HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Beat Piece

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 04:39 PM

Beat Piece

See dig, mama, uh, do ya understand that?
(No)
Well uh, like, I can understand how you can’t, because I’ve been uh,
You know, Paris, Beirut, you know, I mean Iraq, Iran, Eurasia, you know
I speak very very um, fluent Spanish
Ah, todo ‘sta bien, chévere, you understand that?
(Chévere?)
Chevere, bien chevere, is that right mama?
'Cause I’ve got my shaky .....
-- Stevie Wonder; intro to "Don't You Worry 'Bout a Thing"

Last night, I was looking through some "threads" on DU:GD, and noticed some interesting comments regarding the media coverage of the new Iranian president. Not coincidentally, I was reminded of some recent discussions of the new pope. Some folks find each of their public messages encouraging, and others do not. Now, maybe that is the way it should be -- because especially on this forum, there is never total agreement on any important issue. Those differences of opinion -- which often reflect differing values -- have the potential to lead to meaningful discussions.

On the down side, those same differences of opinions and values can lead to meaningless arguing, with anger and insults saturating a thread. In recent years, that has become all too common on this forum. Of course, it has happened since DU began attracting a wider audience, and intensified during the 2008 president primary season.

My purpose in writing this is not to stir the pot of negativity. I understand that people can, and do, have strong feelings about Iran, the Middle East, US policy there, and the Catholic Church as well. A person could have a connection to one or more of these, or they might view them in very negative ways. Yet, for sake of discussion, I think it is important to remember that both are collections of human beings -- some good, some not good -- and each has a long history.

Both new leaders have recently made public statements that, if nothing else, tend to suggest that they are a bit more open-minded than the person they replaced. That does not translate into either the church or nation suddenly becoming ideal. But it sure as heck is better than some of the narrow-minded to hateful things that have come from both groups before.

Recognizing this does not mean one subscribes to Catholicism or Islam. However, no matter how one feels about them, they do exist. And human history has far too much proof that when any such group -- be it a nation-state, religion, etc -- has a spokesperson who publicly stirs the passions of anger, fear, and hatred, it can result in violence.

Equally true is that when a leader speaks of peace and reconciliation, it can calm people, and possibly open their minds. And an open mind just might catch onto an idea .....and there is Power in Ideas. For example, with very few exceptions, most people suffer when there are constant threats of violence, and violence and warfare.(Not to mention that a closed mind, like a closed room, always becomes stuffy.)

The world has more than enough "leaders" who advocate violence and warfare for reasons ranging from land to oil to how someone interprets a sentence in a religious book. There are enough corporate vultures that prey on death and destruction. And I'm not talking about self-defense against attack -- I mean the Dick Cheneyites of the world.

So, I understand why many of us find it at least potentially hopeful that the new Iranian president and new pope are saying rational things, which suggest more open minds. Likewise, I understand why others among us insist upon seeing real actions, solid proof of good intentions, before getting their hopes up.

Hopefully, to some extent, we can do some of both, as individuals and as a community.

Peace,
H2O Man

6 replies, 1011 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Beat Piece (Original post)
H2O Man Sep 2013 OP
Uncle Joe Sep 2013 #1
hootinholler Sep 2013 #2
Bluenorthwest Sep 2013 #3
H2O Man Sep 2013 #6
brer cat Sep 2013 #4
KoKo Sep 2013 #5

Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 04:51 PM

1. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, H2O Man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 05:03 PM

2. So, cracking skulls

Isn't the best way to open a mind? Good to know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 05:14 PM

3. Let's not be naive.

 

“Let’s not be naïve, we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God. We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”
Francis on marriage equality laws, and how they are from Satan.
Make of that what you wish, but don't deny it for some public relations ploy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #3)

Fri Sep 27, 2013, 12:08 PM

6. Years ago,

in one of a series of interviews I did with Onondaga Chief Paul Waterman, we talked about the man who became the first Tadodaho. He was a cruel man who enjoyed inflicting great suffering on others. But he changed. That is an extreme example, of course -- Paul said that he had to be so bad, in order to become so good -- but we do live in extreme times.

In an interview published in the February 25, 1965 Village Voice, Malcolm X spoke about the need to allow room for people to change. He noted that doing so meant they would change. But it is an error in thinking to not allow them that room.

People tend to be transformed in two ways: for some, it is an ongoing, internal process; for others, it is the result of external factors that they may not fully grasp. It is best, of course, for any society to have a combination of the two in order to effect meaningful change. And the truth is that society cannot change, unless people change -- just as conversely, society can't change if people remain the same.

I believe it is good to be skeptical of anyone who claims to be a "leader." And to be fully aware of any group's history, including recent history, be they a church or nation. But that does not exclude the possibility of change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 05:23 PM

4. Nice thread, H2O Man.

I am optimistic that some good, not all we want, but some progress can be made with Iran. I also hope that we will see more tolerance from the Catholic Church toward our LGBT brothers and sisters.

I am reminded of the early years of the civil rights movement. Here in GA, progress was often made in baby steps. Many liberals screamed that it was too slow, but sometimes we have to be patient. People who had believed for their entire life that AAs were inferior were simply not going to change overnight. I considered it a major victory when people would listen respectfully instead of shouting their venom at those of us working for change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to H2O Man (Original post)

Thu Sep 26, 2013, 06:05 PM

5. Two Rays of Light...

Let's hope it lasts...but, it's at least something positive that we haven't seen in awhile.

Quote from your post:

So, I understand why many of us find it at least potentially hopeful that the new Iranian president and new pope are saying rational things, which suggest more open minds. Likewise, I understand why others among us insist upon seeing real actions, solid proof of good intentions, before getting their hopes up.

Hopefully, to some extent, we can do some of both, as individuals and as a community.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread