Despairing of the Human Race

I'm thankful for my blogging friends. You give me hope that the human race is worthwhile after all. Sometimes I'm not so sure. I saw on Facebook where one of the joke writers for the cartoon series Family Guy sent out a twitter comment that said: "If you wanna feel better about this earthquake in Japan, Google "Pearl Harbor death toll".

I'm not mentioning the guy's name because I don't support that kind of thing. But just seeing that comment was enough to make me want to return my human card. Then I looked at a couple of sites where this tweet was being discussed and my dislike for the human race in general went way up.

The guy probably meant his original comment as a joke. He was going for a quick, lazy laugh and didn’t want to put any effort into it. But not only wasn’t it funny, it was horrifically cruel to a people who have lost thousands of their own and are in the midst of one of the worst natural catastrophes of our time. I would think that we all could get behind the fact that the guy who said it was being an asshole, at least at the time he said it, and from what I understand he has made an apology. The worst part, though, was the outpouring of troll behavior in the commenters.

One person said that this kind of comment was typical of liberals and several others joined in with tirades against the evils of liberals. Someone even suggested that this is the kind of thing that happens when you have someone like Obama as president. Now, I have no idea if the guy who made the tweet is a liberal or a conservative as far as politics are concerned, or whether he voted for Obama or not. I also don’t care. He said an asshole thing, no matter what else he “is” or has done. Others added their agreement to the tweet, saying things like the Japanese deserved what they got and how “karma is a bitch.” Frankly, I don’t want to be human in a population that includes people like this.

Take every race, every country, every creed, and you’ll find they’ve done evil things. The Japanese no more “deserve” this than the Gulf Coast deserved Katrina, or New York deserved September 11, or Poland deserved Hitler. A tragedy has occurred, and if you can’t help then at least don’t try to make it worse.

Rant over.
----
----

Politics and Religion in Writing

I sold a story in 1995 called "Crypto," and I was looking at it yesterday with the idea that I might try to sell it as a reprint. But there's a problem. That problem is politics and religion.

The story is meant to be humorous, but in making its jokes it pokes fun at political correctness and at televangelists. It also picks on congress. I was careful with the “congress” jokes to not attack one particular party, but the televangelist jokes could possibly be seen as attacking the more fundamentalist types of religion. And in today’s cultural climate, people seem to be unusually rabid in responding to even the hint of an attack on their politics or religion. Even when the story was first published a couple of readers reviewed it negatively because they took it to have an “agenda.” Honestly, there was no agenda, just an attempt at some jokes. In fact, I was completely surprised that anyone would have thought I had an agenda, although in retrospect I’m surprised that I was surprised.

I have a friend who got into trouble with some readers for her “agenda,” even though it was a “character” in her book that expressed some anti-government sentiment. I at least thought readers would not take everything the characters say or think as evidence of the writer’s beliefs. I was wrong. And in “Crypto,” the jokes (or insults) come through the narrative, which is easier to attribute to the writer’s personal feelings.

In the end, I decided that “Crypto” is going to become a trunk story. I’m going to put it away for now because I know that one reader who feels attacked is very likely to share that feeling with other readers. That outcome might not be good.

How about you? Do you avoid issues of politics and religion in your writing? In your everyday discussions? Does it turn you off if what you’re reading expresses a different perspective on politics and religion from your own? I’m curious.

Finally, in other news, Robert Swartwood is hosting an “Ultimate Flash Fiction Package,” in which you will have a chance to win 120 bucks worth of books. Check it out here.
----
----

Politics

I’ve seen quite a few blog posts lately on political issues. It’s understandable, given the times and the upcoming election. But I’m often at a loss as to how to comment on such posts, and I hope folks don’t get upset with me if I disagree with them. People often express very strong feelings, and it’s usually clear that they really “don’t” understand how anyone could believe differently from them. Of course, I’m the same way. If I view a candidate in a certain light, it seems obvious to me that my reasoning is correct. I like to tell myself that I make my decisions based on reason, but I know that isn’t always the case. Everyone wants to think they are being rational, but humans can’t escape their emotional natures. And this means you too, I’m afraid. Sorry, but that’s just the way it is.

I also find myself to be an incredible cynic these days where politics is concerned. I mean, when have we seen a politician who really seems to care about people in the modern world? Oh, they all give lip service to it. But do you believe their words? I’m afraid that most of the time I don’t. And I’m talking about Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. There’s an old adage: how do you know when a politician is lying? Answer: when his, or her, lips are moving. Well, I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that there’s a lot of truth in that.

Many of the folks I see posting on politics are idealists. They honestly want to make the world a better place. I admire that. But I always want to warn folks that idealists are the politician’s favorite prey. If one can focus passion, then one can accomplish one’s goals. Unfortunately, the politician’s goals may not be the same as what the passionate believers “think” those goals are.

Cynics are not necessarily the enemy of politicians, however. If they’re so cynical that they do nothing, then the politicians can freely discount them. So, I’m going to vote. And I’m voting for the candidate that I “believe” best offers a chance for a change in the direction our country has been heading. Do I believe the direction will really change? Nope.

But I have hope. I suppose I just have to. It’s part of my irrational nature.
----
----

Huxley Predicts the Future

I don't often post on politics in this blog. There are plenty of other sources for that. But I'm reading a short little tome by Aldous Huxley called Science, Liberty and Peace, and though it was published in 1946 its major points have some frightening parallels to today.

Here's one long piece:

"There is also another way in which the preparation for war is useful to the holders of centralized political power. When things go badly at home, when popular discontent becomes inconveniently articulate, it is always possible, in a world where war making remains an almost sacred habit, to shift the people's attention away from domestic to foreign and military affairs. A flood of xenophobic or imperialistic propaganda is released by the government-controlled instruments of persuasion, a "strong policy" is adopted toward some foreign power, an appeal for "national unity" (in other words, unquestioning obedience to the ruling oligarchy) is launched, and at once it becomes unpatriotic for anybody to voice even the most justifiable complaints against mismanagement or oppression."

Here's the kicker:

"It is difficult to see how any highly centralized government could afford to dispense with militarism and the threat of foreign war"

This is only one of many points where Huxley hits home in this essay. This book might be very difficult to find. It was published by Harper & Brothers Publishers in New York and London. But if you can find it at a library or something it is well worth the reading. But be afraid, be very afraid.