Sunday, November 08, 2009
Jake's Word Re: AFGHAN TRAP REVISITED
[In response to a Jazzman Chronicle reprinted below.]
Well said. Delivered with the intelligence, scope and precision of the finest political writing. Much closer in that regard to the founders than anything you're likely to ready anywhere in the major presses. Thank you for your perseverance. We need that now and always.
I keep thinking of something Robert McNamara said when he returned with some of his American counterparts to meet with his former enemies in Vietnam decades later. One of them asked him, "Did you not know the history of Vietnam? Every country around us and many countries from all over the world have invaded and all of them have left defeated. We are still here."
It's obvious that the Bush administration never bothered to study history, any history, let alone Afghanistan. They ignored the fact the English pieced the country together out of warring tribes, just as they did in Iraq. They ignored the fact the British could not control Afghanistan and after a long struggle, they abandoned it. The British empire was crumbling as they left. They even ignored history so recent that even their children and grandchildren knew it. The Soviets invaded with the same results. They left as the Soviet empire crumbled.
We knew this going into Afghanistan. But we went anyway. Al Queda finally found the trigger and pulled it when they could be certain of a massive, unrelenting response. An unified multinational force is the only possible answer in the short run. Troops from all over the world, relatively small numbers from each nation, adapting to each shift of position, applying pressure, making it clear that they will not be there permanently. Eventually U.S. troops and those of other nations beyond the region will have to leave, just as we will eventually have to develop domestic energy resources and leave the entire region to settle its own problems or fight one another forever.
Civilization as we define it began in the middle east (and probably China and other places as well). We will never control the region. Not Alexander, not even the Persians themselves, could hold the region for more than a few years.
We are in deep now, but we don't have to be. The world should be put on notice that our time there is limited and that we have the skill, innovative drive, and resources to free ourselves of economic and cultural ties to the region (including Israel). We should have never been there to begin with. We simply cannot stay there forever if we wish to survive.
Jake Berry
THE AFGHAN TRAP REVISITED: COMPOUNDING OUR MISTAKES
By Jack Random
Let’s assume that the group of people who planned and executed the September 2001 attack on America’s institutions of finance, the military and an unknown third target (I would have thought the CIA in Langley, Virginia) were something more capable than idiots. Let us assume they had at least a notion of a plan that went beyond hitting us where it hurts.
The American response to such an attack was not difficult to predict: We would identify a likely enemy and strike with the awesome might of the world’s most powerful military.
Our response may have gone beyond what the enemy predicted. If they had knowledge of the then residents of the halls of power, they could have predicted a war in Iraq. Though unrelated to the attack and the attackers, Iraq was a war the White House wanted for reasons as obvious as a solar eclipse.
They may have known that we would attack Iraq but they were certain that we would attack the nation that unwittingly hosted them: Afghanistan. They would have predicted that our zeal to display our awesome powers of destruction would cut short any discussion with the ruling Taliban. They would have predicted that our pride and stubborn determination would lead us further and further into the Afghan trap where we would awaken years later to find that we can neither go forward nor get out.
As any foreign power might have told us: there is no winning a war in Afghanistan. There is only a slow, painful death.
Our military commanders tell us what they are supposed to tell us. It is not in their vocabulary to lose a war once it has begun. They tell us what they need to win tempered by what the public will accept. Instead of saying we need to exterminate half the Afghan population and annihilate the northern provinces of Pakistan, the commander requests another 30 to 40 thousand troops. If he gets them have no doubt there will be another request six months down the road and another and another until at length we are in so far we can neither go forward nor get out.
We are in the process of doing precisely what our attackers wanted us to do.
But the commanders and their defenders in Washington protest: The surge will work just as it did in Iraq. Never in the annals of military history has the truth been so deviously distorted. When true history is written, it will record that the American occupation forces in Iraq, trapped and cornered in a spiral descent, made a deal with the enemy. We would give them arms and money (just as we did the Mujahideen in Soviet occupied Afghanistan) to fight against a common foe. They took our money, our weapons and our ammunition on the condition that we would agree to withdraw our forces from the battlefield.
So what have we won in Iraq? Have we won control of the oilfields we so coveted? Have we won a more loyal ally in the region than our former ally in Saddam Hussein? Have we weakened our regional adversary in Iran? Have we secured the democratic form of government?
We have in fact accomplished none of these. We have in fact strengthened Iran, lost our influence over the oil, and the only thing less certain than Iraqi democracy is the prospect of Iraqi unity and peace. As the Hollywood oil man famously opined: There will be blood. There will be a fight for control of Iraq that will likely tear that creation of the British mandate apart. It will be a battle that will stretch on for years and decades and perhaps even centuries and in the end we will have little say over who wins and loses.
As it is in Iraq so it is in Afghanistan but more so. We find ourselves in the same dilemma that confronted the Soviets in the fateful year of 1987. Before the occupation Soviet military commanders warned that Afghanistan was a trap. It was a nation of disparate tribes that could only be united by a foreign occupier. It was a war the Soviets could not win but it would suck the life out of the Soviet treasury like the unquenchable thirst of a vampire. Soviet political leaders would hear none of it. They were the mighty Soviets. They would prevail where no one had before. Once it became clear they could not prevail they were afraid to fail, afraid to be embarrassed as the Americans had been in Vietnam. They were caught in the Afghan trap.
Flash forward to today. The situation in Iraq is unstable even as we prepare the withdrawal of the vast majority of our troops. The situation in Afghanistan is a spiral descent. The Karzai government has revealed itself as hopelessly corrupt. The Afghan model of democracy was clearly Florida 2000 in which votes can be manipulated to the desired outcome at the command of the government in office. (To Obama’s credit, it was not acceptable to the new White House.) We are sponsoring murderers, thieves and drug dealers even as we condemn the enemy for doing the same.
We are losing the war not because we have the wrong strategy and not because we lack the soldiers. We are losing the war for the same reason the Soviets lost: It is not our land to win or lose. The Afghanis may play with us for some time. They may take our weapons. Some may take our money. Whatever they promise or bargain away, in the end we will leave and they will decide for themselves who rules their land.
Our legitimate objectives in Afghanistan are (a) eliminating terrorist cells and training centers intent on attacking our people or assets and (b) ensuring that nuclear weapons in Pakistan are not transferred to irresponsible hands.
Despite the bravado of our former president, we have always known that the mission in this part of the world is one of intelligence gathering and precise covert military action backed up by prosecutions in international courts of law.
It is time we stopped playing by the script of our enemy and started standing for the cause of justice. We are not engaged in a battle of civilizations. We are upholding the rule of law.
From any rational perspective the Afghan president by embracing the illegitimacy of his government has enabled the American president to find the most direct path out of this hopeless quagmire. Clearly, the kind of democracy Karzai envisioned is the kind illustrated by Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Dick Nixon in a former era. It is the kind of democracy practiced in Russia, Iran and countless African states. It is the kind that does not leave the important questions government in the hands of a mindless rabble.
That kind of blatantly undemocratic reasoning might have brought no more than a chuckle from our previous administration as they blindly pressed on with their predetermined agenda of empire building but it should not be acceptable to our current president.
In the beginning many of us were willing to give Karzai the benefit of the doubt. So what if he was a lackey for the oil industry? So what if he had a history of corruption? Anyone who takes the stage in international politics has danced with the devil once or twice. This was his chance to come clean. Instead, by embracing the dark side of electoral politics and rejecting the very concept of democracy, Karzai has become our worst Afghan nightmare. He gives the lie to the benevolence of the American occupation.
It is not in our national interest to uphold a corrupt and unlawful government. It is not in our interest to maintain an occupation indefinitely. Our only interests are fighting the violent extremists who threaten us and maintaining a stable government in nuclear Pakistan. Both objectives would be better achieved by maintaining a small footprint in the region and by withdrawing the bulk of our military presence.
However we may despise the Taliban for their archaic beliefs it was a mistake to declare them the enemy alongside Al Qaeda. The Taliban had no part in the planning or execution of the terror attacks on America. When we declared war on the Taliban we compelled them to join ranks with Al Qaeda. We simultaneously committed ourselves to an unwinnable war. With eyes wide open and led by arrogant folly we marched into the world’s deepest muck hole.
