Excerpts

"America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. "

-- Abraham Lincoln

Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece?

Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

[Gilbert: "There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."]

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Reichsmarschall Hermann Göring, to interviewer Gustave Gilbert during Easter recess of the Nürremberg trials, 18 April 1946.

The Holy Now

There were no formerly heroic times, and there was no formerly pure generation. There is no one here but us chickens, and so it has always been: a people busy and powerful, knowledgeable, ambivalent, important, fearful and self-aware; a people who scheme, promote, deceive and conquer; who pray for their loved ones, and long to flee misery and skip death. It is a weakening and discoloring idea that rustic people knew God personally once upon a time -- or even knew selflessness or courage or literature -- but that it is too late for us. In fact, the absolute is available to everyone in every age. There never was a more holy age than ours, and never a less.

There is no less holiness at this time -- as you are reading this -- than there was the day the Red Sea parted, or that day in the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month, as Ezekiel was a captive by the river Chebar, when the heavens opened and he saw visions of God. There is no whit less enlightenment under the tree by your street than there was under the Buddha's bo tree. There is no whit less might in heaven or on earth than there was the day Jesus said "Maid, arise" to the centurion's daughter, or the day Peter walked on water, or the night Mohammed flew to heaven on a horse. In any instant the sacred may wipe you with its finger. In any instant the bush may flare, your feet may rise, or you may see a bunch of souls in a tree. In any instant you may avail yourself of the power to love your enemies; to accept failure, slander, or the grief of loss; or to endure torture.

Purity's time is always now. Purity is no social phenomenon, a cultural thing whose time we have missed, whose generations are dead, so we can only buy Shaker furniture. "Each and every day the Divine Voice issues from Sinai," says the Talmud. Of eternal fulfillment, Tillich said, "If it is not seen in the present, it cannot be seen at all."

--Annie Dillard, For the Time Being

- Osho

"...It's a messy movie, often intentionally, often not. And it shows off Keira as we've never seen her: raw, dirty, bad. Fifteen minutes into the movie, she strips down to her underwear and administers a sweaty lap dance to a room full of Latino gang members, played convincingly by a roomful of actual Latino gang members. Other elements of the scene - Keira's ass for example - are less authentic.

'You have to decide for yourself what you're comfortable with', she says. 'I'm OK with topless, but I won't show my bottom. I used a double. Tony brought in three girls for me to chose from. Before they came into the office, I'm like, How do I act? I decided to be very businesslike. It was hard not to laugh, but I didn't want to offend anyone. Anyway, they all had very nice bottoms, and I chose one. Then a few weeks ago, I hear about this girl in Vegas claiming to be Keira Knightly's body double. It wasn't her. She wasn't the girl in the movie.'

It's almost cliché by now: You haven't really made it until you've got a low-rent stripper masquerading as your ass double..."

--David Katz

THEN: "Let's start with one simple fact: Iraq is a black box that has been sealed shut since Saddam came to dominate Iraqi politics in the late 1960's. Therefore, one needs to have a great deal of humility when it comes to predicting what sorts of bats and demons may fly out if the U.S. and its allies remove the lid. Think of it this way: If and when we take the lid off Iraq, we will find an envelope inside. It will tell us what we have won, and it will say one of two things. It could say, 'Congratulations! You've just won the Arab Germany - a country with enormous human talent, enormous natural resources, but with an evil dictator, whom you've just removed.' Or the envelope could say, 'You've just won the Arab Yugoslavia - an artificial country congenitally divided among Kurds, Shiites, Sunnis, Nasserites, leftists, and a host of tribes and clans that can only be held together with a Saddam-like iron fist. Congratulations, you're the new Saddam.'

In the first scenario, Iraq is the way it is today because Saddam is the way he is. In the second scenario, Saddam is the way he is because Iraq is what it is. Those are two very different problems. And we will know which we've won only when we take off the lid. The conservatives and neocons, who have been pounding the table for war, should be a lot more humble about this question, because they don't know either."

  - Thomas Friedman in The New York Times, January 26, 2003

IN HINDSIGHT: "To me, the real intelligence failure was how broken Iraqi society was. It was so much more decimated than the CIA were telling the U.S. government. Those guys had memories of an Iraq of the fifties and sixties, not the Iraq that had been battered by eight years of Iran-Iraq war, Gulf War I, ten years of sanctions, and then an invasion. I knew this was going to be hard. Believe me, it didn't take any genius to know that. You just needed to have a basic acquaintance with the Middle East and the history of Iraq to know that.

