All things must come to an end, it is an inevitable part of the cycle of existence, all things must conclude.

Well, we're finally finished.

I said I would write a piece about each of Gandhi's Seven social sins, and now we're here at the end of the line with "Politics Without Principles."

I must admit that this is a tough topic for me because I've tuned out from politics over the past few months. I just got tired of the same trivial arguments, the ridiculous news coverage and the feeling that not much was going to change any time soon. Life, with all of its hardships, was complicated enough that it was easy to abandon my previous devotion to keeping up with the political world.

I offer no excuses, just the facts.

Plus, it's hard for me to think about the concept of politicians and principles. I'm not saying that all politicians are devoid of morals, but it's obvious that becoming a politician requires your morals to be fairly malleable. So, it's seems useless to talk about requiring politicians to have principles if we don't specify that those principles have to be absolute.

And that's a hard concept to sell in a world where people seem disinclined to understand nuance and inclined to distort everything. I guess it makes more sense to speak in cliches and vague euphemisms then to actually speak honestly and directly to the public.

Honestly, I've become so cynical that I don't expect many principles from politicians. I'll admit that I was caught up in the whole Obama movement, and, while I still think the brother will do a good job, the first 100 days of his tenure have driven home the fact that politicians can only do so much. I think he's a swell cat, but his outlook on life differs greatly from my own.

I guess I don't know what else to say about this sin, which is a bummer because I wanted to end this series on a high note. Oh well, some topics lend themselves to deep thinking, and other kind of make you say:

Duh.

Please let me know how you felt about the series, whether you found it useful or not. Thanks.

Share

Give It Up

This cat at my church came to me the other day with a proposition.

Seems like the church used to have a Boy Scout troop before I joined, and they are getting it started again. As part of that effort, they are starting something called "Explorers" and the guy was asking me if I might be interested in participating.

I was shook.

No, it's not because I'm scared of the Boy Scouts and their late night campfires. Nah, I was shook because I thought he was asking me for another chunk of my steadily dwindling personal time, and I was trying to figure out a way to decline without feeling like I was cheating God.

When I first decided to write about Gandhi's social sins, the sin of "Religion Without Sacrifice," was the one topic I couldn't wait to tackle. This sin cuts to the core of what I see as one of the major plagues on mankind.

It's not because all religious folks are bad people, or because they all refuse to sacrifice. However, many of us religious folks have focused on sacrificing in the wrong areas, and instead of making the world a better place, we've screwed things up horribly.

Look, I know we (and by "we" I mean Christians, since that's all I really know) try hard. Most of the church folks I know are just trying to live their lives in a better way. Sure, there are bad apples, but as a whole, I've found that believers of all colors and economic backgrounds care about serving God and being decent people.

As long as it's not too hard.

That's the catch. It can't be too hard. And when I say hard, I don't mean that most Christians refuse to do difficult tasks. Many believers have jobs or hobbies that require them to risk life and limb to make the world better. Or they may give massive amounts of their time and money to volunteer efforts. No, what I mean is that while folks might do difficult tasks, that don't do tasks that are difficult for them.

Now that's sounds kind of screwy, so let me break it down. I once told me wife that I don't have a problem with compromising, I just have a problem with compromising on things I care about. If she wants ice cream and I don't particularly care about ice cream, we can have whatever flavor she likes. If she wants to go to the movies, and I don't care about what movie we watch, then I might get stuck watching The Divine Secrets of the YaYa Sisterhood. (That really happened.)

Compromise comes easy on those situation because I'm not sacrificing anything. I don't really care about the outcome, so anything can happen. But, when it's an issue that's important to me, like something involving a large outlay of my money, then I become so stubborn that mules passing me by on the street do a double take.

Our faith should push us to places where we are uncomfortable, it should have us constantly reevaluating our lives and how we are living them. In fact, I think the biggest sacrifice any Christian can make is to sacrifice "comfort."

My point is that not only is it important to make sacrifices in the name of God, it's important to make the right sacrifices.

It's not enough to sacrifice money, if time is the thing that's really valuable in your life. It's not enough to be at every function, if the thing you're really miserly about is your money.

Attempting to establish a deep personal relationship with God without being willing to give up things you hold dear is foolish...

