I kiss you on the brain in the shadow of the train
I kiss you all starry eyed, my body swinging side to side
I don't see what anyone can see in anyone else but you
~ The Moldy Peaches
Three words float
in my cupped hands
A dandelion's clock
grasped slowly from the late summer breeze
The setting sun's rays through
the gaps between light fingers
turning white feathers into warm gold
Peaking between thumbs
every other moment
with the excitement of child
With those three words
To write you a song
and sing to the world
To open my hands, my arms wide
and blow the golden seeds to the world
I am not a musician
I know two chords
I am not a song writer
I sing only three words
So, talentless, in my hands
these priceless seeds
light as air and warmed by the sun
and watered by my skin
will grow
Monday, April 21, 2008
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Charlton Heston Dead
I was in a coffee shop one day, the day William F. Buckley died. Not that Buckley dieing was very significant. Well I guess thats the point. This guy in the coffer shop talking to his buddy goes:
"Hey, did you hear William F. Buckley died?".
"Yeah, thank god".
Thank god? I asked myself. Who the fuck cares about William F. Buckley? He is some blow hard right wing intellectual, not some Fascist dictator. All he did was write in a magazine and had a show neither of which I read or watched, nor very many other people.
Of course as a budding left wing intellectual I have heard of him, have actually read some of his articles on the web through the Yahoo News service. And I knew he was the patron saint of right wing conservativism here in the US. Well lets be clear, the patron "intellectual" saint of conservatism. Conservatism in the US has many patron saints but not many intellectual ones. And that brings me to why I had an interesting reaction to what this guy said. I found his comment stupid and cruel.
He is a human being, sure you may disagree with him because of his "conservative" viewpoints but he is just a human being and one of little consequence to most people. Sure he is a major influence to major people like Ronald Reagan (according to the New York Times in their obituary on Buckley) but is his death worth celebrating because you disagree with him on some political and moral positions? I find myself feeling shy about comparing Buckley to Socrates but I bet many people celebrated Socrates' death. And for what? Because of his ideas. I would hope whatever our philosophical foundations might be, wishing someone dead simply for their ideas is universally distasteful and unjustified.
Remember that I am discussing an off hand comment made by a guy in a coffee shop. If he knew Buckley personally he wouldn't say something like that, regardless of any philosophical disagreements. But you see? Thats what bugs me about the guy's comment. His celebration, as inconsequential and limited to so few words as it is was is simply based on this guy having a disagreement with Buckley ideas. The comment further bugged me because this guy was on my team. I, as a fellow mid-west semi-intellectual lefty(1), was no fan of Buckley's stance on the issues. Did I reserve for Buckley the level of hate required to celebrate his death? No I didn't. If Buckley caused me offense it has been injury due to ideas. Injury due to ideas is a never an offense worth any resentment toward it's author. The things other people do with those ideas, or what the author himself does with the ideas may lead to offenses worth resentment and celebration upon their death. But not ideas themselves.
When I saw a head line from the New York Times that Heston had died I recalled his starring role in Bowling for the Columbine, the movie made by Michael Moore that brought the lefty film maker into a wide audience. Before seeing Bowling for Columbine all I knew of Heston was that he was a has been actor from the 70's who played Moses. But after seeing Bowling, I knew him as a right wing gun toting lunatic. Well that may very well be true. However that comment by the guy in the coffee shop makes me sure that someone is celebrating Heston's death tonight. I find that idea to be repulsive. To celebrate the death of a human being because he is right wing gun toting lunatic who played Moses seems to me a bit of an disproportional response to someone with whom you have disagreement.
Have I celebrated the death of people with whom I disagreed? Yes I have. Like my fellow lefty in reaction to Buckley, when Reagan died a few short sentences of minor celebration escape my mouth. Through that man's comment and my reaction to it I've come to realize why a disagreement based on ideas should never lead to a celebration of death or lead to death itself. And my minor and inconsequential celebration of Reagan's death? A celebration of man's death because of his ideas. Some may disagree and I may not fully understand what Reagan did while in office but in the society I wish to live in a President is a man of ideas and my disagreements with him are based only on ideas and thus my celebration is fully unjustified. This is a Utopian vision I suspect.
