HUBRIS, PREJUDICE OR SOMETHING WORST?
A National Reconciliation Plan, such a lofty, idealistic, emotive concept, but in precept, given the situation in Iraq, a will-of-the-wisp that only a government sponsored and backed by the Bush Administration would see as a realistic goal, to me its just another Karl Rove fantasy.
The balance of power in this tragic, beleaguered country has been destroyed and the engine driving this conflict is the fact that the proceeds from the second largest pool of oil on Planet Earth are up for grabs.
The question is why should the militarily stronger Sunnis who controlled these funds in the past be interested in national reconciliation when it would mean, not only that these resources would be firmly entrenched in the hands of the Shia majority government, but that this economic power would be used to eventually bring about their ultimate relegation to obscurity and quite possibly their destruction?
What would convince the Sunnis that their dark deeds and abuses of power of the past will be forgiven while ethnic cleansing is moving forward apace in many of their neighborhoods?
National reconciliation in Iraq is as illusory in precept as the nationally redemptive proposition that the Bush Administration would own up to and accept responsibility for its mistakes and admit its palpable and egregious incapacity to govern.
Nor is it likely, given the near total lack of support for the bill sponsored by Senator Kerry et al to set a timetable for the withdrawal of the troops from Iraq that the Congress can limit the abuses of power of this rogue Administration.
It is clear to me that circumstances and events in Iraq have developed a momentum so potentially tragic that the USA can ill afford the luxury of gradualism.
The too little, too late approach has become anachronistic as this nation moves with ever increasing impetus towards disaster.
The time has come for urgent, decisive action to end hostilities in Iraq, it is time for this nation to become aware that a pretend democracy that obscures and provides window dressing for control of government by big money interests is not viable; it is time for a change.
It is time to somehow bring an end to dependency, for a bare majority of citizens to become aware and take responsibility for the future of this nation; or, accept the near certainty of a very dark and dismal period ahead.
Is it possible that this tragedy could have been avoided; would President Bush been so unalterably determined to precipitately attack Iraq – if he had been aware of the consequences and implications of his actions?
Would the Congress knowing what it knows now, have voted to support this action?
Would the American electorate, in the context of information now available, have reelected President Bush no matter how many Swift Boat Ads he ran?
Most importantly and urgently, is there any way the information that was available four years ago prior to the attack provided the basis for action that would have avoided the sere and dread actuality of Allied Forces being deeply mired in the shifting treacherous sands of Iraq?
As I have tried on numerous occasions to communicate the fundamental issue is the inability to process information and arrive at timely conclusions, Americans are just not capable of connecting the dots, and this is the blanket, pervasive inadequacy that must be remedied.
But it is possible to process information to avoid the tragedies and catastrophes that have become commonplace – as I have proved on occasions too numerous to mention, as is documented on the web site voiceofpeace.net.
On at least two occasions I have tried to sound the alarm regarding issues deeply and urgently affecting the welfare of this nation; on both occasions I have failed miserably, even after communicating with the major components of the print and electronic media, with the most visible and powerful politicians and with academicians.
On the first occasion, in 1996, I tried to sound a warning about the fraud being perpetuated against students in the education system.
More recently, I have tried to argue for a more rational and functional response to the problem of combating terrorism.
I feel constrained to speculate about the reason for my failure, is it hubris, or prejudice, or something worst?
In the context of their palpable and pervasive failure to deal with social problems, are Americans too proud to consider valid alternatives, too proud to accept good advice from whatever quarter?
Can President Bush admit that he was wrong to attack Iraq, is it possible for him to accept responsibility for the two thousand five hundred lives that has been wasted because of his error in judgment? Could any human being make such a confession, such a personal sacrifice if it meant that the bloodshed would cease?
It must be clear that the current ideology, the attitudes and ways of thinking being applied to problems are not working, that a new approach is urgently required; also, the extent and degree of the failure to combat poverty, to educate the young, to promote economic growth, to create and implement a viable foreign policy; all indicate that the change required could not be a cosmetic, minor change, but that a fundamental change in direction is needed to create function.
I was not the only voice dissenting against the war, I was not the only prophet of doom indicating the failure of social institutions; what is unique about my position is that I go beyond criticism to suggest that being habituated to applying coercion determined the nature of human culture and is the cause of the mental malaise that cripples and makes futile attempts to create functioning democracies; further that an alternative, positive reinforcements must be adopted to replace coercion if we are to make real the promises of democracy.
Is it possible that a world view that could prompt positive developments have been created by a mulatto from a Caribbean backwater, is it possible that the only way that the human race can break from the intellectual and cultural traditions of the past and create a viable future is if a bare majority of human beings can overcome their prejudices and give credence to the design for human existence produced by someone of mostly mixed Asian and African heritage?