Oh, and I agreed to do the Explorers thing at church. Turns out they didn't even need an additional time commitment from me.

Too funy.


Share

Power Tools

It would be easy to talk about abortion here.

Or maybe eugenics, or plastic surgery, or cloning or even stem cells.

If I was going to discuss "Science Without Humanity" and I decided to focus on any of those topics, I'm sure the activity on this blog would spike. All of those topics are controversial enough that it's a pretty safe bet that folks would feel the need to share their opinions.

I'm going to avoid the easy route.

I read quite a few blogs, and one of them I visit is run by a cat who goes by the name of Denmark Vesey. I find his spot interesting because they are often talking about things I'm not familiar with, which means I'm guaranteed to learn something new. We may not agree on a lot of topics, but I don't have to agree with you to learn from you.

Anyway, one of the recurring topics over there is whether there are genetic differences between the races as far as intelligence. It's the whole "nature vs. nurture" argument, but with a lot more big words and obscure studies. Several of the commenters adamantly oppose the idea that race and intelligence are linked, while others think that's the only obvious conclusion. As a tangent from this argument, the cats over there often discuss whether a large scale mapping of human genomes is an undertaking worth pursuing.

See, scientists have already mapped the DNA of several individuals, but it wasn't until recently that a fairly large scale effort was made to look at groups. Of course, when you're talking about DNA, large scale means slightly more than a thousand instead of millions because of the complexity of the work.

Now, some folks are gung-ho about the project and the information it may provide about genetic differences between the races. They point to the medical benefits of such information and just the pure pursuit of knowledge. It all sounds wonderful.

But, other cats are skeptical about any endeavor that seeks to categorize folks by race, and then analyze their genes. I guess it smells a little too much like the early funk of eugenics. After all, there is the question of how people were divided into "races" in the first place, and then there is the question of how information about differences and similarities is going to be used.

See, the problem is that without humanity, or compassion, science can become a pretty powerful tool of evil. Depending on the results of the study, folks may justify longstanding biases and discrimination as being warranted based on the fact that certain "races" are in fact genetically inferior. After all, people have been trying to prove the inferiority of non-whites for generations, and that is the reason why there has traditionally been a pell-mell rush by folks to avoid being classified as "non-white."

Honestly, I don't have a problem with information, and I understand the value of the genome project. What I also understand is the evil that lurks in the hearts of men. I understand how science and scientific discoveries can be twisted and skewed to represent whatever folks want them to represent.

Gandhi warned against the blind devotion to science and knowledge because he understood that without a higher power or calling guiding us, human beings have a tendency to abuse these very powerful tools. I think Gandhi understood that the urge to build temples to ourselves, to create our own person godheads, is only aided by the power bestowed by science.

Mankind has always had trouble controlling this urge since our creation. Many among us have seen science as the perfect vehicle to allow us to assume a spot alongside God. Whether it was alchemy or the dark arts, mankind has yearned for the power that science can bestow upon us, and often using that power to benefit humanity is an afterthought.

I think science is amazing. It's wonderful and awe-inspiring. The possibility of learning how our genes work and how they control our lives is enticing. But, I also understand that until we as humans learn to temper our power with humanity, with ethics, with compassion, we are like little children playing with assault rifles.

And that's deadly.





Share

Ain't Nothing Common About It

"You got a lot of book learnin', but you ain't got the common sense of a fly sometimes."

Any of y'all ever had somebody say that to you, or something like it?

I have, and let me tell you, that is an uncomfortable experience.

Long time readers of the blog know I'm a fairly intelligent guy. (Let me make sure I don't cramp up from kissing my own butt.) At times in life I've been deemed extremely intelligent. Unfortunately, I've occasionally let that go to my head. My ego has always been a healthy size, but in certain situations, it's been known to start to look like Michael Clarke Duncan.

Whenever that's happened, God has found a way to take me down a few pegs, usually by reminding me of exactly how dumb I can be. Whether it be forcing me to talk about a subject I'm clueless about, or having me make a serious gaffe, any time my ego hits the 'roids, God is quick with the detox. I've learned over the years that just accumulating book learnin' doesn't do much good, if you don't have the common sense, or wisdom, to use that knowledge.