When we made our mission not a surgical strike by Special Forces to eradicate Al Qaeda but a full-scale invasion and occupation, it was a mistake of epic proportions. When we announced to the world that our goal was not to subjugate the Afghan people but to establish a working democracy, we ought to have kept our word.
A democracy is not a packaged good. It is a process and a very messy process under the best of conditions. The most basic premise of a democracy is that all segments of the population must be represented. You do not disenfranchise those with whom you do not agree. No matter how repugnant we may find a group’s beliefs, in a democracy we provide equal access to the electoral process. To exclude a segment of the electorate (as we did the Sunnis in Iraq) is to guarantee a civil war.
We must remember that in the broad scope of history, our own nation disenfranchised women and minorities until only yesterday. Imagine that a foreign power took control of our government and excluded Mormons or Jews or evangelical Christians for their archaic beliefs. The most secular of Americans would never accept that kind of manipulation in betrayal of the democratic ideal.
The way forward in Afghanistan is clear. We must correct the errors of the past. If it is still possible we must invite the Taliban to join the electoral process and we must make sure that the process is fair and equitable to all Afghanis.
The Taliban is not our rightful enemy on the field of battle. They are our adversaries in the universe of ideas. That is a battle we can and will win for we carry the forces of justice and destiny on our side.
What has happened in Afghanistan is shameful. There is no redemption for the kind of corruption the Karzai government has shown. We cannot defend them. We must therefore ensure that a fair and open electoral process sweeps them away into the dustbin of history.
The only agreement we should and can require of the Afghan government is one the Taliban would surely have agreed to nine years ago: a modest presence across the landscape from which to operate a continued assault on those who attacked us and those who intend to attack us and those who similarly threaten the nuclear stability of neighboring Pakistan.
That is our legitimate interest in the region and it is the best scenario we could possibly hope for at this stage of the game.
Jazz.
JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES (CROW DOG PRESS) AND GHOST DANCE INSURRECTION (DRY BONES PRESS). THE CHRONICLES HAVE BEEN POSTED ON NUMEROUS CITES OF THE WORLDWIDE WEB, INCLUDING THE ALBION MONITOR, BELLACIAO, BUZZLE, COUNTERPUNCH, DISSIDENT VOICE, THE NATIONAL FREE PRESS AND PACIFIC FREE PRESS. SEE WWW.JAZZMANCHRONICLES.BLOGSPOT.COM.
Well said. Delivered with the intelligence, scope and precision of the finest political writing. Much closer in that regard to the founders than anything you're likely to ready anywhere in the major presses. Thank you for your perseverance. We need that now and always.
I keep thinking of something Robert McNamara said when he returned with some of his American counterparts to meet with his former enemies in Vietnam decades later. One of them asked him, "Did you not know the history of Vietnam? Every country around us and many countries from all over the world have invaded and all of them have left defeated. We are still here."
It's obvious that the Bush administration never bothered to study history, any history, let alone Afghanistan. They ignored the fact the English pieced the country together out of warring tribes, just as they did in Iraq. They ignored the fact the British could not control Afghanistan and after a long struggle, they abandoned it. The British empire was crumbling as they left. They even ignored history so recent that even their children and grandchildren knew it. The Soviets invaded with the same results. They left as the Soviet empire crumbled.
We knew this going into Afghanistan. But we went anyway. Al Queda finally found the trigger and pulled it when they could be certain of a massive, unrelenting response. An unified multinational force is the only possible answer in the short run. Troops from all over the world, relatively small numbers from each nation, adapting to each shift of position, applying pressure, making it clear that they will not be there permanently. Eventually U.S. troops and those of other nations beyond the region will have to leave, just as we will eventually have to develop domestic energy resources and leave the entire region to settle its own problems or fight one another forever.
Civilization as we define it began in the middle east (and probably China and other places as well). We will never control the region. Not Alexander, not even the Persians themselves, could hold the region for more than a few years.
We are in deep now, but we don't have to be. The world should be put on notice that our time there is limited and that we have the skill, innovative drive, and resources to free ourselves of economic and cultural ties to the region (including Israel). We should have never been there to begin with. We simply cannot stay there forever if we wish to survive.
Jake Berry
THE AFGHAN TRAP REVISITED: COMPOUNDING OUR MISTAKES
By Jack Random
Let’s assume that the group of people who planned and executed the September 2001 attack on America’s institutions of finance, the military and an unknown third target (I would have thought the CIA in Langley, Virginia) were something more capable than idiots. Let us assume they had at least a notion of a plan that went beyond hitting us where it hurts.
The American response to such an attack was not difficult to predict: We would identify a likely enemy and strike with the awesome might of the world’s most powerful military.
Our response may have gone beyond what the enemy predicted. If they had knowledge of the then residents of the halls of power, they could have predicted a war in Iraq. Though unrelated to the attack and the attackers, Iraq was a war the White House wanted for reasons as obvious as a solar eclipse.
They may have known that we would attack Iraq but they were certain that we would attack the nation that unwittingly hosted them: Afghanistan. They would have predicted that our zeal to display our awesome powers of destruction would cut short any discussion with the ruling Taliban. They would have predicted that our pride and stubborn determination would lead us further and further into the Afghan trap where we would awaken years later to find that we can neither go forward nor get out.
As any foreign power might have told us: there is no winning a war in Afghanistan. There is only a slow, painful death.
Our military commanders tell us what they are supposed to tell us. It is not in their vocabulary to lose a war once it has begun. They tell us what they need to win tempered by what the public will accept. Instead of saying we need to exterminate half the Afghan population and annihilate the northern provinces of Pakistan, the commander requests another 30 to 40 thousand troops. If he gets them have no doubt there will be another request six months down the road and another and another until at length we are in so far we can neither go forward nor get out.
We are in the process of doing precisely what our attackers wanted us to do.
But the commanders and their defenders in Washington protest: The surge will work just as it did in Iraq. Never in the annals of military history has the truth been so deviously distorted. When true history is written, it will record that the American occupation forces in Iraq, trapped and cornered in a spiral descent, made a deal with the enemy. We would give them arms and money (just as we did the Mujahideen in Soviet occupied Afghanistan) to fight against a common foe. They took our money, our weapons and our ammunition on the condition that we would agree to withdraw our forces from the battlefield.
So what have we won in Iraq? Have we won control of the oilfields we so coveted? Have we won a more loyal ally in the region than our former ally in Saddam Hussein? Have we weakened our regional adversary in Iran? Have we secured the democratic form of government?
We have in fact accomplished none of these. We have in fact strengthened Iran, lost our influence over the oil, and the only thing less certain than Iraqi democracy is the prospect of Iraqi unity and peace. As the Hollywood oil man famously opined: There will be blood. There will be a fight for control of Iraq that will likely tear that creation of the British mandate apart. It will be a battle that will stretch on for years and decades and perhaps even centuries and in the end we will have little say over who wins and loses.
As it is in Iraq so it is in Afghanistan but more so. We find ourselves in the same dilemma that confronted the Soviets in the fateful year of 1987. Before the occupation Soviet military commanders warned that Afghanistan was a trap. It was a nation of disparate tribes that could only be united by a foreign occupier. It was a war the Soviets could not win but it would suck the life out of the Soviet treasury like the unquenchable thirst of a vampire. Soviet political leaders would hear none of it. They were the mighty Soviets. They would prevail where no one had before. Once it became clear they could not prevail they were afraid to fail, afraid to be embarrassed as the Americans had been in Vietnam. They were caught in the Afghan trap.
Flash forward to today. The situation in Iraq is unstable even as we prepare the withdrawal of the vast majority of our troops. The situation in Afghanistan is a spiral descent. The Karzai government has revealed itself as hopelessly corrupt. The Afghan model of democracy was clearly Florida 2000 in which votes can be manipulated to the desired outcome at the command of the government in office. (To Obama’s credit, it was not acceptable to the new White House.) We are sponsoring murderers, thieves and drug dealers even as we condemn the enemy for doing the same.
We are losing the war not because we have the wrong strategy and not because we lack the soldiers. We are losing the war for the same reason the Soviets lost: It is not our land to win or lose. The Afghanis may play with us for some time. They may take our weapons. Some may take our money. Whatever they promise or bargain away, in the end we will leave and they will decide for themselves who rules their land.