My failure is the more disheartening because I have consistently attempted to enlist the cooperation of human beings; I have attempted to present the facts, the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the existing social reality; I have carefully refrained from joining the intense competition for goods and services, nor have I attempted to impose my world view on any individual.
I have mostly refrained from playing the role of prophet despite the temptations created by successive failures to create a forum for my ideas and have attempted to give a reasonable and rational explanation for my ability to predict the future; that this arises from telling the truth which with practice produces the ability to accurately describe problems, the necessary prerequisite to their solution.
I have never claimed to be unique, or magical, or supernatural, but have said that any human being who practices the discipline of truth will develop the facility to solve problems that I display.
The descriptions of contemporary failures of governments and individuals have been objective, constructive criticisms; that should be seen to be so because I have consistently decried the inadequacies of all individuals and institutions of coercion based culture without fear or favor, without being partisan even using incidents that expose the limitations of the characters of close family and friends to emphasize that the problem is cultural, that the same failed ideology is being applied by politicians, statesmen, religious leaders and ordinary men and women.
I have invariably focused on promoting the method, telling the truth, above every other consideration.
I present a once in a lifetime opportunity for my race; I have told the truth until the truth has made me free – and survived to report on this transformation.
I am saying that telling the truth, the practice of this value, is the means of cleansing the mind of repression that cripples and lames the intellect of the vast majority of human beings and effectively makes impossible the application of intelligence to social problems.
I suggest that the Ministry of Jesus contained the same message but this message was diluted and its impact significantly reduced when the early Church confronted the necessity of becoming popular in an Absolutist regime, a political milieu in which telling the truth was tantamount to committing suicide so a compromise was reached that allowed the Church to survive, albeit in a form that adopted the existing culture; the Spirit of Truth was transformed into the Holy Ghost and telling the truth was replaced by possession.
I say again I have told the truth and this discipline has cleansed my mind of the repression produced by coercion based culture, that the practice of this discipline by a bare majority will produce functioning democracies.
I say further that coercion was the means relied to motivate action for all of human history with many debilitating effects, and that we must adopt the obvious, viable alternative, positive reinforcements – if we are to create a viable future for the human race.
This is not a second hand report compiled more than a hundred years after the fact; it is a report by the individual who has actually experienced the moral and intellectual development precipitated by practicing the discipline of truth, and one whose report is validated by his results, as the essays, the prophetic essays on the web site voiceofpeace.net attest.
There is no doubt that as far back as 1996 I saw and attempted to communicate the failure of the education system, a failure that Oprah Winfrey, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Bill Gates and Time Magazine are now belatedly aware of, a decade later.
There is no doubt that I accurately predicted a long time ago that occupation of Iraq by Allied forces would fail miserably, that this would become the mess that in answering questions at a recent Press Club Luncheon, John Edwards former Senator from North Carolina and Vice Presidential Candidate agreed it has become.
What could be the something worst than hubris or prejudice?
One component of that could be that most individuals wish to perpetuate the status quo, a status quo of inequity and inequality, in which the needs, wants and desires of the individual is much more important than the national interest or the common good.
Can it be that most people want that prostitution continues to dominate the relations between men and women; can it be most of us, albeit unconsciously, wish to perpetuate a situation where, as in the past, the male satisfied the innate drives of his spouse for food, shelter and clothing but ignored her every other need, and in return used her as a sexual object and household drudge?
Can it be that all human beings are capable of is what they have been habituated to over many millennia, relationships in which there is no equity, relationships in which the needs of the strong are satisfied, while those of the weak are not?
Despite three hundred years of the ‘practice’ of democracy this remains the reality today, in every country five per cent of the populace control ninety per cent of the wealth; this is the model for all social relationships, even while artists like Teddy Pendergrass express the hope in a popular love song, that a fifty - fifty love is what would create the possibility of happiness.
Can there be equity, or anything close to it, in human relationships? Can equity be achieved while competition is the ethos of human societies, can equity be achieved in coercion based culture? Is the motivation human beings rely on something they can think about, or is this an area completely repressed?
What I must conclude after thirty years of failing completely to communicate these ideas is that the something worst is that human beings do not know and cannot know what they are doing.
President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, the architects of the attack on Iraq cannot confront reality, nor can anyone else; these individuals cannot admit that they mistakenly caused two thousand five hundred lives to be snuffed out in error.
