Global Warming/Little Ice Ages

Solar Flares and Weather

Solar flares drive weather patterns, and may be larger than expected contributing factors in the global warming we are experiencing. This is something we’ve known for a long time, studying solar patterns as we’ve been doing. We’ve used solar flare patterns to successfully predict even micro-climactic weather. I’m not at all surprised by these findings.

Even though humans are contributing to the hastening of global warming, we aren’t the sole factor, and I believe it would happen even without our input because of longer term weather patterns we haven’t studied. It’s possible that there may be little we can do to avoid a “small summer” or a subsequent “little ice age” except to develop the technology to see us survive it.

National Language

There are many reasons to have a national language.

Let’s start with the positive ones.

A national language promotes a national identity. It helps bind a country together when every citizen can communicate with every other citizen. This is a very Numenous thing, so naturally it’s one of the first things I mention. A shared language allows the citizens to have shared experiences and to build their community.

A shared language allows the citizens to learn about and make informed decisions on public issues. It allows for a wider dissemination of important information. Elected employees can tell their voters what sort of job they will do when elected, and the voters will be able to understand what the candidates are saying. That’s very important.

A shared language allows citizens to coordinate with one another in the event of a disaster. Even when we share the same language, miscommunication can happen. Imagine how badly things would go if we couldn’t communicate quickly and efficiently in a single language with one another if we can still mess things up with a single language.

A shared language reduces the chances of errors in the workplace. When speaking in technical terms, or in career-oriented jargon, a shared language is essential to get the work done right. That is a cost savings to the business for getting projects done right and on time without the delays.

Speaking for the US, until recently, immigrants understood how important it was to integrate into their new homeland, and they made a sincere effort to become a part of society. They worked hard, earned their citizenship, learned the language and customs, opened businesses, and were “more American” than the average American. They were proud of their new country, and did all they could to make it better and make it work for them and make it so their families succeeded.

It didn’t always work out so rosy, but the common consensus was America was better than the country from which they immigrated.

They still kept their original culture alive among family and friends – and bits of their original country’s cultures made its way into the American gestalt – German Oktoberfest, Chinese Chow Mein, French croissants, Brazilian coffee, oompah music, reggae music – oh, I could go on, but you get the idea. We have nifty little ethnic shops dotting the country, and there’s very little that’s “exotic” in America because we’ve welcomed it all, and integrated it into all of our society.

Everyone who immigrated to America knew they’d have to learn to speak enough English to pass their citizenship test and to function in daily life. It was the same way for ex-pat Americans who moved to other countries – when they moved away from America, they had to learn the language of their new homeland, integrate into the new culture and society and find a way to fit in. They kept their Americanisms out of nostalgia, and spread some of American culture to other parts of the world as a result – T-shirts and jeans, American style Pizza, Halloween, Valentine’s Day, Westerns, sweet corn.

Yes, we’ve entered a globalized world, but each country still maintains its own distinctions; distinctions often shaped by their native language, their regional foods, their holidays and celebrations, their fashions, and their involvement in local community needs.

All of this is powered by a shared language.

Let’s get into some of the less savory and negative reasons for having a national language.

Think auto accidents. If the drivers don’t share a few words, important words, in common, a fender bender can (and has) escalated to a brawl with much more serious damages. And while we’re thinking auto accidents, think of problems in the hospitals to which the injured are transported. If the injured doesn’t understand the necessary medical procedures because they don’t understand the language, by not having a shared, national language, the hospital is opened to lawsuits by the injured from misunderstandings due to imprecise translations. When a hospital is required to staff people competent in every possible language because the country lacks a language of their own, it operates at sub-par efficiency, and there’s a possibility that urgent medical treatment is delayed while a translator is sought. When there is a recognized language, the hospital staff can communicate with one another faster, provide quality care faster, and be safe from lawsuit arising from language barriers. Injured people who don’t speak the language and know they don’t speak the language will be more cooperative in attempting to communicate and understand what is being communicated to them rather than insisting on waiting for a translator – to the detriment of their health and well-being.

The same holds true for committing acts that could be interpreted as criminal – when a person does something wrong and doesn’t speak the language, and they know they don’t speak the national language, they will- again – make more of an effort to understand and be understood, rather than compounding the potential problems by insisting upon a translator who may not have the language skills to make a competent translation.

I’m all for being multi-lingual, and offering up translations for visitors and travelers. That’s what a hospitable and welcoming country does. But in conducting the governance of the country, in orchestrating public affairs, in making laws, and in communicating what citizens need to know, all of this is best done in a common language recognized as such throughout the country.

By not having a common language – even with regional differences factored in – a country can be split apart. We’ll encounter language discrimination and people claiming favoritism based on language proficiencies. People will be refused service, or employment, in their own home country because they don’t speak the right language. No one should have to face that in their home country, and only for a while after they emigrate until they gain minimal profficiency in their new home’s language.

It’s not that every other country has a native, common language and so America must also have one, but that a single, common, national language makes sense economically, legally, governmentally, and communally.

