True Press

Have you heard the news yet? Of course not. “True Press” is way ahead of the curve. Listen to this: the president of COSTCO announced that he would run for President.  At this moment thousands of Chinese are dancing in the streets chanting  “Young-Key Soon Wei -ping!”  President Trump has already declared that he has elected not to participate.

End

Shadows of Not Long Ago

If you listen to the current President of the United States of America, the Press is the enemy of the people, spreading “fake news”. That does not surprise me  any more. But I learned  early on how that plays out. I grew up in Nazi Germany. When the National Socialists took over the government in 1933, the first thing they did was to shut down all opposition  papers to prevent them from spreading “Jewish lies”.

Beginning in January of 1945, however, three months before the end of the war in Europe, the American army reached Aachen and started the first post-war German newspaper.

The Army, incidentally, lost twenty thousand men in the struggle to get there.  The absurdity is that those twenty thousand American citizens died fighting an enemy whose enemy was, as we now hear, the same as theirs, the free Press.  That of course was a year before the current leader of this Nation was born and, if we stretch it a little, he can be excused for not knowing that in those days the American military administration was so old-fashioned that they actually thought the re-establishment of a free press was vital to the reeducation of us Germans.

But wait!  I am both, one of those reeducated Germans as well as an American citizen. I am confused now. Which is the America we are making great again?

© 2018 by Herbert H. Hoffman

 

Winner, Losers

I don’t know how many reputable philosophers are on record as having said that the universe and even life itself are essentially absurd. The Bavarians, a sturdy tribe of Germans settled around the city of Munich, the city of beer where I once used to live, sum it up in one of their pithy sayings: “Saufst, schtirbscht; saufst net, schtirbscht ah!” It is hard to be so succinct in English but a reasonable translation would be “Drink too much you die, for shame; don’t drink at all, die all the same.”
Beer drinking is not one of the things that are foremost in my thoughts. But I also run into such absurdities in other contexts. The economy came to mind, the marketplace. There is no such thing as a perpetuum mobile. To keep things moving requires that you put something in. If everything stopped at the status quo antes there would be nothing to sell or buy. We would all be dead. Just losers, no winners.

If you are in commerce and you have something to sell you must find a way to attract buyers. And if you want more than a hand to mouth break-even existence you need many more buyers in order to buy more things to sell to even more buyers. It is a veritable chain reaction until we run into limits. Now we have a dilemma: everything we buy creates waste, pollutes, or harms us in other ways and we would want to cut back, not consume so much. But suppliers can’t survive unless we consume stuff. Most of us grew up believing that there are no limits. The power companies, for example, helped us to think of more ways to use more of the energy they sold. I remember a Southern California Gas Company presentation of the then new icemaker refrigerator where the young lady presenter showed us novel ways to use ice cubes. Put them in drinks; use them for compresses if you burn yourself; give them to houseplants for easy watering, and so on. More consumption was thought to be good for the economy.

Today, though, the limits are obvious. The power company now offers us advice on how to save on energy, i.e. to save money by saving energy. It’s a noble thing to do, of course, but it strikes me as absurd when a supplier urges consumers to consume less. Ultimately, of course, this hurts the supplier. Business shrinks. Employees become surplus humanity on food stamps. We are sorry for those workers and start looking for scapegoats. At election time voters prefer politician who promise to save their jobs. As if any politician had the slightest idea how to do that. The more efficient we become the worse it gets. Should a factory now scrap their robot machinery and hire people instead? They cannot afford people unless they outsource to a poorer country where labor is cheap. But that is not what angry voters want. They want their own old jobs back. And those jobs do not exist any more. The economy, I say, is absurd.

I take a pill every evening. It controls my symptoms. I buy refills every month. It is an ideal situation for the supplier. But I, the patient, would like a pill that cures me, that leaves me with no more symptoms to control. It would be ideal for me but counterproductive for the producer of my trusty daily pill, obviously.