I live in the real world, alone; to enter that world Americans would have to confront the reality that President Reagan, the most popular political figure of recent history, used his executive powers to cause the Space Shuttle Challenger to be launched in weather conditions that ensured its destruction; that he without accepting any blame or without tendering any expression of guilt or remorse gave the eulogy to the dead astronauts and made political points by so doing; and, commissioned an enquiry to cover up his crime.
To enter the world I live in, Americans would have to become aware that human culture was designed to facilitate the sexual abuse of minors by adults; that the young were conditioned to abstain from sex so they would be in a state of high drive and be easy prey.
To enter the world I live in, Americans would have find credible and accept the reality of corruption that Detective Frank Serpico observed in the New York Police Department.
But more, Americans would have to become aware of the difference between concept and precept in their lives; they would have to confront their own moral debility, I am not talking about criticizing the failings of others, of politicians, or religious leaders, or judges, but of themselves, each and every one of them, as they pursue their day to day existences.
To illustrate this, and to indicate how difficult it is for individuals to see the beam in their own eyes, I relate an incident from my own experiences.
Several months ago I received an item of electronic mail from my brother; in that missive he stated that he had chanced upon my daughter and her mother and they had inquired about me and indicated that they had not heard from me for some time.
He lamented on the breakdown of communication in the family and seemed to be encouraging me to stay in touch with my child.
This remonstrance seemed bizarre, strange and out of place coming from him because he has a child for whom he has never provided even an iota of financial support though he is moderately well off, a daughter who he has never recognized as his own, who he has never spoken to or hugged or done any of those things society requires of parents.
It must have been forty years ago he came to me and said he had had sex with a woman once who subsequently proved to be pregnant.
I was twenty years old at the time and advised him that it was unlikely that one such encounter could produce such a result and told him to be sure the child was his before accepting responsibility for it.
Based on that advice he declined responsibility for the child.
A few years later I met that same woman and dated her; she told me that the one time she had had sex with my brother had been her first such experience, that she had never had sex with anyone else prior to that assignation and that she had become pregnant, she was understandably bitter even as she pointed out the child lying in a crib nearby that she claimed was my niece.
Some fifteen years later I again encountered that child and her mother, she happened to be living on the same street as I in Havendale.
In the interim my moral development had begun; when I had advised my brother as to the likelihood of impregnating a female in one sexual encounter, I had been an agent of coercion based culture and one of those who preyed on women, and this fact determined my view of the situation; that mindset had also caused me to doubt the veracity of the story told by that woman during our second encounter, I was much more focused on getting into her pants than giving her justice.
But when I saw my brother’s teenaged child from a perspective cleansed by the practice of the discipline of truth I had no doubt that she was indeed my niece, I so advised him and encouraged him to belated accept responsibility for the child and make up for the neglect of the several years during which he had failed to recognize her.
He declined to even consider doing this, citing the problems it would precipitate in his marriage and his family.
Subsequent to my divorce, when I was thirty two years old, I also had to make a decision as to whether to accept responsibility for a child I was not sure was mine; but by then my moral development had progressed to the point where I was sure that being a father had very much to do with a having a capacity for love and very little to do with the biological act of impregnating a female – and acted accordingly.
When the woman with whom I was having sexual relationships with for about six weeks missed her period, because I knew that she had previously aborted a child in her lunchtime, I went and picked her up at midday shortly thereafter, ostensibly to have lunch with her, but took her to see her doctor.
When that Doctor advised her that I could only be privy to the information he would provide if she desired it, and she hesitated to confirm that she desired my presence and involvement, I told them that aborting a child I believed was mine would have the same result as leaping from a high cliff.
When the Doctor took umbrage at my remarks and threatened to call the Police, we left his office and I took her to see my doctor who confirmed that she was pregnant and recommended the gynecologist who eventually delivered that child.
I caused that woman to cohabit with me for the duration of her pregnancy despite the negative impact this might have had on my two small children whose biological mother had recently abandoned them without saying goodbye.
When that woman proved her unsuitability for motherhood by ironing several dozen nappies of cloth, the disposable versions not being popular in Jamaica at that juncture, late in her pregnancy precipitating birth by caesarean section; I paid for this very expensive procedure as well the other costs of her confinement without demur or without remonstrating with her at her carelessness, expenditures which I had not budgeted for because she assured me that those costs would be covered by her medical insurance.
I wish to be clear, to guard and secure the life of that unborn child, I provided financial support for her mother; I ensured that she could stop working in a timely fashion and rest at home so that there would be no complications - and still she found a way to make things difficult by engaging in a completely unnecessary very strenuous activity which was anyway a task the domestic helper I employed was duty bound to perform.
When I resigned on a point of principle and could no longer support her in the style to which she had become accustomed, she immediately left and disputed my right to see the child; I sought and received the intervention of the Social Service Department in Jamaica who disabused her of the notion that ‘the child did not need a father’ and confirmed my access to the child.