Our legitimate objectives in Afghanistan are (a) eliminating terrorist cells and training centers intent on attacking our people or assets and (b) ensuring that nuclear weapons in Pakistan are not transferred to irresponsible hands.
Despite the bravado of our former president, we have always known that the mission in this part of the world is one of intelligence gathering and precise covert military action backed up by prosecutions in international courts of law.
It is time we stopped playing by the script of our enemy and started standing for the cause of justice. We are not engaged in a battle of civilizations. We are upholding the rule of law.
From any rational perspective the Afghan president by embracing the illegitimacy of his government has enabled the American president to find the most direct path out of this hopeless quagmire. Clearly, the kind of democracy Karzai envisioned is the kind illustrated by Karl Rove, Dick Cheney and Dick Nixon in a former era. It is the kind of democracy practiced in Russia, Iran and countless African states. It is the kind that does not leave the important questions government in the hands of a mindless rabble.
That kind of blatantly undemocratic reasoning might have brought no more than a chuckle from our previous administration as they blindly pressed on with their predetermined agenda of empire building but it should not be acceptable to our current president.
In the beginning many of us were willing to give Karzai the benefit of the doubt. So what if he was a lackey for the oil industry? So what if he had a history of corruption? Anyone who takes the stage in international politics has danced with the devil once or twice. This was his chance to come clean. Instead, by embracing the dark side of electoral politics and rejecting the very concept of democracy, Karzai has become our worst Afghan nightmare. He gives the lie to the benevolence of the American occupation.
It is not in our national interest to uphold a corrupt and unlawful government. It is not in our interest to maintain an occupation indefinitely. Our only interests are fighting the violent extremists who threaten us and maintaining a stable government in nuclear Pakistan. Both objectives would be better achieved by maintaining a small footprint in the region and by withdrawing the bulk of our military presence.
However we may despise the Taliban for their archaic beliefs it was a mistake to declare them the enemy alongside Al Qaeda. The Taliban had no part in the planning or execution of the terror attacks on America. When we declared war on the Taliban we compelled them to join ranks with Al Qaeda. We simultaneously committed ourselves to an unwinnable war. With eyes wide open and led by arrogant folly we marched into the world’s deepest muck hole.
When we made our mission not a surgical strike by Special Forces to eradicate Al Qaeda but a full-scale invasion and occupation, it was a mistake of epic proportions. When we announced to the world that our goal was not to subjugate the Afghan people but to establish a working democracy, we ought to have kept our word.
A democracy is not a packaged good. It is a process and a very messy process under the best of conditions. The most basic premise of a democracy is that all segments of the population must be represented. You do not disenfranchise those with whom you do not agree. No matter how repugnant we may find a group’s beliefs, in a democracy we provide equal access to the electoral process. To exclude a segment of the electorate (as we did the Sunnis in Iraq) is to guarantee a civil war.
We must remember that in the broad scope of history, our own nation disenfranchised women and minorities until only yesterday. Imagine that a foreign power took control of our government and excluded Mormons or Jews or evangelical Christians for their archaic beliefs. The most secular of Americans would never accept that kind of manipulation in betrayal of the democratic ideal.
The way forward in Afghanistan is clear. We must correct the errors of the past. If it is still possible we must invite the Taliban to join the electoral process and we must make sure that the process is fair and equitable to all Afghanis.
The Taliban is not our rightful enemy on the field of battle. They are our adversaries in the universe of ideas. That is a battle we can and will win for we carry the forces of justice and destiny on our side.
What has happened in Afghanistan is shameful. There is no redemption for the kind of corruption the Karzai government has shown. We cannot defend them. We must therefore ensure that a fair and open electoral process sweeps them away into the dustbin of history.
The only agreement we should and can require of the Afghan government is one the Taliban would surely have agreed to nine years ago: a modest presence across the landscape from which to operate a continued assault on those who attacked us and those who intend to attack us and those who similarly threaten the nuclear stability of neighboring Pakistan.
That is our legitimate interest in the region and it is the best scenario we could possibly hope for at this stage of the game.
Jazz.
JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES (CROW DOG PRESS) AND GHOST DANCE INSURRECTION (DRY BONES PRESS). THE CHRONICLES HAVE BEEN POSTED ON NUMEROUS CITES OF THE WORLDWIDE WEB, INCLUDING THE ALBION MONITOR, BELLACIAO, BUZZLE, COUNTERPUNCH, DISSIDENT VOICE, THE NATIONAL FREE PRESS AND PACIFIC FREE PRESS. SEE WWW.JAZZMANCHRONICLES.BLOGSPOT.COM.
Labels: Jack Random, Jake's Word, Jazzman Chronicles
Saturday, November 07, 2009
Mind of Mansel: Cessation Blues
...
american history sweeps a street that won't get clean
I'm carrying a gun carved from snakes and beans
the past tells me the battlefield is not always green
liberty is the highest peak that I have seen
wrapped myself in the flag and went out on the ledge
it took two steps forward to get out over the edge
lovers held out their hands but watched me fall
once I hit purgatory it turned into a serious brawl
I came back to life in the fields of war you see
and I cried to see that others were following me
so I walked off the line and lay my gun to the side
and in the name of peace you know I again died
chorus:
Cessation Blues, let it be one with you
even Gulliver knew, the Cessation Blues
- Chris Mansel
american history sweeps a street that won't get clean
I'm carrying a gun carved from snakes and beans
the past tells me the battlefield is not always green
liberty is the highest peak that I have seen
wrapped myself in the flag and went out on the ledge
it took two steps forward to get out over the edge
lovers held out their hands but watched me fall
once I hit purgatory it turned into a serious brawl
I came back to life in the fields of war you see
and I cried to see that others were following me
so I walked off the line and lay my gun to the side
and in the name of peace you know I again died
chorus:
Cessation Blues, let it be one with you
even Gulliver knew, the Cessation Blues
- Chris Mansel
Labels: Mind of Mansel
Saturday, October 17, 2009
JAKE BERRY'S RESPONSE TO KEITH OLBERMANN’S SPECIAL COMMENTARY ON HEALTHCARE
Olbermann is eloquent as always. And he utilizes a tool that most journalists either do not have or fear to use – a vocabulary. Maybe the words are written by someone else, but regardless, this is proof that intelligent use of the language can of itself be persuasive.
I agree with Olbermann, but that's no surprise. I have always felt that we should seek to collectively try to create a society that is compassionate before all else.
But in a free and open society, we are also free to be subjected to manipulation by those who are greedy to acquire and maintain their hold on power even if it means many others will die, even if it means that they themselves will die sooner than necessary. Power has its own directive. It seeks to consume, to control and drive the whole world to a massive, bloody conclusion merely for the ability to say "I had," "I have," and "I am above all others." It is ego written as large as the universe and once you have tasted even a small portion of it you cannot let it go without personal sacrifice because anything or anyone you believe you have conquered is now a part of you and to lose it means losing something more precious than life in the future, it means losing that part of your self right now. It means a small, immediate death. Once this contagion grips you you will do anything to protect it. That is the contagion, the real disease at the heart of the problem.* Many people – probably a majority now – believe that healthcare reform means that they will lose a part of themselves. This despite the fact that they do not actually possess what it is they are afraid of losing.
Once again we will fail because we prefer to react before we think. The leadership in and out of government, those who will ultimately make the decision about healthcare, has been horrible on all sides and from all corners. No one has spoken directly and clearly about the issue. Olbermann comes as close to it as anyone I have read or heard when he says that the issue comes down to the simple fact - "I want to live." We can make the apparently complex issue much clearer by asking a few questions. Here they are:
Does everyone in this country have the same right to live as everyone else?
If you are rich do you have a greater right to live than if you are poor?
If you are poor is it your obligation to become wealthy enough to pay for health insurance and all other health costs no matter how rapidly those costs continue to rise?
Should we cut healthcare costs by simply eliminating those who cannot afford it from the system? More directly, should we allow the poor to die because they are too poor to afford healthcare?
And how much will the cost of healthcare have to rise before you become one of those who can no longer afford to pay for it and be condemned to death?