When I am sick I see my doctor. Sick people are the stock in trade of physicians and hospitals. Healthy people less so. We all deserve praise for professing to embrace the idea of preventive medicine. But what if we all turned out to be perfectly healthy tomorrow morning? All of us, except the few that get involved in accidents. They will not generate enough income for more than a few doctors and one hospital per town. I see a paradox in that. Physicians do not know yet how to make us all well. But should they find a way, their own existence would be endangered. Some dilemma.
On the other hand, it has all happened before. When the automobile made the horse obsolete all drovers, farriers, and horse traders lost their jobs. Even the horse butchers of Paris slowly disappeared. I remember two of them on rue Chappe in the 18th arrondissement. In the late Forties one still had a shop sign in the form of a horse’s head, a tête de cheval, signifying the nature of his business. Most of these shops are gone now. Their supply of merchandise has dwindled, and so have the customers. But as far as I have been able to determine life goes on. A few doors down the street from where the horse head used to hang you find today the busy Cafe de Chappe. Prominently displayed on the menu the owner lists his Steak à Cheval, a very common item in Parisian brasseries consisting of an egg straddling a ground beef patty “like a rider on a horse.” I am not sure but I think he meant this as a joke. I have convinced myself that, while sad, it is a hopeful sign that most young people cannot possibly ‘get’ this splendid pun. As it did on rue Chappe, life goes on everywhere, at least in the short run. Was not Charles Darwin in the 1830’s worried about Thomas Malthus’ prediction, namely that there was no room for more people? And is it not now two hundred years later? And isn’t Malthus just about the last thing we worry about in our day to day lives? Bless Alfred E. Neuman and his dictum: “What — Me Worry?”. Yes, that’s us. I suspect that there is method in Mad.

(c)2017 by Herbert H. Hoffman
Picture credit: clipart

Lazarus

The 1880’ies are often called the Golden Age. In Russia, unfortunately, these years were characterized by massive Church-inspired pogroms, events at which pious churchgoers, walking behind their priest in procession, would still yell “Kill the Jews”, and mean it.

Emma Lazarus, a minor American writer and poet intent on helping the oppressed, believed that she spoke in the name of all Americans when she wrote The New Colossus. Later, when the Statue of liberty was erected, her words found their way to the wall of the foundation structure.

Now, a hundred years later, Liberty Enlightening The World by Bartholdi is said to be the best known public sculpture in America. Lazarus’ sonnet contains probably the best known line of American poetry: “Give me your tired, you poor, your huddled masses”. Maybe the words once meant what they said. America had a big heart then. Alas, America’s heart has shrunk a bit. Those words sound hollow these days. Do we not have enough trouble with unemployment, automation, outsourcing, social security, health insurance, etc.? We need the housekeepers’, waiters’, gardeners’, and field workers’ jobs for our own people, now essentially blocked from getting into those lucrative manual labor careers. We cannot take on the problems of other nations’ poor as well.

America for Americans is a more honest slogan than ‘Send us your poor’. And if honesty matters we ought to bring Emma’s words up to date lest any newcomers visiting the statue of Liberty misunderstand what we are about. Here is one attempt:

Take back your tired, your poor, your huddled masses.
They should breathe free, live without fear.
But please,
Not here.

(c) 2017 by Herbert H Hoffman Picture credit: whc.unesco.org

 

On Birthright

Some scholars and philosophers claim that you belong where you were born and that it is important to know that. Belonging somewhere is your birthright. Hence the slogan “America for Americans”. It is not a new formulation. Theodore Roosevelt used it, and the Ku Klux Clan did too. A preacher in New York, I understand, once used it as the title of his sermon. I suspect they all meant different things. The first thing that comes to my mind, however, is exclusiveness. The slogan does not evoke the image of welcoming open arms. It rather divides people into Americans and non-Americans.

From the day I entered the United States as an immigrant I saw that America is more than a geographical entity. I felt and still believe that America stands for and is recognized as a value the world over, the champion of democracy, the leader of the free world. America, in other words, is something big. If you take that slogan at face value, however, and apply it to our present reality America has suddenly become something very small. It sounds almost pitiful and desperate.

Time will tell if “America for Americans” really means something or if it is just empty rhetoric. In the meantime, who qualifies as an American? Not visitors, of course. We love tourists and foreign students provided they leave again. Ditto undocumented workers. They are not Americans either, but employers welcome them as cheap labor. Immigrants with Green Cards? No, they are not Americans either. Citizens! That’s it. All citizens are Americans by definition.

But there are two kinds of citizens. Some are born Americans. It is their birthright. Others are immigrants (i.e. non-Americans) but studied to become naturalized Americans. Thus we have two kinds of Americans, naturalized citizens and native citizens. Lately voices are being heard that only native citizens, citizens by birthright, should be considered Americans in this context. A precedent, some believe, would be the constitutional dictum that “no person except a natural born citizen … shall be eligible to the office of president”. If that view wins, perhaps the slogan ought to be more specific, like “America for Native Americans”.

