Contingency Plan -- 3b

purchased from Canstock Images for inspiration and light

When I began this series, I had a list of issues I thought were important. There were more than I knew I could cover before the election, but covered as many as possible with simple essays. Since, I still believe I should go onto something new come November 9th (next Saturday's blog), it was time to stretch my thinking in a different way. I could pick one thing off the list, but...

• health care
• abortion
  
• taxes 
• voting IDs
  
• games/movies
• globalism-- one world government
  
• policing
• legal system
• economy
• divided country
•  environment 

Turned out, though the list still seems important, the new subject is not on it. It is inspired by what I've seen during the campaign through ads and speeches, but also what goes on in a culture as the elite side of a people, try to help the less elite do what is best... or is that what they're doing?

Before I start on the new subject, I want to say that I hope when the election is over we can let be whatever the result is and wait for the new leader to take office and begin to implement their ideas without the vitriol we've seen in recent times. 

I wish I felt more positive regarding that. Right now, I can't, not with all the venom out there, which I have personally run into-- fortunately, not here at the blog but in other social media. It is so important that we have a peaceful transition, as it was meant to be but hasn't always been. 

Having read/heard that one side and then another plans an insurrection if they lose, it looks as though violence is being plotted if loss happens. Some believe that was what the January 6th riot was. I do not think it had enough organization or smarts behind it for it to be more than a riot, which we had seen in cities across the country-- always when something dissatisfied the rioters. If though, a well-planned insurrection happened, could it work? I sure hope not. Even if it helped your side take power, how could that be good for a Constitutional government? Answer-- it could not.

Ranch Boss and I voted already, as Oregon is vote by mail; and in our case, we needed an absentee ballot for being in Arizona for the coming winter. I can't say we were happy with all our choices for ballot measures or candidates. We did the best we could for what we hope will be good for the state, country, and the world. 

It won't be easy, for either side, to not be upset if it goes against how we thought best; but it's the only real hope to continue to live a good life as well as for the community, finding any sort of unification. I don't want to be a hater for the next four years. Life is too sweet to ruin it for something we hurt ourselves more than others. If, we support a well-organized coup, those who take power will run things-- not the voters. Do we like that idea?

Some seem to be calling for a civil war. I have to think they've had no real experience with violence in their own life. Nobody should want a civil war, but instead work harder next time what they regard as a fairer result.

The subject for today, indoctrination, is important for voting wisely-- not only here but around the world as many have or will vote this year on possible change. Do we understand what change will mean? Who will tell us?

Indoctrination can happen not just with elections. Based on the dictionary, it means when an idea or belief is repeated so often it is accepted without questioning. Basically, it becomes dogma at a certain point.

When we look at history, we see what has been declared can be true or a lie-- like the earth is flat. It can lead to freedom or slavery. No one votes to become a slave, but they might give up freedoms when they don't realize it is at stake. 

We come into a season, like the US has just been having, with our own prejudices and opinions. Then, when we see an ad that fits that, watch out that we don't let it swamp any sense of reasoning we might have.

Indoctrination, which can also be called propaganda, is repeated again and again on Social Media, including sites like this one-- though I try hard not to do that. So what is a reader to do? Use discernment and even though we may want to believe an ad, still check it for truth in the supposed logic being used. 

As an example, I will use one of the more controversial issues remaining on the above list-- abortion. The ads I've seen the most frequently are on the side of protecting a legal right to abortion. The subject is emotional and very open to rage on either side. It also involves more than candidates but also ballot measures.

My problem with what I consider questionable logic is when it refers to the argument that the woman has a right to an abortion since it is her body. Yes, it's her body, but once pregnant, another body is also involved. Very tiny to begin, but it's growing and impacting the parent body. It has its own DNA, bones and organs. Does that mean she has no right to what is best for her body? I am not saying she doesn't, but that's the question, not that its our body.

Ads have argued that no man has a right to say what a woman should do where it comes to abortion. This is trying to create division and anger between the sexes.

 The other main point that ads and some politicians make is that the government has no right to impact the woman's body. Here's the problem there-- the government already impacts her body with requiring a helmet when on a motorcycle. It impacts what drugs a doctor can prescribe for her. If she has children, the government can impact her choices after they are born; and it does through social services if they are called in.

What I believe is we have to accept responsibility for making a choice to end an otherwise growing life. I don't consider it murder given the complexity, but I do feel we need to consider what we are doing. We might want to maintain the legal right, which, to me, is logical. But, be honest and not deceptive even to ourselves as to what's going on.

Now, I personally believe in early choice to have an abortion. Later, say after 15 weeks, a doctor should be the one determining the baby is nonviable, say its brain is no longer functioning. If the baby won't survive out of the womb and the mother would likely die, abortion seems a logical option. For many, opposed to all abortions, the arguments are more religious than biological.

Indoctrination does not just involve elections. Sometimes the laws are changed due to things we are told but are not necessarily proven.  When facing indoctrination, people need to think deeply and beyond emotional responses. Dogma can be very powerful.