Life is precious. The life we have is all we know. But as Olbermann states so eloquently, and as we all know, we all must die. How long do you want to live? Do you want to live as long as you are able to speak and hear and know the world around you? If so, you will need to live healthy and need a reliable system of healthcare to help you return to health when you inevitably fall ill. Do you have that right? If you do, does everyone else as well? Where do you draw the line? In the U.S. it appears that the line will be drawn with dollars. Life will be equated with wealth. The richer you are the longer you live. If that is the choice we make. So be it. We have always had a talent for ignoring the suffering of others with the exception of short term emergencies. Oh, there are those few who will give to the poor or help out in other ways. A few will even dedicate their entire lives to alleviating the suffering of others. But most of us are better at ignoring pain and suffering until it touches us. Then we want it to go away. In short, we want to live.
Do I matter more than you? I don't think that I do. And it doesn't bother me that I have less money in my pocket because someone else who is suffering tonight draws on medicaid or medicare or some other publicly funded program. But those programs are in fact underfunded and medicaid in particular is one reason that healthcare costs continue to rise. Another reason might be that pharmaceutical companies, as a group, spend half their budgets on advertising drugs (most of which cannot be acquired without a prescription). But I am obviously a socialist, right? If you believe that you believe a lie. And I am one of many millions.
Consider the questions and consider how you will feel if you fall on the bad side of the equation.
This is the way I speak to myself when it comes to the issue of healthcare. I am not sure that there is a solution. But can't we at least try to find a way for everyone to live as long as they can or as long as they chose? Maybe the answer is simply to leave things alone and let the system collapse. Maybe a better system will replace it based on supply and demand alone. I doubt it, but I'm beginning to think we're going to find out.
INFNITIES
jk
* Editor's Note: Despite the best efforts of the healthcare industry, the public continues to strongly support healthcare reform in general and the public option in particular. Another way to look at the debate is this: If healthcare is a right and not a privilege then it is immoral to profit by it. The health insurance industry serves no useful purpose to the general public. It should eliminated by the most direct means possible. Further, profit making corporations should not be allowed to own and operate hospitals and healthcare clinics any more than such corporations should be allowed to run schools, fire stations, police forces and the military. We are told to be afraid of government (i.e., socialism) but we ought to be afraid of the corporate takeover that is unfolding before our weary eyes.
I agree with Olbermann, but that's no surprise. I have always felt that we should seek to collectively try to create a society that is compassionate before all else.
But in a free and open society, we are also free to be subjected to manipulation by those who are greedy to acquire and maintain their hold on power even if it means many others will die, even if it means that they themselves will die sooner than necessary. Power has its own directive. It seeks to consume, to control and drive the whole world to a massive, bloody conclusion merely for the ability to say "I had," "I have," and "I am above all others." It is ego written as large as the universe and once you have tasted even a small portion of it you cannot let it go without personal sacrifice because anything or anyone you believe you have conquered is now a part of you and to lose it means losing something more precious than life in the future, it means losing that part of your self right now. It means a small, immediate death. Once this contagion grips you you will do anything to protect it. That is the contagion, the real disease at the heart of the problem.* Many people – probably a majority now – believe that healthcare reform means that they will lose a part of themselves. This despite the fact that they do not actually possess what it is they are afraid of losing.
Once again we will fail because we prefer to react before we think. The leadership in and out of government, those who will ultimately make the decision about healthcare, has been horrible on all sides and from all corners. No one has spoken directly and clearly about the issue. Olbermann comes as close to it as anyone I have read or heard when he says that the issue comes down to the simple fact - "I want to live." We can make the apparently complex issue much clearer by asking a few questions. Here they are:
Does everyone in this country have the same right to live as everyone else?
If you are rich do you have a greater right to live than if you are poor?
If you are poor is it your obligation to become wealthy enough to pay for health insurance and all other health costs no matter how rapidly those costs continue to rise?
Should we cut healthcare costs by simply eliminating those who cannot afford it from the system? More directly, should we allow the poor to die because they are too poor to afford healthcare?
And how much will the cost of healthcare have to rise before you become one of those who can no longer afford to pay for it and be condemned to death?
Life is precious. The life we have is all we know. But as Olbermann states so eloquently, and as we all know, we all must die. How long do you want to live? Do you want to live as long as you are able to speak and hear and know the world around you? If so, you will need to live healthy and need a reliable system of healthcare to help you return to health when you inevitably fall ill. Do you have that right? If you do, does everyone else as well? Where do you draw the line? In the U.S. it appears that the line will be drawn with dollars. Life will be equated with wealth. The richer you are the longer you live. If that is the choice we make. So be it. We have always had a talent for ignoring the suffering of others with the exception of short term emergencies. Oh, there are those few who will give to the poor or help out in other ways. A few will even dedicate their entire lives to alleviating the suffering of others. But most of us are better at ignoring pain and suffering until it touches us. Then we want it to go away. In short, we want to live.
Do I matter more than you? I don't think that I do. And it doesn't bother me that I have less money in my pocket because someone else who is suffering tonight draws on medicaid or medicare or some other publicly funded program. But those programs are in fact underfunded and medicaid in particular is one reason that healthcare costs continue to rise. Another reason might be that pharmaceutical companies, as a group, spend half their budgets on advertising drugs (most of which cannot be acquired without a prescription). But I am obviously a socialist, right? If you believe that you believe a lie. And I am one of many millions.
Consider the questions and consider how you will feel if you fall on the bad side of the equation.
This is the way I speak to myself when it comes to the issue of healthcare. I am not sure that there is a solution. But can't we at least try to find a way for everyone to live as long as they can or as long as they chose? Maybe the answer is simply to leave things alone and let the system collapse. Maybe a better system will replace it based on supply and demand alone. I doubt it, but I'm beginning to think we're going to find out.
INFNITIES
jk
* Editor's Note: Despite the best efforts of the healthcare industry, the public continues to strongly support healthcare reform in general and the public option in particular. Another way to look at the debate is this: If healthcare is a right and not a privilege then it is immoral to profit by it. The health insurance industry serves no useful purpose to the general public. It should eliminated by the most direct means possible. Further, profit making corporations should not be allowed to own and operate hospitals and healthcare clinics any more than such corporations should be allowed to run schools, fire stations, police forces and the military. We are told to be afraid of government (i.e., socialism) but we ought to be afraid of the corporate takeover that is unfolding before our weary eyes.
Labels: Jake's Word
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Beatlick Travel: Final Report 2009
Date: Oct 15, 2009 5:59 AM
Beatlick Travel Report #12
It has taken a full year to really become comfortable with our new van. I felt so connected to my old 71 VW and transferring emotionally to my newer 77 has been like taking on a new lover. When in Albuquerque last month the transmission hung up on me twice in one day in downtown traffic. I panicked at first then thought this van is officially blessed by the Ukranian Orhtodox Church, me too and Joe. This can’t be happening. The painful learning curve. All this time I have been shifting in a lazy X pattern when I should have been using an H pattern. So now I know and that is last bit of trouble I have had with the van. Coming back from Taos was one of the most pleasant experiences I have had, stress free driving now.
We are also in a new era with Beatlick News. We’ve changed over to a new publishing program, more compatible than our old Quark documents. I also took the front page picture with my Tracphone and emailed it to my new laptop computer, which is Wifi compatible. Publication is becoming much more streamlined and less stressful, too. And the house-sitting gigs are really starting to stack up so no new trips planned until January.
Here are some final thoughts which will be my Live For Art column in our upcoming issue. Check out beatlick.com in about a week or look for a hard copy in the mail if you are a subscriber.
The Red River and Rio Grande come together at the Wild Rivers Recreational Area in New Mexico. Far above at The Junta Point you stand between the two gorges that hold the rivers between their enormous canyon walls. Having trekked down the canyon paths to the confluence and looking up to Junta Point you can barely intellectually grasp how long it took for the rivers to eat through the flat earth further and further down to the canyon floor. Millions and millions of years. There in the midst of all that space and depth I can’t help but ponder how insignificant I am in the context of all the time ensued to create this natural wonder. How little do we matter in the entire scheme of things except to our own selves and those who share this time and space with us. It’s marvelous and frightening.
I marvel at the friends I am still allowed to have. The longer we are on this earth the more we lose: family, friends, neighborhoods, entire worlds and levels of consciousness.
The universe is still expanding, making us even more significant and small. How we treat each other now is the most important thing—in our homes and in the world. Happy Trails
Keep in touch and stay on the Happy Trails...