Sitting Bull would have liked that. I don’t think it will fly, though.

(c) 2017 by Herbert H. Hoffman
Picture credit: publicdomainpictures.net

Is There Humor in Religion

We have all been admonished at one time or other not to discuss religion in polite society. The danger, I think, is that we might hit on something patently absurd which would tempt some of those present to laugh but deeply offend others. This is where the written word comes in handy. Reading is a solitary act. You are not forced to listen to your conversation partner’s offensive tales. You can simply skip what you don’t like and read or do something else.
So in a blog like this it is alright to hit on a few absurdities in religion and the ensuing humor. One of the funniest stories I know is found in the Bible of the Hebrews. The ancient Hebrews were people soaked in their faith, but at the same time they were Jews, respectful of the power of logical argument and thus quick to grasp the absurdity of a situation and the humor of it. As the tale develops in the Book of Genesis 18: 22-33, here looms God himself, all powerful and as tall as the Empire State building, ready to wipe out the entire neighborhood of Sodom. And there before him stands that little mite of a man, Abraham by name, saying — saying to God! — “Stop! What do you think you are doing?”

I mean, if that is not chutzpa I don’t know what is. You don’t have to be a Jew to laugh out loud if you try to picture this situation. Maybe you remember the ensuing hilarious sequence of Abraham haggling with the Allmighty over how many righteous people, minimum, it would take to save Sodom? There is humor in religion, at least in the Hebrew Bible. In the Greek Bible we also find humor, if subtle, such as Jesus’ eye-winking reaction to Nathaniel’s belittling of Nazareth (John 1:47).

Some one once said that if you want to make God laugh tell him your plans. You could also make him laugh by telling him what trivial details some religious people find important. One I have heard was the “problem” of hand gestures a priest should use when blessing the people. Should his thumb touch one finger? Or two? He might also find it funny that we print “IN GOD WE TRUST” on, of all places, our Federal Reserve notes. “Have the money changers been readmitted to the Temple?” God might ask with a twinkle in his eyes.

More seriously, in the Judeo-Christian scriptures are contradictory passages. One declares Yahweh to be the only existing god, that there can be no others. In a different section, however, it says that there are others and that he is greater than all of them. Scholars go out of their way to explain that the scriptures do not mean what they say which, according to Gallup, does not discourage 3 out of 10 Americans from reading the Bible literally. There is humor in that. There are also numbers in that, millions of voters.

There are other absurd but less humorous topics that sometimes vex religious people. For a long time the Church of England found it troublesome when women tried to enter the priesthood. The Anglican version of that Church in America had by then solved that issue but was now struggling with the issue of homosexual priests and bishops. No sooner was this issue overcome a new issue arrived: homosexual marriages. Suddenly those who left their Church over the women’s issue and those who left because of homosexual priests were now joined by those opposed to homosexual moms and dads. They have not even touched Roe vs Wade yet. In a quasi-theocracy like ours this promises to become an issue way beyond humor.

My Jewish friends tend to have thicker skin. They will not be offended when I snicker at the way they divide themselves into groups. Sarah is a reformed Jew. You can tell by the fact that she stores her milk and her hamburger meat on the same shelf in the refrigerator. Gloria, on the other hand, is not a real Jew but she is married to one and has two Jewish children. Her family is unreformed. They lean toward the orthodox faith, which means that they store their milk and their meat on separate shelves.

I understand that there also are ultra-orthodox Jews. They cannot even store meat and milk in the same refrigerator. So they live on milk and feed the meat to the dogs.

Be that as it may: we tend to be polite and do not laugh at things other people are passionate about. Important is that we are Americans. We could laugh, if we wanted to.

I will not touch the Koran, however.

(c)2017 by Herbert H. Hoffman
Picture credit: dpsg-kreuzritter.de

(Be sure to scroll down for earlier posts)

King Of The Quadrupeds (A fable for election times)

Some say the Lion should be king. He roars, and that is scary. More useful, though, by some accounts, would be the Dromedary. The Camel, that’s the two-humped thing, just does not look quite like a king. The Ox is strong as bovines go but for a king he is too slow. Who else has four feet and could rule? Most likely not the patient Mule. The Donkey? Will not do, alas, for folks might say the king’s an ass. It’s clear such honor should belong to one that’s noble, fast, and strong. I’d say, “A kingdom for a horse!” (But that’s been said before, of course).

(c) 2016 by Herbert H. Hoffman