And that's always been my issue with the Bush administration. My issue is not that this isn't important. No, I think it is important. It's important and hard, and they thought that it was important and easy."

- Thomas Friedman in  Esquire, December 13, 2005

Happiness cannot be found through great effort and willpower, but is already present, in open relaxation and letting go.

Don't strain yourself; there is nothing to do nor undo.

Whatever momentarily arises in the body mind has no real importance at all, has little reality whatsoever.

Why identify with, and become attached to it, passing judgment upon it and ourselves.

Far better to simply let the entire game happen on its own, springing up and falling back like waves-without changing or manipulating anything-and notice how everything vanishes and reappears, magically, again and again, time without end.

Only our searching for happiness prevents us from seeing it.

It's like a vivid rainbow which you pursue without ever catching, or a dog chasing its own tail.

Although peace and happiness do not exist as an actual thing or place, it is always available and accompanies you every instant.

Don't believe in the reality of good and bad experiences; they are like today's ephemeral weather, like rainbows in the sky.

Wanting to grasp the ungraspable, you exhaust yourself in vain.

As soon as you open and relax this tight fist of grasping, infinite space is there-open, inviting and comfortable.

Make use of this spaciousness, this freedom and natural ease.

Don't search any further.

Don't go into the tangled jungle looking for the great awakened elephant who is already resting quietly at home in front of your own hearth.

Nothing to do or undo,

Nothing to force,

Nothing to want,

And nothing missing-

Emaho! Marvelous!

Everything happens by itself.

--Ven. Lama Gendun Rinpoche

Karam Tarchine Lundroup Buddist Monastery

Biollet, France

There then followed the most extraordinary evening in which, each time we hankered for food or additional refreshment or just the sound of an Australian voice, we had to go off and stand by the kitchen doors until we caught someone emerging. Some of the other few diners were doing likewise. During one foray I asked a man with an empty beer glass if he dined here often.

"Wife likes the view," he explained, and we looked across the room to a plump little woman who gave us a small but cheery wave.

"Service is a bit slow, don't you think?

Bloody hopeless," he agreed.

In the morning a new man was behind the front desk. "And how did you enjoy your stay, sir?" he asked smoothly. "It was singularly execrable," I replied. "Oh, excellent," he purred, taking my card.

"In fact, I would go so far as to say that the principal value of a stay in this establishment is that it is bound to make all subsequent service-related experiences seem, in comparison, refreshing."

He made a deeply appreciative expression as if to say, "Praise indeed," and presented my bill for signature. "Well, we hope you'll come again."

"I would sooner have bowel surgery in the woods with a stick."

His expression wavered, then held there for a long moment. "Excellent," he said again, but without a great show of conviction.

--Bill Bryson, "In a Sunburned Country"
 

Down the Yangtze the awful prediction has been fulfilled. You expect this river trip to be an experience of the past — and it is. But it is also a glimpse of the future. In a hundred years or so, under a cold uncolonized moon, what we call the civilized world will all look like China, muddy and senile and old-fangled: no trees, no birds, and shortages of fuel and metal and meat; but plenty of pushcarts, cobblestones, ditch-diggers, and wooden inventions. Nine hundred million farmers splashing through puddles and the rest of the population growing weak and blind working the crashing looms in black factories. Forget rocket-ships, super-technology, moving sidewalks and all the rubbishy hope in science fiction. No one will ever go to Mars and live. A religion has evolved from the belief that we have a future in outer space; but it is a half-baked religion — it is a little like Mormonism or the Cargo Cult. Our future is this mildly poisoned earth and its smoky air. We are in for hunger and hard work, the highest stage of poverty — no starvation, but crudeness everywhere, clumsy art, simple language, bad books, brutal laws, plain vegetables, and clothes of one colour. It will be damp and dull, like this. It will be monochrome and crowded — how could it be different? There will be no star wars or galactic empires and no more money to waste on the loony nationalism in space programmes. Our grandchildren will probably live in a version of China. On the dark brown banks of the Yangtze the future has already arrived.

--Dave Barry

A favorite anecdote of yours explaining why you love or hate New York:

Outsiders think New York is an intimidating, always-make-sure-to-check-your-pockets type of a town. Yet my forgetful husband has now left his cell phone in the back seat of a taxicab on five separate occasions and each time some thoughtful New Yorker has found it, taken the time to track my husband down, and returned his phone. In fact, my husband left me for the fifth guy who found his phone and now lives down in Chelsea.

