When the future is too remote…

Sad and tragic. Tragic and sad – whichever way you look at it:

Jamey Rodemeyer, a 14-year-old high school freshman in Buffalo, N.Y., was bullied. A lot. After years of being called gay slurs at school and being told by anonymous people online that he should die, he killed himself Monday. (…)

Last May, Jamey told his friends that he was bisexual and created his own ‘It Gets Better’ video. He thanked Lady Gaga for supporting the gay community and told the viewers, ‘Love yourself and you’re set.’
Indeed, he received an outpouring of support online from Gaga’s fans, who call themselves ‘little monsters,’ as well as from his friends.
But others online did not embrace him. ‘JAMIE IS STUPID, GAY, FAT ANND UGLY. HE MUST DIE!’ an anonymous commenter said on Formspring. ‘I wouldn’t care if you died. No one would. So just do it : ) It would make everyone WAY more happier!’ said another.

Columnist Dan Savage, who created the ‘It Gets Better’ project, said on his blog that the people who bullied Jamey should be held accountable ‘for their actions, for their hate, for the harm they’ve caused.’
Source: Washington Post

Things like that make me so angry, so furious – and yes, indeed, these people should be held accountable. This boy tried, he tried hard. He was no self-pitying whiner, he was a fighter – or at least, he tried to be. He was a kid who, at only 14, obviously had to live with more hate and resentment than many adults would be able to bear. But, just like Savage says, sometimes hope isn’t enough. Sometimes the damage done by hate and by haters is simply too great. Sometimes the future seems too remote. And those are the times our hearts break.

And it makes me wonder: are people like those Westboro Baptists and suchlike happy about this too? Are they proud? How dramatically wrong can your view of the world possibly be if you believe it is a good idea to spread so much hate – even worse: if you’re convinced it is your mission and divine purpose to do so, if you are bigoted enough to declare that some of us, based on features randomly chosen, deserve to live and others do not?
Yes, everbody is entitled to their own madness – but just like individual freedom it most clearly ends where it overlaps with the freedom of others.

Jamey Rodemeyer was just one of I don’t know how many out there who feel like this every day – who try, and try hard, and fight, and struggle. As if growing up wasn’t hard enough already, trying to find some space in life you can squeeze into and feel comfy, at least a little…

Keep it Clean – Keep Rockin’

If I were to say anything about my personal approach towards religion, and to boil it down to my basic convictions, it would probably be, firstly, that I’m convinced that if there is a God (or whatever your term of choice may be), we weren’t given our brains for nothing; why would God grant brains if we were meant to be sheeple? It’s our damn obligation to use our brains – thoroughly and responsibly.
And secondly: whoever abuses religion in order to promote their own hatred has never understood what religion is really about, however convinced they may be of their alleged mission.

I am also convinced that everybody is entitled to their own madness – but personal freedom implicates its own limitations: it ends where it overlaps with the freedom of others. Some people are more aware of this than others – and some don’t seem to be aware of this at all. They get caught in the pseudo-logic that they are not only right, but that it’s their duty to dedicate their lives to a mission based on loathing and hatred for practically everything that is not 110% in line with their convictions.
Personally I believe these people lead very poor lives. They will never know what real joy and real friendship are; but of course they, if you ask them, will disagree.

Reason can resist zeal, but it can’t overcome it, so the most you can hope for is to prevent other people from being dragged into this self-sustaining ideologic circle: whatever you try to bring reasonably forward against it will be reinterpreted to fit the system. By arguing against their conviction you prove that they are right – within their line of argument. And they will accept no other.

The Westboro Baptist Church is a perfect example. Equipped with enough sense of humour you may still snicker at signs saying God hates America or America is doomed (if I were convinced God hated the country I was in – well, I’d move my ass out of there asap!) – but it’s not easy to remain levelheaded when someone shows up at a funeral, holding up signs that the deceased deserved to die, requesting that we pray for more casualties.
So since it is impossible to fight that kind of zeal with reason, what the terrific Foo Fighters came up with when the Westboro Baptists called for a picket of their show was probably one of the best ideas one could possibly have had:

The prologue – Hot Buns, promo for the North American tour:

And what Dave Grohl, the master of the rock universe, and his guys came up with in response to some Westboro Baptist bigotry (and watch closely – Rise Against seemed to enjoy the show too):

Music. That’s All.

