with what The Times has revealed about Santos, and here is one of her observations that I think is particularly worth passing along: Human connection is what makes us happy. Not "online" connection. Not politics by Zoom. Real, human-to-human interaction is the surest direct route to happiness. Please read the entire article, if you're not willing to take my word for it. Actually, I recommend that you read it even if you already agree!

Our politics, today, is a very angry politics. For instance, I am presenting, below, a couple of examples of the kind of comments I quite often receive in response to one, or another, of my Facebook postings. When I indicated that "I'd rather be excluded for those I include, rather than be included for those I exclude," here was a prompt response:

You are included into a sick fuck crowd that was created during the sixties. You represent a hate group that is far more evil than the Nazis or the KKK. You will never understand this until you die and meet with Satan.

One of my blog postings that might well suggest to a reader that I think that electing our current president was a "mistake," which I do, brought me this reaction:

It is truly unbelievable the stupidity of the Dem/RINO establishment. Genetically you have absolutely no connection with the great men and women that created the greatest nation on Earth. Your genes are those from lazy fat slobs, like Karl Marx, who’s [sic] hearts are filled with hatred and covet those who have intelligent and willing to work hard under the guidance of their savior and mighty God.

If The Declaration of Independence is to be believed, all persons (and not just citizens of the United States of America) have an unalienable right to "pursue Happiness." 

That means, among other things, that we have to stand back and let other people believe what they choose to believe (even if we are almost positive that those other people are wrong to believe what they do). 

Talking to others - and particularly to those with whom we disagree - is the way to a "happy," or at least a "happier" politics. Take it from Laurie Santos (the "Happiness Guru"). 

Maybe I'll take that online course!! Sounds like a good idea! And for anyone who makes comments like those I copied out above, I recommend that course for them, as well!!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/30/magazine/laurie-santos-interview.html

#223 / Worst War Ever

  

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

The guy pictured above, Robert Hubbell (an attorney, by the way), does a pretty good job, I think, of "decoding" what is actually going on in our national politics. For anyone reading this blog posting, but who is not already a subscriber to Hubbell's "Today's Edition," let me suggest, right here, that you subscribe yourself. Hubbell would appreciate your paid subscription, of course, but there is a "free" version.

On August 9th, Hubbell's newsletter had this title: "Trump’s new Iran war strategy: Pretend that it never happened." My immediate thought was this: wouldn't that be nice!

In fact, Hubbell immediately outlined what has, in fact, happened because of our current president's unilateral decision to launch a war against Iran - a "war" that has not been declared by our elected representatives in Congress, which is how our nation is supposed to "go to war," when the nation decides that it should. 

The Constitution, as all should know, requires a debate in Congress, and then a decision by Congress, whenever our nation chooses to go to war. When and if the nation does decide to go to war, our elected president is then the "Commander in Chief." However, it's Congress, not the "Commander in Chief," which is required to make the decision to go to war. As is obvious, Mr. "I, alone, can fix it," never got the message. Similarly, he also acts like he hasn't understood that "Executive Orders" do not create new laws, but are intended to provide direction to Executive Branch employees as to how to implement the laws enacted by Congress.

Well, enough talk about "American Government 101." Almost everyone reading this probably already knows how our government is supposed to work. It's just too bad that our current president either knows and doesn't care or doen't know at all. I think it's the former, but I am, truly, not sure about that!

Here are a few of Hubbell's observations about our current (undeclared) war against Iran:

Over the weekend, there was a major shift in Iran’s negotiating position for reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Iran had previously issued a set of preconditions for a nuclear deal; over the weekend, Iran attached those preconditions to reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The demands were issued by the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and likely reflect the ascendance of a more reactionary faction within Iran as unconfirmed rumors of Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei’s impending death circulate. See Iran Wire, Exclusive: Iranian Leaders are Concerned About Mojtaba Khamenei’s Worsening Health. The demands include:

Payment of billions of dollars in reparations to Iran for damage caused by the US air war against Iran. 

The release of all Iranian assets frozen by the US and its allies. 