I don't want to live in a society where anyone would feel compelled to celebrate the death of anyone with which you had a philosophical disagreement. Nor would I want to live in a society in which anyone would feel compelled to celebrate the death of someone who believes in certain ideas and acted upon them. And of course this is not the world we live in. People have ideas which lead to injustices even if those injustices are not truly compatible with the ideas from which they came. This is not the world we have but this is the world we should want and should create.
(1) (Note: The author has determined that if you are on the left and have even heard of Buckley, this qualifies one as a "semi" intellectual.)
"Hey, did you hear William F. Buckley died?".
"Yeah, thank god".
Thank god? I asked myself. Who the fuck cares about William F. Buckley? He is some blow hard right wing intellectual, not some Fascist dictator. All he did was write in a magazine and had a show neither of which I read or watched, nor very many other people.
Of course as a budding left wing intellectual I have heard of him, have actually read some of his articles on the web through the Yahoo News service. And I knew he was the patron saint of right wing conservativism here in the US. Well lets be clear, the patron "intellectual" saint of conservatism. Conservatism in the US has many patron saints but not many intellectual ones. And that brings me to why I had an interesting reaction to what this guy said. I found his comment stupid and cruel.
He is a human being, sure you may disagree with him because of his "conservative" viewpoints but he is just a human being and one of little consequence to most people. Sure he is a major influence to major people like Ronald Reagan (according to the New York Times in their obituary on Buckley) but is his death worth celebrating because you disagree with him on some political and moral positions? I find myself feeling shy about comparing Buckley to Socrates but I bet many people celebrated Socrates' death. And for what? Because of his ideas. I would hope whatever our philosophical foundations might be, wishing someone dead simply for their ideas is universally distasteful and unjustified.
Remember that I am discussing an off hand comment made by a guy in a coffee shop. If he knew Buckley personally he wouldn't say something like that, regardless of any philosophical disagreements. But you see? Thats what bugs me about the guy's comment. His celebration, as inconsequential and limited to so few words as it is was is simply based on this guy having a disagreement with Buckley ideas. The comment further bugged me because this guy was on my team. I, as a fellow mid-west semi-intellectual lefty(1), was no fan of Buckley's stance on the issues. Did I reserve for Buckley the level of hate required to celebrate his death? No I didn't. If Buckley caused me offense it has been injury due to ideas. Injury due to ideas is a never an offense worth any resentment toward it's author. The things other people do with those ideas, or what the author himself does with the ideas may lead to offenses worth resentment and celebration upon their death. But not ideas themselves.
When I saw a head line from the New York Times that Heston had died I recalled his starring role in Bowling for the Columbine, the movie made by Michael Moore that brought the lefty film maker into a wide audience. Before seeing Bowling for Columbine all I knew of Heston was that he was a has been actor from the 70's who played Moses. But after seeing Bowling, I knew him as a right wing gun toting lunatic. Well that may very well be true. However that comment by the guy in the coffee shop makes me sure that someone is celebrating Heston's death tonight. I find that idea to be repulsive. To celebrate the death of a human being because he is right wing gun toting lunatic who played Moses seems to me a bit of an disproportional response to someone with whom you have disagreement.
Have I celebrated the death of people with whom I disagreed? Yes I have. Like my fellow lefty in reaction to Buckley, when Reagan died a few short sentences of minor celebration escape my mouth. Through that man's comment and my reaction to it I've come to realize why a disagreement based on ideas should never lead to a celebration of death or lead to death itself. And my minor and inconsequential celebration of Reagan's death? A celebration of man's death because of his ideas. Some may disagree and I may not fully understand what Reagan did while in office but in the society I wish to live in a President is a man of ideas and my disagreements with him are based only on ideas and thus my celebration is fully unjustified. This is a Utopian vision I suspect.
I don't want to live in a society where anyone would feel compelled to celebrate the death of anyone with which you had a philosophical disagreement. Nor would I want to live in a society in which anyone would feel compelled to celebrate the death of someone who believes in certain ideas and acted upon them. And of course this is not the world we live in. People have ideas which lead to injustices even if those injustices are not truly compatible with the ideas from which they came. This is not the world we have but this is the world we should want and should create.
(1) (Note: The author has determined that if you are on the left and have even heard of Buckley, this qualifies one as a "semi" intellectual.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)