Which brings me to Gandhi's next social sin, knowledge without character.

I guess I could have discussed this topic from the aspect of having morals and letting those morals guide your use of knowledge. I thought about doing that for a while. After all, when I think of "character" I typically think of a value system, a "code."

But, character can also refer to temperament and personality. And that's where I think some knowledge seekers fall short. They allow their new found knowledge to affect their personalities and temperament to the point that it's easy to wonder if they have a lick of "common sense."

Common sense is a misunderstood phrase. Most of us think of some sort of homespun, down-home wisdom when we think of it, and that's only partially true. The deeper meaning speaks to the fact that life is rarely as simple, or as complicated as we would like to make it. Therefore, common sense, is often the ability to cut through the fog of misunderstanding and reveal the truth about situations.

Knowledge is of course invaluable in this process. Information can stimulate our minds in new directions and allow us to see the world from a different perspective. But, that only happens if we have an open mind and heart. It only happens if we have the ability to sift through information and determine what's truly important instead of becoming bogged down in minutiae.

Common sense will not allow you to overlook obvious and persistent warning signs in relationships. Nor will it allow you to inflate the importance of minor issues so that they become major concerns. Common sense goes hand in hand with discernment and wisdom, some would probably say it's just a synonym for those two words.

What I think Gandhi's warns against is the accumulation of information and knowledge without the simultaneous hoarding of common sense. It's a terrible thing to possess power and not know how to wield it.

Unfortunately, there are no shorts cuts to wisdom or common sense. While we may have varying degrees of wisdom from birth, all of us must nurture those fledgling gifts in order to reach our full potential. We must train our minds to think about the world and our place in it. Only then do we insure our knowledge is tempered by character.

Only then do we have common sense.











Share

But It Feels So Good

When I was in grad school I had a bit of a mental crisis.

For a variety of reasons, I hit rock bottom mentally, and began to search for answers in my life. I'd always attended church and considered myself a Christian, but it was during this period that I really established a serious relationship with God.

I was also trying to maintain a long distance relationship.

I mention that because it obviously put a kink in my plans to do God's will. Anybody who has been in a long distance relationship knows that infrequent, short visits from a person you are sexually attracted to do not encourage celibacy. Fornication and frequent flier miles tend to go hand in hand.

So, while a part of me is busy lusting for my future wife's goodies, another part of me is telling me that I should get in line with biblical tenets. Consequently, we would have these marathon "getting to know you" sessions, capped off by me wallowing in angst about failing God. It wasn't very productive or fun.

Which brings me to Gandhi's second social sin, pleasure without conscience.

Clearly, in my example my conscience was present and working well. I was distraught by my fornication, which was a good sign. However, there have been many times in the past when I viewed sex outside of marriage much less negatively. To take that further, there have been times when I've viewed HEINOUS sexual activities outside of marriage much less negatively.

One source of enduring shame is my previous attitude towards "trains." For the uninformed, a "train" refers to a situation when someone, usually a female, has sex with a string of partners in consecutive sessions. As soon as one partner finishes, another steps up.

As a youngster, I didn't see anything wrong with participating in a train. I rationalized this mindset by telling myself that if a young lady wanted to do something like that, it was on her. I remember listening to my homeboys talk about the trains they had participated in and my first reactions was always "Damn, why wasn't I there?"

I almost got my wish once in college. A group of friends and I concocted a scheme where we would all hide in a dorm room, while another friend ushered in an intoxicated fellow student. Once those two got "engaged" we would all pop out of our hiding places and convince the girl that she should have sex with all of us. I actually chickened out at the last minute after fearing that she might feel violated and accuse me of rape. But, I still hid in that tub for a long time before I made up my mind...

It wasn't until I read Nathan McCall's book "Make Me Wanna Holla'" that I really began to understand that "trains" were not benign events, but were often quite close to sexual assault with girls coerced and intimidated into sex. I always assumed that these girls were just "freaks." But, McCall's book made me acknowledge that most young women only acquiesced because they were terrified that the pack of aroused and belligerent young men demanding sex from them in a strange room might do something worse if they refused.

Pleasure without conscience.