(That last sentence isn’t true, but it could be, and that’s why I love New York!)

--Gillian Zoe Segal

"I am enclosing two tickets to the first night of my new play; bring a friend... if you have one."
--George Bernard Shaw to Winston Churchill

"Cannot possibly attend first night; will attend second, if there is one."
--Winston Churchill's response to George Bernard Shaw

"Winston, if you were my husband, I would poison your coffee!"
--Lady Astor to Winston Churchill at a dinner party

"Madam, if I were your husband, I would drink it!"
--Winston Churchill's response to Lady Astor

from the novel  How To Be Good:

At the beginning of my third week in Janet's flat, I come home to find Tom watching TV with a new friend. The new friend is a little fat child with a boil near his nose and a boy-band fringe that only serves to accentuate, or perhaps even poke fun at, his almost startling unattractiveness. "You know the kind of faces I'm usually found on?" the fringe seems to be saying. "Well, have a look at this one!" Tom's friends don't look like this. They look handsome and cool. Cool is very important to Tom; fat and boils (and fluffy brown-and-white sweaters) are usually of even less interest to him than they are to anyone else.

"Hello," I say brightly. "Who's this?"

The new friend looks at me, and then looks around the room, head wobbling, to try to locate the stranger in our midst. Heartbreakingly, given his other disadvantages, he doesn't appear to be very bright; even after having ascertained that there is no one else with us, he declines to answer my question presumably on the assumption that he would get it wrong.

"Christopher," mumbles Tom.

"Hello, Christopher."

"Hello."

"Are you staying for tea?"

He stares at me again. Nope. He's not going to risk getting caught out on that one.

--Nick Hornby

Caring for Your Introvert

The habits and needs of a little-understood group
 
by Jonathan Rauch
 
.....
 
 

o you know someone who needs hours alone every day? Who loves quiet conversations about feelings or ideas, and can give a dynamite presentation to a big audience, but seems awkward in groups and maladroit at small talk? Who has to be dragged to parties and then needs the rest of the day to recuperate? Who growls or scowls or grunts or winces when accosted with pleasantries by people who are just trying to be nice?

If so, do you tell this person he is "too serious," or ask if he is okay? Regard him as aloof, arrogant, rude? Redouble your efforts to draw him out?

If you answered yes to these questions, chances are that you have an introvert on your hands—and that you aren't caring for him properly. Science has learned a good deal in recent years about the habits and requirements of introverts. It has even learned, by means of brain scans, that introverts process information differently from other people (I am not making this up). If you are behind the curve on this important matter, be reassured that you are not alone. Introverts may be common, but they are also among the most misunderstood and aggrieved groups in America, possibly the world.

I know. My name is Jonathan, and I am an introvert.

Oh, for years I denied it. After all, I have good social skills. I am not morose or misanthropic. Usually. I am far from shy. I love long conversations that explore intimate thoughts or passionate interests. But at last I have self-identified and come out to my friends and colleagues. In doing so, I have found myself liberated from any number of damaging misconceptions and stereotypes. Now I am here to tell you what you need to know in order to respond sensitively and supportively to your own introverted family members, friends, and colleagues. Remember, someone you know, respect, and interact with every day is an introvert, and you are probably driving this person nuts. It pays to learn the warning signs.

What is introversion? In its modern sense, the concept goes back to the 1920s and the psychologist Carl Jung. Today it is a mainstay of personality tests, including the widely used Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Introverts are not necessarily shy. Shy people are anxious or frightened or self-excoriating in social settings; introverts generally are not. Introverts are also not misanthropic, though some of us do go along with Sartre as far as to say "Hell is other people at breakfast." Rather, introverts are people who find other people tiring.

Extroverts are energized by people, and wilt or fade when alone. They often seem bored by themselves, in both senses of the expression. Leave an extrovert alone for two minutes and he will reach for his cell phone. In contrast, after an hour or two of being socially "on," we introverts need to turn off and recharge. My own formula is roughly two hours alone for every hour of socializing. This isn't antisocial. It isn't a sign of depression. It does not call for medication. For introverts, to be alone with our thoughts is as restorative as sleeping, as nourishing as eating. Our motto: "I'm okay, you're okay—in small doses."

How many people are introverts? I performed exhaustive research on this question, in the form of a quick Google search. The answer: About 25 percent. Or: Just under half. Or—my favorite—"a minority in the regular population but a majority in the gifted population."