For the five years that I was unemployed I could not contribute financially to her welfare but did everything I could to be with her and nurse her through the childhood diseases she contracted; I remember with a clarity undiminished by the passage of time an occasion when she contracted a virus which gave her a high fever, for the duration I held in my arms, continually took her temperature and knocked it down with a combination of alcohol and chilled water.
When I received my green card I ensured that the child received that benefit also and went to great pains to ensure that she entered the USA in my company so that her right to reside in this nation would not be questioned.
For as many times as my finances allowed over the years since my migration to the USA in 1984, I caused her to visit me on her vacations in school, accompanied by her mother on at least one occasion.
When she graduated High School in Jamaica, for two years I worked two jobs to be able to afford a lifestyle that would give her the opportunity of attending college in the USA.
My effort and sacrifice were meaningless; after a few months she discovered she could not live without her boyfriend in Jamaica and she made arrangements to return to that country to marry him.
She had quickly become employed at one of the companies I worked for but instead of using the income she earned to get a college education, she spent her earnings calling Jamaica long distance and accumulated a phone bill of some Three Thousand Dollars, making a mockery of two years of my unremitting labor.
Two years during which I was always exhausted, two years during which by the end of the week I would fall asleep as I waited for the light to change at intersections, two years during which I had to be extremely careful lest my tiredness cause an accident.
But none of this caused me to love her any less; the rift between us resulted from a point of principle.
I asked her to delay her marriage so that I could attend; one of the consequences of poverty is that it had caused me to miss out on all the social occasions that my family celebrated, I had not attended funerals, and weddings, on anniversaries over the years.
Even with the income from two jobs I had not the means to attend her wedding in Jamaica and pay the bills that were due each month; in fact, the reason that she could go is that I had agreed to pay her bills for six month so that she could save the money to pay for her tuition.
I knew that I was due to receive an inheritance from the estate of an aunt that had died in Jamaica; that would allow me a break from the treadmill of poverty on which I had existed for so many years; an amount that would allow me not only to attend but to defray the cost of her wedding.
She declined to postpone the wedding, and it occurred in my absence, as had so many celebrations over the years, including the wedding of my other daughter.
I reflected on all the years of her life, that she had never given me a Christmas card or a birthday card, or any other gift; indeed, the Christmas we were together she had bought presents for those she had left in Jamaica but never considered it necessary to buy me a gift whatever its value.
It became clear to me that there was no equity in our relationship, that she was treating me as prey; the guiding principle of my life is that I treat no human being as prey, nor, will I be treated by any human being as prey.
I am different from other human beings because I do not compromise on principles; these apply for me with every individual, with every organization, in every situation.
I am uncompromising in my attachment to certain principles, and the several bouts of poverty I have endured; the loneliness that is my lot is a consequence of this as much as anything else.
I confess to expecting certain minimum standards of behavior from all human beings, no less than I expect from myself; and this has dire consequences in a world where anything goes, a world in which there are no standards of behavior.
But is progress possible if everyone accepts that there should be a world where anything goes?
I am an honest politician, someone who went into politics well off and came out dirt poor, it is one of my greatest achievements which like my efforts to be a good father will never get the recognition it deserves, and for the same reason, because in concept every politician is honest, and everyone is a good father and exposure of the reality is not permitted, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth can never be told.
My brother shared my experiences more than any other person on earth; he should have been able to follow my political career and should have been aware that while all my colleagues became millionaires I endured poverty; yet he has the temerity and effrontery to call me a liar.
He should be aware of my efforts to be a good father to my daughter, and should be able to compare this to his treatment of his children; yet he dares to question my actions as a parent.
The point I am so laboriously making is that all human beings and all organizations cannot bear exposure, they do all in their power to appear to act consistent with the concepts they espouse, and they have the power to suppress the truth, so that for an individual to achieve real moral consistency is something that must be suppressed at all cost.
But I have done this, and those who ignore my warnings do so at their peril, the articles I wrote for the Daily Gleaner from 1979 through 1982 attest to this in respect of the fortunes of the island of Jamaica, the information on the web site voiceofpeace.net should be taken very seriously by all those who deem it in their interests to ignore it, the doom that I foretell will come to past – unless the remedies I suggest are applied.
I say again that the solution to all the massive social problems that human beings face is very simple; they must adopt the discipline of truth and commit to applying positive reinforcements in their relations with other human beings.
The alternative is also clear, if this moral development does not occur an increasing majority of human beings will continue to languish, as they have done since the beginning of time, on a treadmill of tragedy; a treadmill that exists in a stasis of conflict, poverty and despair.
