Why We Blog

Why do we blog?

Is it for the fame? Is it for the money? Is it so we can change the world?

No.

We blog to try to make sense of the senseless world around us. We blog to make sure things that need to be said aren’t left unsaid. We blog because we can.

We blog because we live in a country where we have been encouraged to say what we want, when we want, about whatever we want. And by blogging, we carry on a long tradition of encouraging others to do the same. Just as men like Thomas Paine and Upton Sinclair have inspired those before us to speak out, the great bloggers of our time will inspire future generations to do the same.

Freedom of speech is one of the most wonderful gifts our forefathers have given us. The only way to truly abuse it is to not use it.

Castro Quits!

Looks like Fidel Castro is finally hanging it up.

From CNN.com

Castro quits as president, state-run paper reports
Fidel Castro announced his resignation as president of Cuba and commander-in-chief of Cuba’s military on Tuesday, according to a letter published by state-run newspaper Granma.

Read more here.

Iraq’s Other Benchmarks

Much has been made about Iraq meeting benchmarks that have been set by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group. These benchmarks are considered the measure of success or failure by the Iraqi government, and have great emphasis placed on them by many in America. But let’s forget about the ISG benchmarks for a moment and look at another set of benchmarks that are well known in the field of Psychology—Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

In 1943, Abraham Maslow published “A Theory of Human Motivation” in which he theorized that humans have a distinct hierarchy of needs in order to survive and develop. Maslow’s Hierarchy works from the bottom up, in the following order:

• Self-Actualization
• Esteem
• Belonging
• Safety
• Physiological

In order for a need to be met, the need below it must first be met.

Now let’s apply Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to Iraq. Remember, this works from the bottom up.

First on the list are “physiological needs.” What is needed to survive. We’re talking the basics like air, food, water, etc.

Iraq has that covered. People are not dying of mass starvation in Iraq like they are in places in Africa. And they certainly aren’t dying by breathing the air like some of them did under the rule of Saddam Hussein. Iraq meets Maslow’s first benchmark.

Next on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is “safety.” People not only need to be safe, they need to feel safe. The Surge has been working on both. Violence continues to drop to its lowest levels of the war. People are moving back to their homes. Iraqi’s are beginning to have hope. While this benchmark has not been fully met, many Iraqi’s may feel otherwise, and have gone on to the next.

Maslow’s third need is a sense of “belonging.” This is brought about by friends and family, but in the case of Iraq, that would be better equated to allies and nationalism. Iraqis have an ally in the United States, as long as we don’t desert them while they are vulnerable. And the nationalism will come as new laws continue to be passed that allow all of Iraq’s people and ideologies to be properly represented. Though progress continues to be made, this benchmark has not been completely met, which makes it impossible to move to the next.

Maslow’s fourth need is “self-esteem.” Once Iraq has a sense of belonging, it can work on its self-esteem and confidence. This is when Iraq can stand proudly as a nation amung nations, and begin to make positive marks on the world. This is the place we (should) all want Iraq to be. Where Iraqis are proud to be Iraqis, and that pride and confidence can hopefully lead them to the next benchmark.

Maslow’s final need is “self-actualization.” This is when you have reached the pinnacle of your possibilities as a person, or a nation. Few people or nations reach this stage of development for a multitude of reasons. The best anyone can really hope for is an opportunity to do so, and the ability to recognize it when it comes.

Iraq is a democracy. A democracy is ruled by the people, and people have their own needs and benchmarks. It’s not going to be changes from the top down that makes Iraq, its going to be the changes from the bottom up. We’ve helped Iraq reach stage 3, and are working on number 4.

Is this as far as we go? Are we going to continue to help Iraq become the nation we all hope it can be, or do we let it fend for itself? Do we help it upward or do we watch it slide alone down the ladder we’ve worked so hard to climb together?

Forgotten History: The Potsdam Declaration

Last August marked the 62^nd anniversary of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that brought an end to World War II. Tens of thousands of Japanese gathered in Hiroshima to remember the event. The mayor of Hiroshima took the opportunity to condemn the United States for its failure to end nuclear buildups.

America is often criticized for being the only country to have used atomic weapons, and for the 250,000 Japanese civilians that were killed. The defense that we were trying to end the war, and save exponentially more lives by not invading Japan is slowly being eaten away. As a tutor of History at a small community college, I have seen the papers of students who do not accept that defense.

But there is one thing I have not seen in all of the papers or articles I have read that condemn America’s use of the atomic bomb. I searched my history textbooks and I couldn’t find it there, either. I asked my high school children if they had heard of it, and I got a blank stare in return.

It is the Potsdam Declaration.