Beatlick Pamela Hirst
Beatlick Travel Report #12
It has taken a full year to really become comfortable with our new van. I felt so connected to my old 71 VW and transferring emotionally to my newer 77 has been like taking on a new lover. When in Albuquerque last month the transmission hung up on me twice in one day in downtown traffic. I panicked at first then thought this van is officially blessed by the Ukranian Orhtodox Church, me too and Joe. This can’t be happening. The painful learning curve. All this time I have been shifting in a lazy X pattern when I should have been using an H pattern. So now I know and that is last bit of trouble I have had with the van. Coming back from Taos was one of the most pleasant experiences I have had, stress free driving now.
We are also in a new era with Beatlick News. We’ve changed over to a new publishing program, more compatible than our old Quark documents. I also took the front page picture with my Tracphone and emailed it to my new laptop computer, which is Wifi compatible. Publication is becoming much more streamlined and less stressful, too. And the house-sitting gigs are really starting to stack up so no new trips planned until January.
Here are some final thoughts which will be my Live For Art column in our upcoming issue. Check out beatlick.com in about a week or look for a hard copy in the mail if you are a subscriber.
The Red River and Rio Grande come together at the Wild Rivers Recreational Area in New Mexico. Far above at The Junta Point you stand between the two gorges that hold the rivers between their enormous canyon walls. Having trekked down the canyon paths to the confluence and looking up to Junta Point you can barely intellectually grasp how long it took for the rivers to eat through the flat earth further and further down to the canyon floor. Millions and millions of years. There in the midst of all that space and depth I can’t help but ponder how insignificant I am in the context of all the time ensued to create this natural wonder. How little do we matter in the entire scheme of things except to our own selves and those who share this time and space with us. It’s marvelous and frightening.
I marvel at the friends I am still allowed to have. The longer we are on this earth the more we lose: family, friends, neighborhoods, entire worlds and levels of consciousness.
The universe is still expanding, making us even more significant and small. How we treat each other now is the most important thing—in our homes and in the world. Happy Trails
Keep in touch and stay on the Happy Trails...
Beatlick Pamela Hirst
Labels: Beatlicks
Sunday, October 04, 2009
AMERICA’S BROKEN PROMISE: THE UNFULFILLED RIGHTS OF HUMANKIND
JAZZMAN CHRONICLES. DISSEMINATE FREELY.
By Jack Random
In what Thomas Paine christened The Age of Reason, democracy supplanted the royal monarchy as the government of choice for enlightened nations. There was much discussion in those pivotal times of human advancement concerning the inherent Rights of Man. Borrowing from England’s Magna Carta, the British philosopher John Locke and the French philosophers Jean-Jacque Rousseau and Francois-Marie Arouet (aka Voltaire), Thomas Jefferson immortalized the universal human rights in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Many attempts have been made to identify and innumerate the universal Rights of Man but none yet has succeeded in finding a general consensus across the divergent cultures of our planet. Some nations, held back by centuries of tradition and religious belief, have not yet accepted the basic tenets of individual liberty. Others like our own have failed to move beyond the most basic of rights and liberties. Some would say we have done a poor job of ensuring and protecting even those fundamental rights and I would count myself among them.
There is something to be said for the conservative approach to enlightenment. We cannot expect primitive societies governed by witchdoctors and tribal warlords to be transformed into functioning democracies overnight. We cannot expect nations carved in the earth by foreign occupying powers to embrace ideals of governance they have neither discovered nor devised for themselves. All societies must be allowed to evolve according to their own levels of consciousness by their own methods.
But we in America pride ourselves as a bastion of civil liberty. We never tire of proclaiming ourselves leaders of the free world, a shining city on a hill illuminating the way forward for all of humankind. It hardly matters that we have so often failed the test by sponsoring military dictatorships and coups or allowing the disenfranchisement of minority voters to overturn elections, we have an obligation by our own proclamation and self-aggrandizement to forward the cause. We have a responsibility to lead the world because we believe ourselves to be the world’s leader.
Despite our flaws and failures we have often found our way to push forward in critical times not by summoning the lost voices of our founders but by recognizing their substantial shortcomings. Our founders did not acknowledge the rights of women but the nation found a way. Our founders did not recognize the rights of minorities or the poor but succeeding generations righted those wrongs.
It is time we moved forward. It is time we understood once and for always that for every right our founders committed to law they got something wrong. They were profoundly flawed men even if enlightened for their time and we have no obligation to be bound in perpetuity to their shortcomings.
The recent national debate (if it may be called that) has brought to light several of our shortcomings in the fulfillment of human rights. When angry white men bring semi-automatic weapons to political protests it should not escape anyone’s attention that the right to free expression is compromised by anyone who does not agree with the armed protesters. It is not by happenstance that the founders placed the right to bear arms in the context of “a well regulated militia.” They had no intention of validating the spectacle of an armed mob intimidating their fellow citizens.
What are we afraid of: that a subversive element will take over the government? I would suggest that the subversive element is the angry mob itself and that recent history has already recorded the takeover of our government through electoral fraud. But the remedy was and is in the ballot box, not in armed mobs issuing thinly veiled threats before the television screens.
It will take time but we must curtail the right to arm in order to protect the greater right to freedom of expression and freedom from the inevitable violence that will ensue if this trend continues. We must elect officials who are sworn to take no money from the gun lobby that zealously blocks gun control legislation to prevent unstable individuals from purchasing automatic weapons and wielding them in public. We must eventually change the political equation that will not allow anyone to become a Supreme Court justice unless they agree to ignore the language of the second amendment in favor of an unfettered individual right to bear arms. Barring that we must amend the constitution.
The national debate on healthcare reform has brought to the fore the unfulfilled right to decent and affordable medical care for all our citizens. Indeed, all human beings, even those here illegally or as guests, should have the right to medical treatment without fear of penalty or deportation.
America is so far behind the curve on this issue that it alone places us in the second class of nations on the fulfillment of human rights and respect for human dignity. Every American should be ashamed that we alone among industrialized nations fail to ensure universal healthcare to our people. We are so blind to our own interests that we allow an industry that is motivated by profit and profit alone to dictate the terms of so-called “healthcare reform.” The corporate monoliths that provide millions in political contributions and millions more in a public relations offensive summon the uninsured and unhealthy masses to decry real reform as socialism and (unbelievably) fascism and the masses fall in line. It seems not to matter that fully 65% of the people do not buy the corporate propaganda and remain steadfast in supporting the public option as critical to the reform effort, it only matters that the angry mob on the television screen opposes it.
The fault here goes to the heart of our democracy. Quite simply, our elected officials are on the take. Until we succeed in banning corporate contributions from dominating our electoral system, our officials will represent the wealthiest corporations first and spend most of their time trying to deceive the people into believing it is in their interest.
Perhaps they can explain how it is in our interest that international corporations have been granted all the rights of individuals and more while individuals have been denied the most basic right of democracy: the right to vote. If you don’t believe that is possible you should spend a little time reading the landmark Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore 2000. If the courts were forced to recognize the right to vote they would find it difficult to ignore the massive voter disenfranchisement that allowed George W. Bush to steal two presidential elections.
How can we possibly believe that our president went to war to secure other nation's rights to democracy when we have done so little to protect our own? The election of 2000 should have been the death knell of the Electoral College. Instead it fortified our standing as a second-class democracy. In any other nation the defense of archaic rules to justify the nullification of popular will would have been condemned for what it is: hypocrisy.
Compounding our shame, we have leaders who advance the notion that voting is not a right at all; it is rather a privilege. As a wise man once said: That is not only a lie but a damnable lie. If voting is a privilege then we live in an aristocracy and democracy be damned.
We cannot summon the founders on this one – not unless we want to go back to the days when the right to vote was conditioned on property ownership and neither women nor minorities were in the club. When the Declaration proclaimed, “all men are created equal,” it was a literal exclusion. The founders set up the United States Senate as a surrogate House of Lords to guard against the dangers of democracy. We can no longer defend such notions any more than we can defend slavery or the disenfranchisement of women.
The U.S. Senate has become the obstructionist body that thwarts the will of the people. It not only stands in the way of meaningful healthcare reform; it stands in the way of the advancement of human rights.