William E. Virtue
Memphis, TN
Copyright Retained, All Rights Reserved
The balance of power in this tragic, beleaguered country has been destroyed and the engine driving this conflict is the fact that the proceeds from the second largest pool of oil on Planet Earth are up for grabs.
The question is why should the militarily stronger Sunnis who controlled these funds in the past be interested in national reconciliation when it would mean, not only that these resources would be firmly entrenched in the hands of the Shia majority government, but that this economic power would be used to eventually bring about their ultimate relegation to obscurity and quite possibly their destruction?
What would convince the Sunnis that their dark deeds and abuses of power of the past will be forgiven while ethnic cleansing is moving forward apace in many of their neighborhoods?
National reconciliation in Iraq is as illusory in precept as the nationally redemptive proposition that the Bush Administration would own up to and accept responsibility for its mistakes and admit its palpable and egregious incapacity to govern.
Nor is it likely, given the near total lack of support for the bill sponsored by Senator Kerry et al to set a timetable for the withdrawal of the troops from Iraq that the Congress can limit the abuses of power of this rogue Administration.
It is clear to me that circumstances and events in Iraq have developed a momentum so potentially tragic that the USA can ill afford the luxury of gradualism.
The too little, too late approach has become anachronistic as this nation moves with ever increasing impetus towards disaster.
The time has come for urgent, decisive action to end hostilities in Iraq, it is time for this nation to become aware that a pretend democracy that obscures and provides window dressing for control of government by big money interests is not viable; it is time for a change.
It is time to somehow bring an end to dependency, for a bare majority of citizens to become aware and take responsibility for the future of this nation; or, accept the near certainty of a very dark and dismal period ahead.
Is it possible that this tragedy could have been avoided; would President Bush been so unalterably determined to precipitately attack Iraq – if he had been aware of the consequences and implications of his actions?
Would the Congress knowing what it knows now, have voted to support this action?
Would the American electorate, in the context of information now available, have reelected President Bush no matter how many Swift Boat Ads he ran?
Most importantly and urgently, is there any way the information that was available four years ago prior to the attack provided the basis for action that would have avoided the sere and dread actuality of Allied Forces being deeply mired in the shifting treacherous sands of Iraq?
As I have tried on numerous occasions to communicate the fundamental issue is the inability to process information and arrive at timely conclusions, Americans are just not capable of connecting the dots, and this is the blanket, pervasive inadequacy that must be remedied.
But it is possible to process information to avoid the tragedies and catastrophes that have become commonplace – as I have proved on occasions too numerous to mention, as is documented on the web site voiceofpeace.net.
On at least two occasions I have tried to sound the alarm regarding issues deeply and urgently affecting the welfare of this nation; on both occasions I have failed miserably, even after communicating with the major components of the print and electronic media, with the most visible and powerful politicians and with academicians.
On the first occasion, in 1996, I tried to sound a warning about the fraud being perpetuated against students in the education system.
More recently, I have tried to argue for a more rational and functional response to the problem of combating terrorism.
I feel constrained to speculate about the reason for my failure, is it hubris, or prejudice, or something worst?
In the context of their palpable and pervasive failure to deal with social problems, are Americans too proud to consider valid alternatives, too proud to accept good advice from whatever quarter?
Can President Bush admit that he was wrong to attack Iraq, is it possible for him to accept responsibility for the two thousand five hundred lives that has been wasted because of his error in judgment? Could any human being make such a confession, such a personal sacrifice if it meant that the bloodshed would cease?
It must be clear that the current ideology, the attitudes and ways of thinking being applied to problems are not working, that a new approach is urgently required; also, the extent and degree of the failure to combat poverty, to educate the young, to promote economic growth, to create and implement a viable foreign policy; all indicate that the change required could not be a cosmetic, minor change, but that a fundamental change in direction is needed to create function.
I was not the only voice dissenting against the war, I was not the only prophet of doom indicating the failure of social institutions; what is unique about my position is that I go beyond criticism to suggest that being habituated to applying coercion determined the nature of human culture and is the cause of the mental malaise that cripples and makes futile attempts to create functioning democracies; further that an alternative, positive reinforcements must be adopted to replace coercion if we are to make real the promises of democracy.
Is it possible that a world view that could prompt positive developments have been created by a mulatto from a Caribbean backwater, is it possible that the only way that the human race can break from the intellectual and cultural traditions of the past and create a viable future is if a bare majority of human beings can overcome their prejudices and give credence to the design for human existence produced by someone of mostly mixed Asian and African heritage?