Luckily, music was not my first love. Had it been, it would have gone horribly wrong because the music my parents listened to (and consequently me too, as a kid) – well, let’s say only few things could be further from what I like to call music now. Like maybe fingernails on a chalkboard. Or a jackhammer.

So music was not my first, but it’s maybe my one and only true love (you know – it’s not that I, in a different context, wouldn’t believe in love… I just don’t trust it one single inch). Given that I’m not involved in the process of making it. Though I absolutely enjoyed being in the school choir and later staging musicals, for the last couple of years I have been very happy to let others do the entertainment and be entertained.

And to be honest: 2011 has been one of the bestest years ever when it comes to live music so far – and it doesn’t seem to have ended yet. It will be damn hard for 2012 to even come close…

A while ago, they posted this picture on failblog:

I could do better from this year only (apart from the fact, of course, that I would never ever get something like that inked… but different story): Anberlin. The unmatched Linkin Park. 30 Seconds to Mars. The mighty Placebo. Boysetsfire, back on stage together. Rise Against. The most amazing high priests and masters of the rock universe, the Foo Fighters. The New Recruits – yes, their very first show ever, we were there, and man, these guys rocked! The Flatliners. The Subways. Smashing Pumpkins. Emil Bulls… who did I forget? Many, I suppose… 4LYN. Punchers Plant. Vroudenspil. Bosse. The very last show of the Blackout Argument is coming up, I definitely mustn’t miss that. ASTPAI. The Exposed. Alter Bridge. And I’m sure I still missed quite a few.

I am, true, hard to please when it comes to music. Bands that only do a proper job in the studio but suck performing live? Lie down and rot in your graves. Bands that give a shit about the audience and just do their routine? Go and burn in hell. I want passion. I want skill. I want sweat. I want dedication. I like it loud and hot. I like guys who come on stage in their street clothes and favourite shirts, who drink beer and don’t give a fuck about stage choreography, who scream and shout and play their guitars, bass and drums just like they have sex: with passion. And yes, also for fun and sheer pleasure – not like they loved what they’re doing, but because they love what they’re doing.

And this is what it has to look like:

Lessons Learned?

Somehow, it seems, us humans tend to either ignore any lessons from the past, or to cling to history in panic, afraid someone might accuse us of being ignorant and heartless if we said we moved on. We have yet to find a way of learning our lessons and, at the same time, focus on the future rather than the past – as private individuals, and as nations.

Moving on doesn’t mean we forget, or stop to care. We’re not erasing history if we refuse to remain in a state of shock. In fact, a focus on the future, with history in mind, will probably even provide us with the far better lessons to learn, while a focus on the past might even lead us, as Mr Dionne most appropriately points out, down the wrong path – and this is not only true for the 9/11 attacks:

We learned lessons from the attacks, but so many of them were wrong. (…) Reflections on the meaning of the horror and the years that followed are inevitably inflected by our own political or philosophical leanings. It’s a critique that no doubt applies to my thoughts as well. We see what we choose to see and use the event as we want to use it.

This does nothing to honor those who died and those who sacrificed to prevent even more suffering. In the future, the anniversary will best be reserved as a simple day of remembrance in which all of us humbly offer our respect for the anguish and the heroism of those individuals and their families.

But if we continue to place 9/11 at the center of our national consciousness, we will keep making the same mistakes. (…)

We have no alternative from now on but to look forward and not back. This does not dishonor the fallen heroes, and Lincoln explained why at Gettysburg. ‘We can not dedicate – we can not consecrate – we can not hallow this ground,’ he said. ‘The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract.’ The best we could do, Lincoln declared, was to commit ourselves to ‘a new birth of freedom.’ This is still our calling.
Source: Washington Post

Time to leave 9/11 behind, as Mr Dionne put it? Why, yes, to an extent. The title may be a bit blunt, but if you read the full article – unlike, obviously, some of the people who commented on facebook, where the article was on the Washington Post’s wall – you will probably agree…

9/11

I absolutely love the Shoeboxblog. If you don’t know it yet, check it out, follow these guys on facebook (or twitter, if you use it, which I don’t, but, well, for those who do, it might be worthwile).