It is time we ended the archaic Senate rules that allow forty senators to defeat any major legislation. If they cannot do it or will not then we must elect senators who will. But we cannot find viable candidates for such a regal position who will represent our interests because the cost of a senate seat requires big money – the kind of money that only corporate monoliths can provide.
Here lies the linchpin of this thesis. It is the reason our government is incapable of advancing the rights of humankind. It is the reason we have not secured our right to vote. It is the reason we have not fulfilled the right to healthcare, the right to employment or the right to decent shelter. All our interests as citizens of the nation fall secondary to corporate interests because the largest and most powerful international corporations have a stranglehold on our political process.
They have the money and money rules – even when it has been provided on the public dole from our own pockets.
What we need now is a peaceful revolution, a mass movement, and a cause that supercedes all others. It is a cause that unifies disparate groups because it is simple and appeals to common sense. It would not prevent the election of fools and charlatans to office but it would end corporate dominance of our government overnight.
It is simply this: Only individuals (subject to the limitations set by our legislative bodies) shall be allowed to contribute to political campaigns.
Jazz.
JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES (CROW DOG PRESS) AND GHOST DANCE INSURRECTION (DRY BONES PRESS). THE CHRONICLES HAVE BEEN POSTED ON NUMEROUS CITES OF THE WORLDWIDE WEB, INCLUDING THE ALBION MONITOR, BELLACIAO, BUZZLE, COUNTERPUNCH, DISSIDENT VOICE, THE NATIONAL FREE PRESS AND PACIFIC FREE PRESS. SEE WWW.JAZZMANCHRONICLES.BLOGSPOT.COM.
By Jack Random
In what Thomas Paine christened The Age of Reason, democracy supplanted the royal monarchy as the government of choice for enlightened nations. There was much discussion in those pivotal times of human advancement concerning the inherent Rights of Man. Borrowing from England’s Magna Carta, the British philosopher John Locke and the French philosophers Jean-Jacque Rousseau and Francois-Marie Arouet (aka Voltaire), Thomas Jefferson immortalized the universal human rights in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
Many attempts have been made to identify and innumerate the universal Rights of Man but none yet has succeeded in finding a general consensus across the divergent cultures of our planet. Some nations, held back by centuries of tradition and religious belief, have not yet accepted the basic tenets of individual liberty. Others like our own have failed to move beyond the most basic of rights and liberties. Some would say we have done a poor job of ensuring and protecting even those fundamental rights and I would count myself among them.
There is something to be said for the conservative approach to enlightenment. We cannot expect primitive societies governed by witchdoctors and tribal warlords to be transformed into functioning democracies overnight. We cannot expect nations carved in the earth by foreign occupying powers to embrace ideals of governance they have neither discovered nor devised for themselves. All societies must be allowed to evolve according to their own levels of consciousness by their own methods.
But we in America pride ourselves as a bastion of civil liberty. We never tire of proclaiming ourselves leaders of the free world, a shining city on a hill illuminating the way forward for all of humankind. It hardly matters that we have so often failed the test by sponsoring military dictatorships and coups or allowing the disenfranchisement of minority voters to overturn elections, we have an obligation by our own proclamation and self-aggrandizement to forward the cause. We have a responsibility to lead the world because we believe ourselves to be the world’s leader.
Despite our flaws and failures we have often found our way to push forward in critical times not by summoning the lost voices of our founders but by recognizing their substantial shortcomings. Our founders did not acknowledge the rights of women but the nation found a way. Our founders did not recognize the rights of minorities or the poor but succeeding generations righted those wrongs.
It is time we moved forward. It is time we understood once and for always that for every right our founders committed to law they got something wrong. They were profoundly flawed men even if enlightened for their time and we have no obligation to be bound in perpetuity to their shortcomings.
The recent national debate (if it may be called that) has brought to light several of our shortcomings in the fulfillment of human rights. When angry white men bring semi-automatic weapons to political protests it should not escape anyone’s attention that the right to free expression is compromised by anyone who does not agree with the armed protesters. It is not by happenstance that the founders placed the right to bear arms in the context of “a well regulated militia.” They had no intention of validating the spectacle of an armed mob intimidating their fellow citizens.
What are we afraid of: that a subversive element will take over the government? I would suggest that the subversive element is the angry mob itself and that recent history has already recorded the takeover of our government through electoral fraud. But the remedy was and is in the ballot box, not in armed mobs issuing thinly veiled threats before the television screens.
It will take time but we must curtail the right to arm in order to protect the greater right to freedom of expression and freedom from the inevitable violence that will ensue if this trend continues. We must elect officials who are sworn to take no money from the gun lobby that zealously blocks gun control legislation to prevent unstable individuals from purchasing automatic weapons and wielding them in public. We must eventually change the political equation that will not allow anyone to become a Supreme Court justice unless they agree to ignore the language of the second amendment in favor of an unfettered individual right to bear arms. Barring that we must amend the constitution.
The national debate on healthcare reform has brought to the fore the unfulfilled right to decent and affordable medical care for all our citizens. Indeed, all human beings, even those here illegally or as guests, should have the right to medical treatment without fear of penalty or deportation.
America is so far behind the curve on this issue that it alone places us in the second class of nations on the fulfillment of human rights and respect for human dignity. Every American should be ashamed that we alone among industrialized nations fail to ensure universal healthcare to our people. We are so blind to our own interests that we allow an industry that is motivated by profit and profit alone to dictate the terms of so-called “healthcare reform.” The corporate monoliths that provide millions in political contributions and millions more in a public relations offensive summon the uninsured and unhealthy masses to decry real reform as socialism and (unbelievably) fascism and the masses fall in line. It seems not to matter that fully 65% of the people do not buy the corporate propaganda and remain steadfast in supporting the public option as critical to the reform effort, it only matters that the angry mob on the television screen opposes it.
The fault here goes to the heart of our democracy. Quite simply, our elected officials are on the take. Until we succeed in banning corporate contributions from dominating our electoral system, our officials will represent the wealthiest corporations first and spend most of their time trying to deceive the people into believing it is in their interest.
Perhaps they can explain how it is in our interest that international corporations have been granted all the rights of individuals and more while individuals have been denied the most basic right of democracy: the right to vote. If you don’t believe that is possible you should spend a little time reading the landmark Supreme Court decision Bush v. Gore 2000. If the courts were forced to recognize the right to vote they would find it difficult to ignore the massive voter disenfranchisement that allowed George W. Bush to steal two presidential elections.
How can we possibly believe that our president went to war to secure other nation's rights to democracy when we have done so little to protect our own? The election of 2000 should have been the death knell of the Electoral College. Instead it fortified our standing as a second-class democracy. In any other nation the defense of archaic rules to justify the nullification of popular will would have been condemned for what it is: hypocrisy.
Compounding our shame, we have leaders who advance the notion that voting is not a right at all; it is rather a privilege. As a wise man once said: That is not only a lie but a damnable lie. If voting is a privilege then we live in an aristocracy and democracy be damned.
We cannot summon the founders on this one – not unless we want to go back to the days when the right to vote was conditioned on property ownership and neither women nor minorities were in the club. When the Declaration proclaimed, “all men are created equal,” it was a literal exclusion. The founders set up the United States Senate as a surrogate House of Lords to guard against the dangers of democracy. We can no longer defend such notions any more than we can defend slavery or the disenfranchisement of women.
The U.S. Senate has become the obstructionist body that thwarts the will of the people. It not only stands in the way of meaningful healthcare reform; it stands in the way of the advancement of human rights.
It is time we ended the archaic Senate rules that allow forty senators to defeat any major legislation. If they cannot do it or will not then we must elect senators who will. But we cannot find viable candidates for such a regal position who will represent our interests because the cost of a senate seat requires big money – the kind of money that only corporate monoliths can provide.
Here lies the linchpin of this thesis. It is the reason our government is incapable of advancing the rights of humankind. It is the reason we have not secured our right to vote. It is the reason we have not fulfilled the right to healthcare, the right to employment or the right to decent shelter. All our interests as citizens of the nation fall secondary to corporate interests because the largest and most powerful international corporations have a stranglehold on our political process.
They have the money and money rules – even when it has been provided on the public dole from our own pockets.
What we need now is a peaceful revolution, a mass movement, and a cause that supercedes all others. It is a cause that unifies disparate groups because it is simple and appeals to common sense. It would not prevent the election of fools and charlatans to office but it would end corporate dominance of our government overnight.