Are introverts misunderstood? Wildly. That, it appears, is our lot in life. "It is very difficult for an extrovert to understand an introvert," write the education experts Jill D. Burruss and Lisa Kaenzig. (They are also the source of the quotation in the previous paragraph.) Extroverts are easy for introverts to understand, because extroverts spend so much of their time working out who they are in voluble, and frequently inescapable, interaction with other people. They are as inscrutable as puppy dogs. But the street does not run both ways. Extroverts have little or no grasp of introversion. They assume that company, especially their own, is always welcome. They cannot imagine why someone would need to be alone; indeed, they often take umbrage at the suggestion. As often as I have tried to explain the matter to extroverts, I have never sensed that any of them really understood. They listen for a moment and then go back to barking and yipping.

Are introverts oppressed? I would have to say so. For one thing, extroverts are overrepresented in politics, a profession in which only the garrulous are really comfortable. Look at George W. Bush. Look at Bill Clinton. They seem to come fully to life only around other people. To think of the few introverts who did rise to the top in politics—Calvin Coolidge, Richard Nixon—is merely to drive home the point. With the possible exception of Ronald Reagan, whose fabled aloofness and privateness were probably signs of a deep introverted streak (many actors, I've read, are introverts, and many introverts, when socializing, feel like actors), introverts are not considered "naturals" in politics.

Extroverts therefore dominate public life. This is a pity. If we introverts ran the world, it would no doubt be a calmer, saner, more peaceful sort of place. As Coolidge is supposed to have said, "Don't you know that four fifths of all our troubles in this life would disappear if we would just sit down and keep still?" (He is also supposed to have said, "If you don't say anything, you won't be called on to repeat it." The only thing a true introvert dislikes more than talking about himself is repeating himself.)

With their endless appetite for talk and attention, extroverts also dominate social life, so they tend to set expectations. In our extrovertist society, being outgoing is considered normal and therefore desirable, a mark of happiness, confidence, leadership. Extroverts are seen as bighearted, vibrant, warm, empathic. "People person" is a compliment. Introverts are described with words like "guarded," "loner," "reserved," "taciturn," "self-contained," "private"—narrow, ungenerous words, words that suggest emotional parsimony and smallness of personality. Female introverts, I suspect, must suffer especially. In certain circles, particularly in the Midwest, a man can still sometimes get away with being what they used to call a strong and silent type; introverted women, lacking that alternative, are even more likely than men to be perceived as timid, withdrawn, haughty.

Are introverts arrogant? Hardly. I suppose this common misconception has to do with our being more intelligent, more reflective, more independent, more level-headed, more refined, and more sensitive than extroverts. Also, it is probably due to our lack of small talk, a lack that extroverts often mistake for disdain. We tend to think before talking, whereas extroverts tend to think by talking, which is why their meetings never last less than six hours. "Introverts," writes a perceptive fellow named Thomas P. Crouser, in an online review of a recent book called Why Should Extroverts Make All the Money? (I'm not making that up, either), "are driven to distraction by the semi-internal dialogue extroverts tend to conduct. Introverts don't outwardly complain, instead roll their eyes and silently curse the darkness." Just so.

The worst of it is that extroverts have no idea of the torment they put us through. Sometimes, as we gasp for air amid the fog of their 98-percent-content-free talk, we wonder if extroverts even bother to listen to themselves. Still, we endure stoically, because the etiquette books—written, no doubt, by extroverts—regard declining to banter as rude and gaps in conversation as awkward. We can only dream that someday, when our condition is more widely understood, when perhaps an Introverts' Rights movement has blossomed and borne fruit, it will not be impolite to say "I'm an introvert. You are a wonderful person and I like you. But now please shush."

How can I let the introvert in my life know that I support him and respect his choice? First, recognize that it's not a choice. It's not a lifestyle. It's an orientation.

Second, when you see an introvert lost in thought, don't say "What's the matter?" or "Are you all right?"

Third, don't say anything else, either.


The URL for this page is http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2003/03/rauch.htm.