Today, everything that needs to be said is said by Chuck & Beans:

2 Things:

1. What I said about democracy, that one of its major flaws is what it is, is truer than ever:

Fünf Prozent geknackt: Laut Umfragen könnten die Piraten den Einzug ins Berliner Abgeordnetenhaus schaffen – weil ihr Wahlkampf auffällig anders ist: Es könnte chic werden, Piraten zu wählen, so Politikwissenschaftler Christoph Bieber.
Quelle: ZDF heute

Ja sind wir denn noch zu retten? Reicht jetzt gegen etwas zu sein tatsächlich schon aus, um politisch ernst genommen zu werden? Ganz ehrlich: Wer tatsächlich die Piratenpartei wählt, sollte eigentlich durchaus mal von ihr regiert werden (daß vornehmliche ‘Anti’-Parteien – die sich eher dadurch definieren, daß sie gegen etwas sind, als tatsächlich sinnvolle, umsetzbare Programme zu entwickeln – nicht gerade regierungstauglich sind, naja, Beispiele dafür hatten wir ja reichlich).
Aber dann bitte in Gottes Namen ohne mich!
Da fragt man sich doch, ob diejenigen, die Parteien wie die Piratenpartei in der Tat für wählbar halten, sich schon mal mit deren Programm auseinandergesetzt haben. Vermutlich eher nicht. Und chic? Findet man es tatsächlich chic, seine Stimme an so eine Partei zu verschwenden? Und ist dann am Ende, weil man ja so anvantgardistisch und anders ist, vielleicht sogar noch Stolz darauf?

2. The Washington Post published a satellite picture of Ground Zero, shot about a day after the attack. To keep it as short as possible: moving. Still today.

Also, a story about boatlifters by Katharine Herrup for Reuters… apart from the fact that it is one of those touching stories, Herrups conclusion is as simple as it is optimistic:

It was a day that lots of local, ordinary people become heroes. It was a day that was supposed to tear America apart, but instead brought Americans together. It was a day that brought out the best in many people.

‘We wanted to tell a story that reminds Americans that this is a country that bounces back from adversity’, the President of the Center for National Policy Stephen Flynn, who had been a U.S. Coast Guard officer, told me. ‘Our national DNA is resilience. The key for us is to move forward with some key lessons and one of the lessons missing is the strength of civil society and how it responded when 9/11 happened.’
Source: NY Times

Too optimistic? Maybe.
But then, maybe that’s exactly what people need – because if we couldn’t be hopeful after 9/11, wouldn’t that feel like giving up?

The Whole Truth and Nothing But

One of the major flaws of democracy clearly is – that it is what it is: democracy. People get to vote. And, most naturally, they will vote for whoever is ready to make the best promise. As to whether whatever is promised is credible or not – well, everyone has to decide for themselves, right? Quite a number of those who constantly tend to complain about all politicians being liars and untrustworthy should, indeed, question their own approach towards politics. Some of us clearly beg for being lied to. And we reward the best lie.

So when Thomas Friedman today quotes Mahbubani and his spectacular finding that there will be no painless solution. ‘Sacrifice’ will be needed, and the American people know this. But no American politician dares utter the word ‘sacrifice.’ Painful truths cannot be told – are we really supposed to be surprised?

This is not an American phenomenon, it’s global.

What, however, is indeed a bit astounding is Friedman’s conclusion about to what extent the cold war pushed on with the economy – nation-building, he labels it, but obviously it’s mainly about economic progress:

Why has this been a lost decade? An answer can be found in one simple comparison: How Dwight Eisenhower and his successors used the cold war and how George W. Bush used 9/11. America had to face down the Russians in the cold war. America had to respond to 9/11 and the threat of Al Qaeda. But the critical difference between the two was this: Beginning with Eisenhower and continuing to some degree with every cold war president, we used the cold war and the Russian threat as a reason and motivator to do big, hard things together at home — to do nation-building in America. We used it to build the interstate highway system, put a man on the moon, push out the boundaries of science, teach new languages, maintain fiscal discipline and, when needed, raise taxes. We won the cold war with collective action.