It is simply this: Only individuals (subject to the limitations set by our legislative bodies) shall be allowed to contribute to political campaigns.
Jazz.
JACK RANDOM IS THE AUTHOR OF THE JAZZMAN CHRONICLES (CROW DOG PRESS) AND GHOST DANCE INSURRECTION (DRY BONES PRESS). THE CHRONICLES HAVE BEEN POSTED ON NUMEROUS CITES OF THE WORLDWIDE WEB, INCLUDING THE ALBION MONITOR, BELLACIAO, BUZZLE, COUNTERPUNCH, DISSIDENT VOICE, THE NATIONAL FREE PRESS AND PACIFIC FREE PRESS. SEE WWW.JAZZMANCHRONICLES.BLOGSPOT.COM.
Labels: Jack Random, Jazzman Chronicles
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Beatlick Travel: Wild Rivers
Date: Sep 26, 2009 11:23 AM
The confluence of the Rio Grande and Red River is at the Wild Rivers Recreation Area where this report originates. The confluence I mentioned earlier on the Low Road to Taos report was actually the Rio Grande and Rio Pueblo confluence.
I also meant to tell you in my last report about all the small black tarantulas that kept crossing the dirt road we took out to Manby Springs. We passed seven in one mile. That was before the weather changed. These little guys knew all about it and were on their way to make new burrows for themselves as they prepared to settle down for the winter.
We are already hunkered down in full winter mode now as we head out for the Wild Rivers Recreation Area on BLM land. We are sleeping on the bottom bunk and lining the interior with the Indian blankets to keep in the warmth from two big candles, an oil lamp, the occasional Coleman heater, and my favorite – a hot water bottle. I carry it around like a baby, call it the “baby” and just am amazed how warm and cozy it makes me feel. I love it.
We have driven about thirty miles from Taos, off the main road, through lots of small communities that seem to be living a much more hard-scrabble life than their counterparts in glamorous downtown Taos. The clouds get bigger, grayer, and more daunting as we head further and further away.
The Montoso campsite is along the rim of the Rio Grande Gorge. The mountains are dark and vast in the background. There is a second gorge beyond our horizon where the Red River is making its way through its own steep canyon walls, heading toward the Rio Grande. It rains on us that night and a subdued atmosphere greets us as we set out on our hike.
We had to walk to the Junta Trail from the van through a path of decimated pines. By the time we got to the gorge overlook there was some sun peeking out of the clouds. We were well suited up, complete with gloves, sweaters, neck scarves, and sporting two walking sticks.
Here two ecological worlds collide at the Junta. High above on the rim where we camp we see grasslands below the big mountain peaks, along with sagebrush, juniper and pinyon trees. Far down below in the shadows at the bottom of the gorge there are towering ponderosa pine, small springs, and lush riparian vegetation. All lay there in shadow most of the day because the canyon walls are so high.
I can't imagine how far it is from the bottom of that gorge where the river runs to the top of those snow capped mountain peaks that greeted us this morning. It is a 1.2 mile hike down to the confluence. The trail is rated “difficult” and it is. We set out on a rocky switch back trail, had to climb down one ladder, take a long series of metal steps clinging to the rock face, then follow the continuous switch back rocky path down to a flatland. The BLM has made a valiant effort to hold back the relentless law of gravity that erodes the steep rock walls, taking out old trails, and necessitating new ones. At the bottom four trails converged into a cross, where we picked up the Junta trail, .4 miles further down an easy dirt path.
Unlike so many other places we have constantly encountered other hikers here, mostly fishermen with their rods in hand. Two couples came by us with ski poles, or I guess hiking poles. I took our two wooden walking sticks and made myself a hiking stick outfit and was amazed how much easier it was to maneauver and traverse across the rocks.
Despite how intimidating the trail looked and how distant the confluence, we made it there in 30 minutes or less. The hiking sticks I think added to the speed. Joe is a billy goat and scampers over rocks. I was definitely going slower than he was before I started using the two sticks.
There were only big boulders where the two rivers came together, no shoreline. The Rio Grande is the larger of the two rivers, neither one of them really daunting, yet the slope of the land and the big rocks created a friction and conflict so strong that a marvelous roar fills your ears and the water is smashing and gushing over stones, with the light dancing through the droplets of water. I found a relatively flat rock, took up a comfortable yoga position and just willed all that raw energy into my own body.
Later with great dexterity we made two sandwiches on our knees; there was no surface to maneuver with. We munched avocado, pepperoni, and cheese sandwiches while we watched the nearby man fishing for trout. Two women sat on rocks keeping him company. The sun went in and out and long logs of gray clouds still dominated the sky.
When Joe pointed out to me the ridge we had to hike back to I was shocked by how far away it looked and figured it would take all afternoon to get there. However surprisingly enough we were back withing an hour and fifteen minutes.
The most devastating shock of this hike is the destruction created by the pine bark beetles. We camped in the bone yard of pine tree skeletons. In my estimation in places a third of the trees are destroyed. Their carcasses so massive in number that it would be impossible to remove them, or burn them, and they devastate the landscape with their blackened limbs like burnt fingers scratching towards deliverance. But there is none.
Happy Trails
Beatlick Pamela
The confluence of the Rio Grande and Red River is at the Wild Rivers Recreation Area where this report originates. The confluence I mentioned earlier on the Low Road to Taos report was actually the Rio Grande and Rio Pueblo confluence.
I also meant to tell you in my last report about all the small black tarantulas that kept crossing the dirt road we took out to Manby Springs. We passed seven in one mile. That was before the weather changed. These little guys knew all about it and were on their way to make new burrows for themselves as they prepared to settle down for the winter.
We are already hunkered down in full winter mode now as we head out for the Wild Rivers Recreation Area on BLM land. We are sleeping on the bottom bunk and lining the interior with the Indian blankets to keep in the warmth from two big candles, an oil lamp, the occasional Coleman heater, and my favorite – a hot water bottle. I carry it around like a baby, call it the “baby” and just am amazed how warm and cozy it makes me feel. I love it.
We have driven about thirty miles from Taos, off the main road, through lots of small communities that seem to be living a much more hard-scrabble life than their counterparts in glamorous downtown Taos. The clouds get bigger, grayer, and more daunting as we head further and further away.
The Montoso campsite is along the rim of the Rio Grande Gorge. The mountains are dark and vast in the background. There is a second gorge beyond our horizon where the Red River is making its way through its own steep canyon walls, heading toward the Rio Grande. It rains on us that night and a subdued atmosphere greets us as we set out on our hike.
We had to walk to the Junta Trail from the van through a path of decimated pines. By the time we got to the gorge overlook there was some sun peeking out of the clouds. We were well suited up, complete with gloves, sweaters, neck scarves, and sporting two walking sticks.
Here two ecological worlds collide at the Junta. High above on the rim where we camp we see grasslands below the big mountain peaks, along with sagebrush, juniper and pinyon trees. Far down below in the shadows at the bottom of the gorge there are towering ponderosa pine, small springs, and lush riparian vegetation. All lay there in shadow most of the day because the canyon walls are so high.
I can't imagine how far it is from the bottom of that gorge where the river runs to the top of those snow capped mountain peaks that greeted us this morning. It is a 1.2 mile hike down to the confluence. The trail is rated “difficult” and it is. We set out on a rocky switch back trail, had to climb down one ladder, take a long series of metal steps clinging to the rock face, then follow the continuous switch back rocky path down to a flatland. The BLM has made a valiant effort to hold back the relentless law of gravity that erodes the steep rock walls, taking out old trails, and necessitating new ones. At the bottom four trails converged into a cross, where we picked up the Junta trail, .4 miles further down an easy dirt path.
Unlike so many other places we have constantly encountered other hikers here, mostly fishermen with their rods in hand. Two couples came by us with ski poles, or I guess hiking poles. I took our two wooden walking sticks and made myself a hiking stick outfit and was amazed how much easier it was to maneauver and traverse across the rocks.
Despite how intimidating the trail looked and how distant the confluence, we made it there in 30 minutes or less. The hiking sticks I think added to the speed. Joe is a billy goat and scampers over rocks. I was definitely going slower than he was before I started using the two sticks.