It's not hard to see the danger of that sin when you consider the reality of "trains." The thought of a frightened naked girl being tricked and bullied into having sex (often unprotected sex) with a string of random men should chill all our souls. There is nothing pleasurable about that experience for most girls, and therefore there should be nothing pleasurable about it for men.

Our conscience, or if you're a Christian the Holy Spirit, speaks to us when we've stepped from the path that we should trod. The pursuit of pleasure in its many forms, from sex, to drugs, to pain, can consume any of us if we do not have a good relationship with that inner voice.

But, how do we know when we've crossed the line?

I think that if you can honestly say that your pleasure is causing pain for others, you may need to reconsider what you're doing. If your actions, while fulfilling for you, seem to make the world a much worse place, then you're probably committing the sin Gandhi described. There is nothing inherently wrong with seeking and finding pleasure in the joys of life, but when the pursuit of your happiness overrides any moral code, you've ventured into deep and dark waters.

No man is an island, and all actions have consequences. When your enjoyment is tied to causing others undesired pain, you are drinking from a bitter and dangerous cup.


Share

Work Is A Sucka Bet

I recently copped a new car.

Some of y'all may remember me talking about my anxiety regarding the purchase and the whole negotiation process. Fortunately, I did my research, sucked things up and played hardball with a few car salesmen. I got a decent deal on a nice vehicle, and when I pay off the balance in a few years I'll probably make some aftermarket modifications to it.

Then, I'll probably buy a gun.

Whoa, a gun, Big Man? I can seem some of y'all taking a step back and wondering where that came from. The thing is, I live in one of the most violent cities in America. The only reason this isn't THE most violent city in America is because Gary, Indiana, has bigger problems than being the birthplace of Michael Jackson. And if I'm going to riding on chrome with candy paint, I'd better be strapped.

I told y'all I would talk about Gandhi's seven social sins and today I want touch on the idea of acquiring wealth without work.

The recent housing meltdown and the implosion of several banks have made all of us painfully aware of the power and danger of greed. If we weren't sure before just how badly capitalism could screw things up, well we know now.

The thing is, in my city, I learned a long time ago just how insidious the lure of wealth could be to those who have no desire to work.

My hometown is the kind of place where carjackings are more common than car pooling. If we have a day without a homicide, well they might throw a parade to rival Zulu. It's so bad down here that a friend and I recently agreed that if we hadn't been born in this city, there is no way in hell we would EVER move here. Ever.

At the root of this city's ubiquitous violence are two things: capitalism and ignorance.

See, it's bad enough to be poor with no viable options to improve that situation. It's quite another thing to be poor with no options and live in a country where your very self-worth is defined by the amount of things you can acquire. Think about it. Our society glorifies the accumulation of wealth, it's like our national religion, and yet for massive segments of the population there are very few legal routes for them to achieve that wealth. For a lot of the cats educated in the New Orleans public school system, they are just as likely to win the lottery as they are to be prepared for college or a well paying job upon graduation.

So, when you want wealth and you don't have the means to acquire it within the system, what do you do? Well, if you're Kenneth Lay, you create a phony energy company, cook the books unmercifully and steal billions.

If you're Ray Ray from Hollygrove, you try to cook up some crack or become the neighborhood stick-up boy. You might clear a couple thousand if you're lucky.

It's not that operating a phony corporation or hugging the block are easy, it's just that they are typically easier than taking the long route to wealth. See, corporate executives and d-boys often share a certain impatience, an unwillingness to sacrifice in the short-term to achieve long-term riches. Both groups are looking for shortcuts, and whenever you seek a shortcut, it's quite easy to get lost in the forest.

Gandhi's first social sin speaks to me because I see its side effects on the neighborhoods I once visited, and the people I used to call "friend." I see how the poor decisions of a mis-spent youth can have unexpected consequences in adulthood. I also see how a willingness to sacrifice and struggle in the short-term can lead to stability and satisfaction in the future.

As long as mankind walks this planet, we will be in the business of acquiring wealth. We will always seek to have more than our neighbors and some of us will even covet the little our neighbors manage to possess. David coveted Uriah's wife, even though he had scores of concubines of his own. Some people will never be satisfied and they will never be willing to do an honest day's work to sate their desires.

It's killing my city one outrageous homicide and armed robbery at a time.





Share