On July 26, 1945-nearly two weeks before the bombings-President Truman and the leaders of Britain and China issued the Potsdam Declaration as the defining terms for Japanese surrender. The document begins by stating Japan will be given an opportunity to end the war. (Read full document here.)

We-the President of the United States, the President of the National Government of the Republic of China, and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, representing the hundreds of millions of our countrymen, have conferred and agree that Japan shall be given an opportunity to end this war.
…
The time has come for Japan to decide whether she will continue to be controlled by those self-willed militaristic advisers whose unintelligent calculations have brought the Empire of Japan to the threshold of annihilation, or whether she will follow the path of reason.

Following are our terms. We will not deviate from them. There are no alternatives. We shall brook no delay.

What were the terms? Basically, Japan was order to cease fire, dismantle its war production capabilities, and give back all of the land it had taken during the war. Pretty standard stuff, right?

What other terms were there?

We do not intend that the Japanese shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation, but stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals, including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners. The Japanese Government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies among the Japanese people. Freedom of speech, of religion, and of thought, as well as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established.

There we go again. Butting into the business of another nation and pushing freedom on them.

Now, what does the Potsdam Declaration say will happen if Japan refuses to meet these demands?

We call upon the government of Japan to proclaim now the unconditional surrender of all Japanese armed forces, and to provide proper and adequate assurances of their good faith in such action. The alternative for Japan is prompt and utter destruction.

“Prompt and utter destruction.” Is there anything unclear in that? It looks like fair terms and fair warnings that were unfortunately ignored.

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were human tragedies that would have been avoided if only Japan would have heeded the fair warning it was given. Its decision to ignore it cost the lives of a quarter million of its people. Another tragedy is that important factors in this event are being ignored and forgotten by the world.

And we all know what happens when we forget history.

Let’s get out now!

The United States is in the middle of a civil war—Obviously. Just look at these headlines!

Female student kills 2 others, self at Louisiana college
Six killed as gunman ‘goes to war’
Berkeley to Marines: Get out of our city
Reputed mobsters rounded up in U.S., Italy
5 dead in strip mall shooting; gunman at large
Man arrested in Virginia triple slaying

I suggest we cut our losses and get out now, before we are stuck in America for the next hundred years!

Shut up

Roland S. Martin recently posted a piece at CNN.com entitled “Conservatives’ hatred of McCain makes no sense,” where he calls our opinions of the Arizona Senator “irrational,” “hysterical,” and “laughable.” He claims that conservatives are only looking for a new Ronald Reagan, then goes on to cite McCain’s stances on abortion, federal spending, and Iraq.

McCain is a guy who is fiercely pro-life. That’s a pretty important issue for the conservatives. He is strong on the military and being a former Vietnam prisoner of war sure doesn’t hurt. When Republicans got weak-kneed over the surge in Iraq, McCain stood tall and proclaimed that it will work.

The guy is a fiscal conservative who abhors the spending that has taken place during the presidency of George W. Bush and the Congress under Republican rule. Yes, he voted against the first two Bush tax cuts. But as he said, when you don’t have spending limits with tax cuts, you blow up the federal deficit, and we are a weaker nation today because Republicans acted like a teenager with Mom and Dad’s credit card.

Now, I don’t “hate” John McCain. I have a great deal of respect for his military and public service, and I believe he is indeed a hero. But I do hate some of the things he has done. 

Martin says that conservatives hate John McCain because McCain-Feingold levels a legal playing field on federal election spending that doesn’t play well into the Republican’s hands.

What they seem to be most angry about is that McCain teamed up with Wisconsin Sen. Russ Feingold to move through a law that severely restricted the dollars in federal elections. This angered conservatives because they viewed the issue as a First Amendment cause. In fact, they really were upset about the GOP losing a major advantage over the Democrats when it came to fundraising. With that window narrowed by the law, they didn’t want to see that advantage disappear. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down some parts of the law, but that still hasn’t satisfied the money vultures on the right.

Here’s the kicker:

Lastly, there’s the immigration debate.

You see, right there is the problem. Immigration isn’t last when it comes to the conservative ”hatred” of John McCain, it’s first. Martin drones on about leadership and compromise by McCain instead of saying amnesty and pandering, like they actually were. He reminds us that McCain is “a pragmatic leader trying to solve a difficult situation.”

 Then he gets to the real point.

Word to the wise: Shut up, suck it up and deal with it.

Sorry Roland. Liberals might toe the line these days when they are ordered to “shut up” about certain candidates, but most conservatives remember that we have the 1st Amendment right to say what we want, when we want, about whom we want.

We call ‘em like we see ‘em, we don’t like John McCain for president, and if you cannot handle that then you need to practice what you preach.