The cessation of insulting or threatening language from the US government toward Iran. 

The cessation of the US naval blockade of Iran. 

The withdrawal of US troops from the region. 

The cessation of US military operations directed against Iran’s allies in the region....

 

As [a] WSJ news analysis ... notes, "For weeks, President Trump had been laying the groundwork to declare victory in the Iran war should Tehran fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, even floating the idea privately to senior aides that he’s willing to walk away without a nuclear deal, U.S. officials said." 

But that scaled-back objective became more difficult when Iran insisted Saturday on its highest price yet for permitting the free flow of traffic in the waterway, seeking billions of dollars in U.S. payments, the removal of American troops from the region and an end of the U.S. naval blockade, among other things.

Per the WSJ, the new criterion for victory is the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, regardless of Iran’s control over the strait. To state the obvious, reopening the strait under Iran’s control is a materially worse scenario than existed before the war.... Trump wants to find a pretext to walk away and pretend that the war never happened.

If we actually start following what is happening, we will understand what our undeclared war has accomplished: (1) we have spent billions of dollars, going further into debt, along with causing the deaths of thousands of people, many hundreds of them, at least, being Americans; (2) used up scarce military supplies, making the United States more vulnerable elsewhere in the world; and (3) made everything worse, and that we have particularly given Iran a control lever over energy supplies, worldwide. No elimination of any possible nuclear threat from Iran has or will occur, and nuclear proliferation has actually increased, given our current president's commitment to provide nuclear bomb-making materials to Saudi Arabia. 

I am, hereby, nominating the Iran War (a war never actually approved by the procedures spelled out in the Constitution) as: "The Worst War, Ever!"

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://roberthubbell.substack.com/podcast

#222 / Moral Injury

  

Click Here For The Blog In The Original

Not all injuries are "physical." A friend of mine recently raised his concern about potential "moral injuries." He is concerned about the plan to put young men on a Selective Service System list of those who may be drafted (no women will be included, as I understand the plans), and he is thinking ahead to those young men who will, once they are drafted into military service and sent out on military missions, suffer not only potential bodily injury, but also potential "moral injury." My friend has grandchildren. They're on his mind!

Here is a definition of moral injury:

Moral injury is the psychological, social, spiritual, and behavioural distress and impairment an individual experiences after their moral values are violated by themselves or others.

You can click right here for a more extensive definition and discussion of "moral injury." Moral injuries may result in PTSD - "Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder" - but such injuries can be real even if PTSD does not accompany them.

During the Vietnam War, young men were confronted, as I was, with a decision about what to do if they were drafted. A young man facing the military draft could qualify to be excluded from military service as a "conscientious objector," if that young man could demonstrate that he was "opposed to participation in war, in any form, by reason of his religious training or belief." Those were the "magic words" to qualify for C.O. (conscientious objector) status. Those who qualified as conscientious objectors, if drafted, would be required to do "alternative service," in lieu of "military service," and they would not be inducted into any branch of the military.

I, personally, decided that I was not only opposed to participation in war, in any form, but that I was opposed, in addition, to the entire "draft" system itself. I was, in other words, one of those "Boys Who Said No." My ability to "opt out" from military service, individually, by qualifying to do "alternative service," was not enough to make me comfortable with participating in the system as a whole. I didn't think in terms of the potential "moral injury" I might suffer if I did participate in the draft system, but I think it's fair to say that I might well have ended up with a "moral injury" had I registered with the Selective Service System (I did do that) and then excused myself from military service by establishing my bona fides as a C.O..

Like my friend, I have a couple of male grandsons, plus a granddaughter, too, and I think my friend's concern about "moral injury" is both relevant and timely. Young men who are thinking ahead (always a good thing to do) should consider attending a Quaker Meeting, and asking for some help and advice. 

That's what I did - and I am very happy that I did!

To Subscribe, Please Click This Link

Image Credit:

https://www.ohsrep.org.au/moral_injury_strong_predictor_of_ptsd_in_public_safety_personnel_sn_757