Throughout America’s history, English has been the common language, so much so that other countries learned English to communicate with American government and scientists. It makes sense that we embrace that American heritage and continue to keep English as the common tongue in our country, if only to keep the country from splitting apart.

Two Words

There are two words with which I think more people should become acquainted: Ondinonk and Toshinamu.

“Ondinonk” is the impulse to do something good, especially if there is no chance of recognition or reciprocal response, a very strong altruistic impulse. These are the small impulses, like holding a door open, or sending a donation anonymously, or picking up trash in a park, or some other small good deed. A lot of people practice ondinonk and aren’t aware that they do it. Sometimes, it is a larger thing, like the gentleman who leaped onto the young man who was having a seizure attack on the train tracks and kept the younger man safe with his own body as the train passed over them. That was an act of ondinonk. He didn’t think of rewards for his act, he simply acted when the need was there.

“Toshinamu” is a personal or private dedication to a cause or project, whether it succeeds or not, and whether one receives recognition or not. It is slightly stronger than a vow, not as powerful as an oath. Sandwich Saturdays is one such thing. I make and deliver sandwiches on Saturday mornings for the homeless in a few areas. I’ve been doing this since 1999 – 8 years now. It is a personal dedication. I know other people who do similar things. Not necessarily Sandwich Saturdays, but some cause they have assumed responsibility for helping with – running in a marathon, bringing meals to a shut-in, volunteering as a Pink Lady at the hospital, blessing and cleaning up roadkill, distributing wildflower seeds along roadsides, feeding the fish in a certain lake or birds in the wild, whatever cause they’ve chosen. It doesn’t matter if it’s small or large, what matters is the personal commitment, a commitment that is kept no matter how hard it might become or what other activities might get in the way.

I bet all of y’all practice both of these, and didn’t know that’s what you were doing.

Now, you have words for it.

Thoughts

Tolerance is a social rather than a religious virtue.

Taking a broad-minded view of other people’s beliefs is essential for the happiness and health of a society, not just for the members of that society but for their neighboring cultures.

It is an attitude impossible for those whose personal religion is strong.

If we hold strong religious beliefs, if we know we have found the key and guiding principle to Life, then we cannot allow our friends to flounder blindly. We may recognize they live virtuous and admirable lives, but their task is made that much harder and it is our duty to help them.

Opinions vary about the nature of this help – from being a shining example to conversion by sword, but no truly religious person can stand by and do nothing.

More than the unbeliever is the wrong believer, whose conversion to teh right way of thinking is of the greatest concern to the true believer. The infidel, the unbeliever, is virtually impossible to win over. No one can prove that Christianity or Buddism or Islam or Numenism is better than Judaism or Shintoism or Taoism. The unbeliever is not a threat to one’s beliefs. Those who follow another creed have beliefs that are, to the believer, unimportant and irrelevant.

But the one who believes the same basic thing, but gives it another interpretation is being led into dangerous and avoidable error. His crime is more serious. The heretic, by accepting the underlying principles, perverts them, detroys their value, and undermines the entire structure upon which the religion is built. Heresies are ubiqiutous and must be rooted out, for the room for error is infinitely great.

Theologians arrive at their interpretations and conclusions through continual arduous efforts of the intellect, rejecting any easy compromise that might weaken their structure. Religion, particularly monotheistic religions, must, by their nature, be of narrow intention and it knows there is no other way to salvation.

It isn’t until the religion gains state acceptance that persecution is possible. Persecution requires the co-operation of the state. That co-operation can be passive, wherein the state doesn’t enforce separation of church and state, and allows a religion to conduct its agenda with only moderate and ineffective restraint. Religion has only spiritual avenues – and to the hardcore heretic, threats of ex-communication and religious banishment are meaningless. The state can bring more physical force to bear. When the two team up, the cruelties can become unspeakable.

Not all heretics are persecuted, or not severely persecuted. This is because some heretical thoughts are more societally dangerous, when their teachings run counter to social welfare, where, if tolerated, the state itself might collapse.

When a religion sets out to crush dissident thoughts, it must have the help of the state.

That’s why I fail to understand why such a dangerous and heretical sect of Christians has come to be in charge of one of our political parties. The Dominionists are a threat to the social welfare of our country, and yet, they are the religious party with the greatest political influence.

OK, that’s probably wrong. I do sort of understand how they got so powerful. They did it through trickery and lies, through preaching a prosperity doctrine at deep odds with their Bible. They appeal to the need and greed of the people they seek to convert. They claim their God will bless them with whatever they need and want. Gaining wealth is a sure sign of their God’s blessing. Being poor is a sign of their disfavor.

Veriloquy

Veriloquy is catching on in the oddest places. A comedian, Stephen
Colbert[1], has re-energized an obsolete term that is so descriptive of
our zeitgeist that it’s small wonder the word is catching on –
“truthiness”. I’ve used it off and on myself for years, and always
got laughed at for using so many antiquated and obsolete words. A
comedian uses it and suddenly it’s one of the hottest new words.

Eh – I’ll take veriloquy where I can find it.