1421 - The Year the Chinese Discovered America

"On the issue of how could a European cartographer construct a map and a globe showing the Pacific Ocean years before the first known European saw it, there is a very interesting book that came out in 2002. The book is called 1421, subtitled The Year the Chinese Discovered America, by Gavin Menzies, a retired Royal Navy submarine captain. His thesis is that in 1421 the Ming Emperor Zhu Di sent out a large fleet commanded by eunuch admirals and charged with sailing and charting the entire globe. The part of this story that is well known is that a fleet sailed to the East coast of Africa, returning with among other things a giraffe. But Menzies's claim is that off the coast of Africa the fleet divided into smaller, but still large fleets that separately explored and charted: 1) the southern Indian Ocean and southern and western Australia, 2) a fleet that entered the South Atlantic and sailed up the west coast of Africa before dividing again into groups that explored and charted, 3) the north coast of South America, the Caribbean (where it was hit by a hurricane off the Bahamas), Florida, the eastern seaboard, sailing all the way up to and circumnavigating Greenland, and finally sailing the seas north of Siberia, and down through the Bering Strait, and 4) the east coast of South America and Patagonia, then through the straits of Magellan to the west coast of South America, where the fleet divided again, one part going 5) north along the west coast of the Americas at least up to and into San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento delta, and 6) another group heading west across the south Pacific all the way to eastern Australia. Further, while the fleets suffered extensive losses through storms and shipwrecks, at least one ship from each fleet made it back to China, where things then got very strange.

"Just after the fleets had departed China Beijing was hit by a strong electrical storm, and the Temple of Heaven was struck by lightning. There were many casualties in the resulting fire, including the Emperor's favorite concubine. But more significantly, the Confucian Mandarins, who had opposed Zhu Di's efforts to expand China's tribute system so widely, used this event to overmaster the now aged and demoralized emperor by claiming that Heaven was showing its displeasure at his actions, so that, when the fleets eventually began returning to China they were decommissioned and their logs and all records of their journeys destroyed. All records kept in Beijing were also destroyed, as were the shipyards capable of constructing more fleets. China then turned inward and isolationist.

"However, one or more maps and accounts of the voyages made it to the Ottoman Empire, and into the hands of at least one European who had converted to Islam and met, and possibly sailed for a time with one of the fleets. Eventually some Italians and the Portuguese (first) and later Spanish courts became aware of this information. This prompted Henry the Navigator to launch his voyages of exploration, which put the Portuguese around the Cape of Good Hope and into the Indian Ocean, as well as into the Atlantic. It also prompted the Columbus brothers to seek and get the support of the Spanish crown to sail west, where they knew they would find land.

"Menzies provides a large amount of evidence to support his claim, some "circumstantial", some very tangible (e.g., wrecks of Chinese junks in Australia, Chinese artifacts found in a number of places, Aboriginal rock paintings in Australia of what can only be Chinese coming ashore, the same in Baja California, the presence of Asian domesticated foul in South America when the Europeans arrived, etc. Other odd historical facts that this theory addresses include the fact that Magellan told his crew, who didn't want to keep sailing south, that he KNEW there was a way through to another ocean because he HAD SEEN it on a map! This for the man who supposedly discovered the strait bearing his name. Also, when the Spanish first landed in the Caribbean they reported meeting people who were clearly not Indian, but more obviously Chinese and even Portuguese (probably survivors of wrecks blown off course in storms, or of voyages presumed lost). Columbus could have used this to lend credence to his belief that he had actually got to some islands off the coast of Asia, which he maintained until his death, and for which he has always be castigated. Contrary to popular belief there were also records of horses in the Americas when Spanish arrived. Only the Chinese or earlier Portuguese visitors could have brought these. Some of the Indians the Spanish met apparently knew what horses were, and some of the paintings in Baja and elsewhere show men wearing Chinese style garments riding horses.

"Menzies claims he was greatly aided in his ability to track the fleets' courses due to the construction and handling characteristics of the ships themselves. The vessels were very seaworthy, much larger than anything that existed in Europe or the Middle East, and constructed of teak and mahogany, making them much more durable and resistant to worms and rot than ships constructed of oak or soft woods. However, the vessels could not sail well against the winds or currents. So the routes taken would have had to track with the major ocean currents and prevailing winds.

"If Menzies is correct, this is truly a case of truth being stranger than fiction. How different history would have been if China had not disowned and abandoned these discoveries for internal political and religious reasons. Its naval capabilities, wealth and general level of technological sophistication at the time far exceeded anything in Europe. The world was truly China's oyster had it wanted to take it."

Here are some URLs on this: www.1421.tv
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=2WQU6TDJPN&isbn=0060537639&itm=1

The first URL is a link to Menzies's Web site. The second URL is a link to the book itself at Barnes and Noble. -Mike Duggan