My failure is the more disheartening because I have consistently attempted to enlist the cooperation of human beings; I have attempted to present the facts, the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the existing social reality; I have carefully refrained from joining the intense competition for goods and services, nor have I attempted to impose my world view on any individual.
I have mostly refrained from playing the role of prophet despite the temptations created by successive failures to create a forum for my ideas and have attempted to give a reasonable and rational explanation for my ability to predict the future; that this arises from telling the truth which with practice produces the ability to accurately describe problems, the necessary prerequisite to their solution.
I have never claimed to be unique, or magical, or supernatural, but have said that any human being who practices the discipline of truth will develop the facility to solve problems that I display.
The descriptions of contemporary failures of governments and individuals have been objective, constructive criticisms; that should be seen to be so because I have consistently decried the inadequacies of all individuals and institutions of coercion based culture without fear or favor, without being partisan even using incidents that expose the limitations of the characters of close family and friends to emphasize that the problem is cultural, that the same failed ideology is being applied by politicians, statesmen, religious leaders and ordinary men and women.
I have invariably focused on promoting the method, telling the truth, above every other consideration.
I present a once in a lifetime opportunity for my race; I have told the truth until the truth has made me free – and survived to report on this transformation.
I am saying that telling the truth, the practice of this value, is the means of cleansing the mind of repression that cripples and lames the intellect of the vast majority of human beings and effectively makes impossible the application of intelligence to social problems.
I suggest that the Ministry of Jesus contained the same message but this message was diluted and its impact significantly reduced when the early Church confronted the necessity of becoming popular in an Absolutist regime, a political milieu in which telling the truth was tantamount to committing suicide so a compromise was reached that allowed the Church to survive, albeit in a form that adopted the existing culture; the Spirit of Truth was transformed into the Holy Ghost and telling the truth was replaced by possession.
I say again I have told the truth and this discipline has cleansed my mind of the repression produced by coercion based culture, that the practice of this discipline by a bare majority will produce functioning democracies.
I say further that coercion was the means relied to motivate action for all of human history with many debilitating effects, and that we must adopt the obvious, viable alternative, positive reinforcements – if we are to create a viable future for the human race.
This is not a second hand report compiled more than a hundred years after the fact; it is a report by the individual who has actually experienced the moral and intellectual development precipitated by practicing the discipline of truth, and one whose report is validated by his results, as the essays, the prophetic essays on the web site voiceofpeace.net attest.
There is no doubt that as far back as 1996 I saw and attempted to communicate the failure of the education system, a failure that Oprah Winfrey, Reverend Jesse Jackson, Bill Gates and Time Magazine are now belatedly aware of, a decade later.
There is no doubt that I accurately predicted a long time ago that occupation of Iraq by Allied forces would fail miserably, that this would become the mess that in answering questions at a recent Press Club Luncheon, John Edwards former Senator from North Carolina and Vice Presidential Candidate agreed it has become.
What could be the something worst than hubris or prejudice?
One component of that could be that most individuals wish to perpetuate the status quo, a status quo of inequity and inequality, in which the needs, wants and desires of the individual is much more important than the national interest or the common good.
Can it be that most people want that prostitution continues to dominate the relations between men and women; can it be most of us, albeit unconsciously, wish to perpetuate a situation where, as in the past, the male satisfied the innate drives of his spouse for food, shelter and clothing but ignored her every other need, and in return used her as a sexual object and household drudge?
Can it be that all human beings are capable of is what they have been habituated to over many millennia, relationships in which there is no equity, relationships in which the needs of the strong are satisfied, while those of the weak are not?
Despite three hundred years of the ‘practice’ of democracy this remains the reality today, in every country five per cent of the populace control ninety per cent of the wealth; this is the model for all social relationships, even while artists like Teddy Pendergrass express the hope in a popular love song, that a fifty - fifty love is what would create the possibility of happiness.
Can there be equity, or anything close to it, in human relationships? Can equity be achieved while competition is the ethos of human societies, can equity be achieved in coercion based culture? Is the motivation human beings rely on something they can think about, or is this an area completely repressed?
What I must conclude after thirty years of failing completely to communicate these ideas is that the something worst is that human beings do not know and cannot know what they are doing.
President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, the architects of the attack on Iraq cannot confront reality, nor can anyone else; these individuals cannot admit that they mistakenly caused two thousand five hundred lives to be snuffed out in error.
I live in the real world, alone; to enter that world Americans would have to confront the reality that President Reagan, the most popular political figure of recent history, used his executive powers to cause the Space Shuttle Challenger to be launched in weather conditions that ensured its destruction; that he without accepting any blame or without tendering any expression of guilt or remorse gave the eulogy to the dead astronauts and made political points by so doing; and, commissioned an enquiry to cover up his crime.