Anyway, the word is a good descriptor for many of the people in
Paganism that I term “fluffy”.

To quote Colbert: “It used to be, everyone was entitled to their own
opinion, but not their own facts. But that’s not the case anymore.
Facts matter not at all. Perception is everything.”

See – that’s *exactly* where we hit stumbling blocks talking with
fluffies – we ask for facts, they respond with opinions. We can’t
allow fact and opinion to be conflated in the way they are being to
create this “truthiness”. We have to learn and keep separate the
difference between what really is fact and what we want to be fact –
between fact and fiction or fact and wishful thinking. Too many
Pagans believe that what they want to be true really is regardless of
the facts. They buy into the certainty of their gurus and book
authors even if there are no facts backing those people up – or if hte
facts prove to be wrong or even harmful. They want it to be true so
badly they can’t tell the difference anymore – anad that’s why they
get so defensive and abusive when people like us come along and offer
facts instead of opinions with supporting documents and combined
experiences.

Then add in another word Colbert so recently coined, “Wikiality”
[2,3], and *boom* – we have the fluffy Pagan subculture that we rant
and rail so heartily against.

Yes, we live in a consensual reality, but it is a reality we can test
and multiple people can agree to the same standards and have
experiences close enough to be usable among htem. Even synesthetes
like me can recognize and agree to these realities even when our
perceptions are so different from others.

But those who have opted for a wikiality instead of reality are taking
truthiness to a whole new level – neurolinguistics [4] gone horribly
wrong. They live in a world where not only are feelings and opinions
weightier than facts, but that if enough people believe something, it
must be true – no matter how far into the face of reality it flies.

Obviously, these two phenomenon are so widespread in society that
comedians are picking up on it and commenting on it – creating words
to describe it or reviving old terms because the conditions are right
for them. Good comedians, to me, are the canaries of society – they
live on the bizarre fringes, seeing in society all that is corrupt,
funny, skewed, dangerous. It is they who dare speak the truth, and to
speak it in a way that captures the mind and the imagination of the
people.

I’m kind of ashamed I didn’t realize “truthiness” was becoming such a
popular word again. I’ve gotten slow in my old age. And to miss
“wikiality” as a new word for almost 2 months – virtually unforgiveable!

[1] Stephen Colbert
[2]The Word – July 31, 2006
[3] a portmanteau word of “wikipedia” and “reality” – truth by consensus
[4] Grinder and Bandler – Frogs into Princes
Grinder and Bandler Trance-Formations
Bandler – Structure of Magic I
Grinder – Structure of Magic II

PC

8-2-06

ginmar has a rant up about PC.

I don’t fit her parameters of what she perceives an anti-PC person to be. Because, I am anti-PC, and I don’t think I am a bad person for it.

I am a considerate person. I will not willingly harm another person, and never will I maliciously harm someone.

PC is not about being considerate of others, though. It’s about being condescending. When one person uses euphemistic language to speak about another person, or their condition, then they’ve just shown they are not willing to look directly at the issue or the person. They prefer to smother it all in labels, as if using pretty words will clean things up and make them go away.

I am an immigrant to the US. I am also an Indian, a Kiowa Apache more specifically, and a German. I am a woman. I’m old. I’m fat. I am not insulted when I am called a half-breed, or a feminazi, or an anti-feminist (funny, how I can be both in the same breath), or old, or fat. I am insulted when I am called “volumetrically challenged”, “pleasingly plump”, “senior”, “of the female persuasion”, or other such PC terms.

And, yanno, I’m not 100% Indian, so calling me “Native American” or whatever is the currently in vogue PC term is incorrect anyway.

You see, when PC becomes so convoluted that no one knows what words are currently the “right” ones to use when addressing another person, or talking about them, PC becomes a stumbling block to communication and to community and mingling. All those labels keep people separated, and Other.

Giving lofty titles to jobs doesn’t change the nature of the job, nor does it bestow any extra dignity on the person doing the job. A secretary is still a secretary, regardless of gender or for whom one is doing secretarial work. A garbage collector is not an engineer, and calling them one isn’t going to change the fact that they haul garbage from one place to another.

As for the citizens of the United States – they are all Americans, regardless of country of origin. Separating them out by labeling them “Irish-Americans” or “German-Americans” or “Greco-Americans” or “African-Americans” (what, no “Nairobi-Americans” or “Egyptian-Americans”?) or “French-Americans” is divisive and ssets them into a lesser status. They aren’t Americans, they’re (fill in the blank)-Americans, not quite full Americans.

Poor people are poor, not “economically challenged”. A lot more contributes to their poverty than mere lack of money. By labelling them as “economically challenged”, they are then dismissed as being too stupid to understand how to handle their money, and not, you know, because they are nickel and dimed to death, with disproportionate taxes and fees. The PC label allows people to disregard their very real plight.

That’s why I hate being PC. I want to look closely at the people, the problems, and the issues, not clothe them in frilly terms like the Victorians once dressed table legs to hide the mere mention or thought that there might be naughty “legs” under those drapey tablecloths.