George W. Bush did the opposite. He used 9/11 as an excuse to lower taxes, to start two wars that — for the first time in our history — were not paid for by tax increases, and to create a costly new entitlement in Medicare prescription drugs. Imagine where we’d be today if on the morning of 9/12 Bush had announced (as some of us advocated) a ‘Patriot Tax’ of $1 per gallon of gas to pay for education, infrastructure and government research, to help finance our wars and to slash our dependence on Middle East oil. Gasoline in the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001, averaged $1.66 a gallon.

But rather than use 9/11 to summon us to nation-building at home, Bush used it as an excuse to party — to double down on a radical tax-cutting agenda for the rich that not only did not spur rising living standards for most Americans but has now left us with a huge ball and chain around our ankle. And later, rather than asking each of us to contribute something to the war, he outsourced it to one-half of one-percent of the American people. Everyone else — y’all have fun.

We used the cold war to reach the moon and spawn new industries. We used 9/11 to create better body scanners and more T.S.A. agents. It will be remembered as one of the greatest lost opportunities of any presidency — ever.
Source: NY Times

We won the cold war with collective action.
This sentence alone makes me cringe. The cold war won by nation-building in the USA? Please go and repeat your history classes. While I’m quite with Friedman as far as George W. is concerned, I couldn’t possibly disagree more on his praise of achievements chiefly – in his opinion – powered by the threats of the cold war. Are we to see the arms race as the general basis of the economic success of the US and consequently the Western world? True, military necessities have undoubtedly contributed to research and development. But to believe that research, development, any kind of relevant interest or activity by public authorities really, would have come to a standstill without the threat of the cold war (and this seems to be Friedman’s conclusion), is a misconception.

While Friedman has a point demanding more genuine truth in politics – which he won’t get, given the nature of people and the fact that we don’t like to hear unpleasant truths – I think he’s misled in his analysis of the economic history during the cold war.

Speaking of unpleasant truths:
I’ve been deliberately waiting to write about the Perisic trial until today. The first coverage I found yesterday was indeed in the NY Times, but since I know that some German papers (at least their online editions) tend to preferably publish whatever makes it to the Europe-related sections of the NYT, I wanted to give them time to catch up. Which they did, by and large.
Some – most, actually, except e.g. Focus online – yet decided to remain silent on one subject: what Perisic was not found guilty of.

The judges said Perisic ‘knew that it was highly probable’ Bosnian Serbs would kill, abuse and expel Bosnian Muslims after seizing control of Srebrenica, but that he could not ‘reasonably have foreseen’ the extent of the massacre and acquitted him of aiding and abetting extermination in the enclave.
Source: NY Times

This is downright sickening. So despite the fact that Perisic had a clear notion of what was about to happen, and that without his aid (weapons, logistics and soldiers) the Serbian forces could never have committed their crimes, he is not to be held responsible?
Good Lord, this is what armies are all about! We’re not talking about a civilian here who has no legal control over his neighbour who goes out and buys a gun and shoots the postman; we’re talking about an officer in charge! He knew what was about to happen; he may not have ordered it, yet he did nothing to prevent it, although he, being the officer in charge, had means to do so. Even worse: he continued sending aid afterwards, like everything just had gone the way it had been planned.
Don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying he’s the lone culprit (and yes, I know very well that war, having to fight, being ordered to kill, brings out the worst in people, soldiers as well as civilians – and like I said before, I consider myself damn lucky that I didn’t have to go through any of this so far, and I truly hope it will stay that way, for me, my friends, my family, for simply everyone I care about). A 27 years’ sentence probably means Perisic will spend the rest of his life in prison and never be released again. Fair enough. But – no responsibility for the Srebrenica massacre? Honestly?