To enter the world I live in, Americans would have to become aware that human culture was designed to facilitate the sexual abuse of minors by adults; that the young were conditioned to abstain from sex so they would be in a state of high drive and be easy prey.
To enter the world I live in, Americans would have find credible and accept the reality of corruption that Detective Frank Serpico observed in the New York Police Department.
But more, Americans would have to become aware of the difference between concept and precept in their lives; they would have to confront their own moral debility, I am not talking about criticizing the failings of others, of politicians, or religious leaders, or judges, but of themselves, each and every one of them, as they pursue their day to day existences.
To illustrate this, and to indicate how difficult it is for individuals to see the beam in their own eyes, I relate an incident from my own experiences.
Several months ago I received an item of electronic mail from my brother; in that missive he stated that he had chanced upon my daughter and her mother and they had inquired about me and indicated that they had not heard from me for some time.
He lamented on the breakdown of communication in the family and seemed to be encouraging me to stay in touch with my child.
This remonstrance seemed bizarre, strange and out of place coming from him because he has a child for whom he has never provided even an iota of financial support though he is moderately well off, a daughter who he has never recognized as his own, who he has never spoken to or hugged or done any of those things society requires of parents.
It must have been forty years ago he came to me and said he had had sex with a woman once who subsequently proved to be pregnant.
I was twenty years old at the time and advised him that it was unlikely that one such encounter could produce such a result and told him to be sure the child was his before accepting responsibility for it.
Based on that advice he declined responsibility for the child.
A few years later I met that same woman and dated her; she told me that the one time she had had sex with my brother had been her first such experience, that she had never had sex with anyone else prior to that assignation and that she had become pregnant, she was understandably bitter even as she pointed out the child lying in a crib nearby that she claimed was my niece.
Some fifteen years later I again encountered that child and her mother, she happened to be living on the same street as I in Havendale.
In the interim my moral development had begun; when I had advised my brother as to the likelihood of impregnating a female in one sexual encounter, I had been an agent of coercion based culture and one of those who preyed on women, and this fact determined my view of the situation; that mindset had also caused me to doubt the veracity of the story told by that woman during our second encounter, I was much more focused on getting into her pants than giving her justice.
But when I saw my brother’s teenaged child from a perspective cleansed by the practice of the discipline of truth I had no doubt that she was indeed my niece, I so advised him and encouraged him to belated accept responsibility for the child and make up for the neglect of the several years during which he had failed to recognize her.
He declined to even consider doing this, citing the problems it would precipitate in his marriage and his family.
Subsequent to my divorce, when I was thirty two years old, I also had to make a decision as to whether to accept responsibility for a child I was not sure was mine; but by then my moral development had progressed to the point where I was sure that being a father had very much to do with a having a capacity for love and very little to do with the biological act of impregnating a female – and acted accordingly.
When the woman with whom I was having sexual relationships with for about six weeks missed her period, because I knew that she had previously aborted a child in her lunchtime, I went and picked her up at midday shortly thereafter, ostensibly to have lunch with her, but took her to see her doctor.
When that Doctor advised her that I could only be privy to the information he would provide if she desired it, and she hesitated to confirm that she desired my presence and involvement, I told them that aborting a child I believed was mine would have the same result as leaping from a high cliff.
When the Doctor took umbrage at my remarks and threatened to call the Police, we left his office and I took her to see my doctor who confirmed that she was pregnant and recommended the gynecologist who eventually delivered that child.
I caused that woman to cohabit with me for the duration of her pregnancy despite the negative impact this might have had on my two small children whose biological mother had recently abandoned them without saying goodbye.
When that woman proved her unsuitability for motherhood by ironing several dozen nappies of cloth, the disposable versions not being popular in Jamaica at that juncture, late in her pregnancy precipitating birth by caesarean section; I paid for this very expensive procedure as well the other costs of her confinement without demur or without remonstrating with her at her carelessness, expenditures which I had not budgeted for because she assured me that those costs would be covered by her medical insurance.
I wish to be clear, to guard and secure the life of that unborn child, I provided financial support for her mother; I ensured that she could stop working in a timely fashion and rest at home so that there would be no complications - and still she found a way to make things difficult by engaging in a completely unnecessary very strenuous activity which was anyway a task the domestic helper I employed was duty bound to perform.
When I resigned on a point of principle and could no longer support her in the style to which she had become accustomed, she immediately left and disputed my right to see the child; I sought and received the intervention of the Social Service Department in Jamaica who disabused her of the notion that ‘the child did not need a father’ and confirmed my access to the child.