There were only big boulders where the two rivers came together, no shoreline. The Rio Grande is the larger of the two rivers, neither one of them really daunting, yet the slope of the land and the big rocks created a friction and conflict so strong that a marvelous roar fills your ears and the water is smashing and gushing over stones, with the light dancing through the droplets of water. I found a relatively flat rock, took up a comfortable yoga position and just willed all that raw energy into my own body.
Later with great dexterity we made two sandwiches on our knees; there was no surface to maneuver with. We munched avocado, pepperoni, and cheese sandwiches while we watched the nearby man fishing for trout. Two women sat on rocks keeping him company. The sun went in and out and long logs of gray clouds still dominated the sky.
When Joe pointed out to me the ridge we had to hike back to I was shocked by how far away it looked and figured it would take all afternoon to get there. However surprisingly enough we were back withing an hour and fifteen minutes.
The most devastating shock of this hike is the destruction created by the pine bark beetles. We camped in the bone yard of pine tree skeletons. In my estimation in places a third of the trees are destroyed. Their carcasses so massive in number that it would be impossible to remove them, or burn them, and they devastate the landscape with their blackened limbs like burnt fingers scratching towards deliverance. But there is none.
Happy Trails
Beatlick Pamela
Labels: Beatlicks
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Beatlick Travel: Taos
Date: Sep 23, 2009 11:45 AM
We spent four days urban camping in Taos alternating between Wal-Mart and Smith's grocery store before we found the public parking lot. Most accommodating with the city bus line right there, too. Taos is wrapping up the "Summer of Love" and I have had a good time interviewing locals about their reactions. Very diversified and some downright controversial. I have a scathing report to pass on later from a local, but I'm still waiting for permission to publish his rant.
Taos is tiny and I'm telling you they roll up the sidewalks at six o'clock around here. The restaurants are closed by nine and there are I think only three bars that are open into the night. The whole focus is the art scene and skiing. The prices are outrageous I think and all the merchandise is high end. We attended an open-mic in the lounge at the historic Taos Inn, but got there late. There was never a sign up sheet or invitation by the guy singing for anyone else to participate. The drinks were $9 apiece so Joe just ordered a $2 cup of tea. It was a great place to people watch. It's obvious who are the wealthy tourists and who are local low-enders. Their faces are lined with hard work and their jeans are stained with dirty feet in worn out sandals.
The lobby itself was magnificent, constructed of old timbers higher that telephone poles called vegas. They held up a mosaic roof of more wood, smaller pieces called latillas. They made a mosaic of great beauty, like some Cistene Chapel made out of logs. Balconied rooms overlooked the lounge and there was a great iron door that opened into the bar. All the walls were old adobe.
A beautiful long-haired redhead sat next to Beatlick Joe so he initiated a conversation with her. Turns out she lives in Gatlinburg and is moving to the tiny little shrine town of Chimayo. She said her name was Jen and she was staying in Santa Fe and had driven up for the day because she loved Taos so much. Her rental car had been broken into into two days before and she was overcome with how much help and support people gave her as she dealt with the problem. Turns out when she was married she lived in Nashville and her ex-husband ran the fancy Stockyard Restaurant downtown. After a few reminiscences about Music City we were discussing the local hot springs.
Before long a single man sitting on a nearby leather sofa joined our conversation. He was from Rhode Island, a real estate evaluator, whatever that means. He was obviously taken with Jen, who never would disclose her last name as she divulged her former careers in radio and the broadcast media world.
Bob turned out to be divorced, came to Taos two or three times a year, and was currently staying in an earth ship house out in what the locals call the "gopher holes." Those are houses made of recycled materials and tires filled with dirt. As Jen used her interviewing skills Bob's answers disclosed more affluency. He had another house in Vermont. The richer he appeared the more animated she became. Soon Bob was ordering a round of those $9 drinks. We had a good time talking to those two and Joe and I speculated if Jen would really drive all the way back to Santa Fe. We all departed when the bar closed at eleven. Jen had a CD of one of her interviews with an important physicist and philosopher back at her car she wanted to give Bob. We speculated whether she would make that long drive back to Santa Fe that night.
It was one of the most social nights we have had with anyone since we came here. The other highlight of our trip was the spectacular hike down to Manby Hot Springs. They are just a few miles out of town, about six miles down a dirt road. Then you park and hike down the Rio Grande Gorge. It was a steep and rocky trail but only took about twenty minutes. Another VW van owner was there with us. We have seen a lot of VW vans in this town.
Our hot springs mate was Stephan, pronounced the European way: stef-fun. I had hoped we would be alone and we had waited most of the afternoon for the parking lot to empty out. But just as we locked up our van Stephan pulled up in his. So I had to soak, in my bathing suit I might add, with Joe and Stephan both naked. But that's the way it's done out here.
Happy Trails
Beatlick Pamela
We spent four days urban camping in Taos alternating between Wal-Mart and Smith's grocery store before we found the public parking lot. Most accommodating with the city bus line right there, too. Taos is wrapping up the "Summer of Love" and I have had a good time interviewing locals about their reactions. Very diversified and some downright controversial. I have a scathing report to pass on later from a local, but I'm still waiting for permission to publish his rant.
Taos is tiny and I'm telling you they roll up the sidewalks at six o'clock around here. The restaurants are closed by nine and there are I think only three bars that are open into the night. The whole focus is the art scene and skiing. The prices are outrageous I think and all the merchandise is high end. We attended an open-mic in the lounge at the historic Taos Inn, but got there late. There was never a sign up sheet or invitation by the guy singing for anyone else to participate. The drinks were $9 apiece so Joe just ordered a $2 cup of tea. It was a great place to people watch. It's obvious who are the wealthy tourists and who are local low-enders. Their faces are lined with hard work and their jeans are stained with dirty feet in worn out sandals.
The lobby itself was magnificent, constructed of old timbers higher that telephone poles called vegas. They held up a mosaic roof of more wood, smaller pieces called latillas. They made a mosaic of great beauty, like some Cistene Chapel made out of logs. Balconied rooms overlooked the lounge and there was a great iron door that opened into the bar. All the walls were old adobe.
A beautiful long-haired redhead sat next to Beatlick Joe so he initiated a conversation with her. Turns out she lives in Gatlinburg and is moving to the tiny little shrine town of Chimayo. She said her name was Jen and she was staying in Santa Fe and had driven up for the day because she loved Taos so much. Her rental car had been broken into into two days before and she was overcome with how much help and support people gave her as she dealt with the problem. Turns out when she was married she lived in Nashville and her ex-husband ran the fancy Stockyard Restaurant downtown. After a few reminiscences about Music City we were discussing the local hot springs.
Before long a single man sitting on a nearby leather sofa joined our conversation. He was from Rhode Island, a real estate evaluator, whatever that means. He was obviously taken with Jen, who never would disclose her last name as she divulged her former careers in radio and the broadcast media world.
Bob turned out to be divorced, came to Taos two or three times a year, and was currently staying in an earth ship house out in what the locals call the "gopher holes." Those are houses made of recycled materials and tires filled with dirt. As Jen used her interviewing skills Bob's answers disclosed more affluency. He had another house in Vermont. The richer he appeared the more animated she became. Soon Bob was ordering a round of those $9 drinks. We had a good time talking to those two and Joe and I speculated if Jen would really drive all the way back to Santa Fe. We all departed when the bar closed at eleven. Jen had a CD of one of her interviews with an important physicist and philosopher back at her car she wanted to give Bob. We speculated whether she would make that long drive back to Santa Fe that night.
It was one of the most social nights we have had with anyone since we came here. The other highlight of our trip was the spectacular hike down to Manby Hot Springs. They are just a few miles out of town, about six miles down a dirt road. Then you park and hike down the Rio Grande Gorge. It was a steep and rocky trail but only took about twenty minutes. Another VW van owner was there with us. We have seen a lot of VW vans in this town.
Our hot springs mate was Stephan, pronounced the European way: stef-fun. I had hoped we would be alone and we had waited most of the afternoon for the parking lot to empty out. But just as we locked up our van Stephan pulled up in his. So I had to soak, in my bathing suit I might add, with Joe and Stephan both naked. But that's the way it's done out here.
Happy Trails
Beatlick Pamela
Labels: Beatlicks