For the five years that I was unemployed I could not contribute financially to her welfare but did everything I could to be with her and nurse her through the childhood diseases she contracted; I remember with a clarity undiminished by the passage of time an occasion when she contracted a virus which gave her a high fever, for the duration I held in my arms, continually took her temperature and knocked it down with a combination of alcohol and chilled water.
When I received my green card I ensured that the child received that benefit also and went to great pains to ensure that she entered the USA in my company so that her right to reside in this nation would not be questioned.
For as many times as my finances allowed over the years since my migration to the USA in 1984, I caused her to visit me on her vacations in school, accompanied by her mother on at least one occasion.
When she graduated High School in Jamaica, for two years I worked two jobs to be able to afford a lifestyle that would give her the opportunity of attending college in the USA.
My effort and sacrifice were meaningless; after a few months she discovered she could not live without her boyfriend in Jamaica and she made arrangements to return to that country to marry him.
She had quickly become employed at one of the companies I worked for but instead of using the income she earned to get a college education, she spent her earnings calling Jamaica long distance and accumulated a phone bill of some Three Thousand Dollars, making a mockery of two years of my unremitting labor.
Two years during which I was always exhausted, two years during which by the end of the week I would fall asleep as I waited for the light to change at intersections, two years during which I had to be extremely careful lest my tiredness cause an accident.
But none of this caused me to love her any less; the rift between us resulted from a point of principle.
I asked her to delay her marriage so that I could attend; one of the consequences of poverty is that it had caused me to miss out on all the social occasions that my family celebrated, I had not attended funerals, and weddings, on anniversaries over the years.
Even with the income from two jobs I had not the means to attend her wedding in Jamaica and pay the bills that were due each month; in fact, the reason that she could go is that I had agreed to pay her bills for six month so that she could save the money to pay for her tuition.
I knew that I was due to receive an inheritance from the estate of an aunt that had died in Jamaica; that would allow me a break from the treadmill of poverty on which I had existed for so many years; an amount that would allow me not only to attend but to defray the cost of her wedding.
She declined to postpone the wedding, and it occurred in my absence, as had so many celebrations over the years, including the wedding of my other daughter.
I reflected on all the years of her life, that she had never given me a Christmas card or a birthday card, or any other gift; indeed, the Christmas we were together she had bought presents for those she had left in Jamaica but never considered it necessary to buy me a gift whatever its value.
It became clear to me that there was no equity in our relationship, that she was treating me as prey; the guiding principle of my life is that I treat no human being as prey, nor, will I be treated by any human being as prey.
I am different from other human beings because I do not compromise on principles; these apply for me with every individual, with every organization, in every situation.
I am uncompromising in my attachment to certain principles, and the several bouts of poverty I have endured; the loneliness that is my lot is a consequence of this as much as anything else.
I confess to expecting certain minimum standards of behavior from all human beings, no less than I expect from myself; and this has dire consequences in a world where anything goes, a world in which there are no standards of behavior.
But is progress possible if everyone accepts that there should be a world where anything goes?
I am an honest politician, someone who went into politics well off and came out dirt poor, it is one of my greatest achievements which like my efforts to be a good father will never get the recognition it deserves, and for the same reason, because in concept every politician is honest, and everyone is a good father and exposure of the reality is not permitted, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth can never be told.
My brother shared my experiences more than any other person on earth; he should have been able to follow my political career and should have been aware that while all my colleagues became millionaires I endured poverty; yet he has the temerity and effrontery to call me a liar.
He should be aware of my efforts to be a good father to my daughter, and should be able to compare this to his treatment of his children; yet he dares to question my actions as a parent.
The point I am so laboriously making is that all human beings and all organizations cannot bear exposure, they do all in their power to appear to act consistent with the concepts they espouse, and they have the power to suppress the truth, so that for an individual to achieve real moral consistency is something that must be suppressed at all cost.
But I have done this, and those who ignore my warnings do so at their peril, the articles I wrote for the Daily Gleaner from 1979 through 1982 attest to this in respect of the fortunes of the island of Jamaica, the information on the web site voiceofpeace.net should be taken very seriously by all those who deem it in their interests to ignore it, the doom that I foretell will come to past – unless the remedies I suggest are applied.
I say again that the solution to all the massive social problems that human beings face is very simple; they must adopt the discipline of truth and commit to applying positive reinforcements in their relations with other human beings.
The alternative is also clear, if this moral development does not occur an increasing majority of human beings will continue to languish, as they have done since the beginning of time, on a treadmill of tragedy; a treadmill that exists in a stasis of conflict, poverty and despair.
William E. Virtue
Memphis, TN
Copyright Retained, All Rights Reserved
posted by voiceofpeace @ 2:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home