How do we figure out for ourselves what is wise? It might be by personal experience. Today with Artificial Intelligence, we might believe something that never happened. Remember the old joke. Who you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes? Not so easy to determine right now where speeches can be created for someone who never said them.

There are many issues that we believe because of what we were told. To reach a point of questioning it all can lead to total chaos. On the other hand, to question can lead to wise choices if we look for facts.

Where it comes to indoctrination, I could list a lot more things, where I might agree or disagree with the popular stance, things I've been led to believe or don't, but I feel that's for each person to look at for themselves, as I have for myself once I felt it was okay to question. There are those who tell us to question nothing as it's ignorant or wrong. I was told all my life I question too much. Maybe so, but it's how I am and not likely to change now...

Next week this blog will move from political issues and hopefully something that will lead to more creativity and even joy. Our election will be over (although perhaps still counting or in the courts to determine winners depending on how close) with no discussions here about the results. 

The whining will likely increase, based on what I've seen so far. Will we turn to that and let it ruin our lives or find new things to inspire us? The main thing is, when we have the option, vote, wait for the outcome, then whatever happened. don't be a bemoaner-- that accomplishes nothing except angst or anger. I've voted where I lost and other times where I won for what I had hoped. Sometimes winning didn't turn out as I had hoped either. Life went on either way.

What Does Adapt Mean?

 For the next blog, a natural seemed to follow immigration. People sometimes leave their homes because of climate change where they no longer can support themselves by work they have always done. There are reasons beyond climate change as in violence or lack of the income they could earn elsewhere; but we currently do see example of droughts that make it tough to grow crops even enough to feed the current population.

I began to research climate change a little differently than I had before when I knew I'd be writing about it. I have considered if, of course, when I was told by various groups that we'd all die if we didn't change our ways. The problem was when the Green New Deal was proposed by progressives that it had much to do with social change as much as climate change. It turned a lot of people off to listening to the ones proposing it, who were usually woke. How many know today what the Green New Deal even proposed? The following came from a source, where the link is below.

• The Green New Deal wants to institute changes that would lead the U.S. to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and 100 percent renewable energy. 
• To do this, the bill proposes investments specifically geared toward communities that have been impacted by climate change, as well as investments in renewable power, clean energy manufacturing, zero-emission transportation, and sustainable farming.
• The bill also proposes broad infrastructure repair, affordable and energy-efficient power grids, ecosystem restoration, and hazardous waste clean-up.
• The Green New Deal would instruct the U.S. to collaborate globally for a more cohesive approach to climate change.

 This was in: https://marketrealist.com/p/green-new-deal-summary/, which said it was estimated it would cost the US $93 trillion  Since this was proposed in the House and Senate, there has been a lot more coming out for what we need to do to avoid catastrophe in the United States and for the world. For instance, cattle are bad as they put out methane. Hence they should go and people need to be vegans, as cheese is also a no no.  

Of course, most of this won't happen first. It's a process that the climate people want to see gradually happen. For instance there was the Paris Accords, which have many bans on so-called developed countries that are not carried over to developing countries, which included China, close to being the dominant country in the world as it's growing.

NOW, here comes my take as an average person and not a scientist trained in climate (which is not weather). btw, these photos are all at Chaco Canyon twenty-five years ago. When we went there, it was claimed they were the Anasazi People. Today, as so often happens, they are called Ancestral or Ancient Pueblo People. It is believed that Chaco was a religious center for them.

To start on Climate Change,, I don't think that conservatives totally disagree that climate is changing. More, it's that it has been always changing from the time humans were developed enough to notice. I suppose there are some that don't believe climate is changing today, but they aren't paying attention to their own neighborhoods or the storms, which human are measuring and sometimes being devastated by. 

The question is how much difference can humans make to it, and what will a change do?  

At one time, humans (many today also) put all their faith in a god, their god to either destroy or save. Today, for many who don't count on a deity, they count on science and why not. Look what it's accomplished for the human population, at least the developed side. 

When it's suggested that coal, oil, gas, should be eliminated from use, it's not going after all the places they are used. It's developed countries. They don't want to get rid of all cars, just gas fueled ones-- except they then need electricity, in many areas where it's hard to get enough electricity for the homes it already serves, let alone if everyone gets an electric car. 

Can we depend on solar, when it only works with the sun? Or windmills when wind isn't extensive enough everywhere? There might yet be a new fuel for homes, vehicles, and don't forget planes, but it's not here right now.

This does not mean I am against doing what we can about CO2 and Methane, but it seems it is all I see discussed. There is a reason to be concerned given the example of many ancient civilizations. I have some links that those looking for more info on those and what went wrong. One of the theories was that they could not or would not adapt. Might we fall into that trap? 

Another question to go with that is-- could they adapt? When the Hittites based their early, very successful civilization on growing grains, maybe with a severe drought, such as they had, there was no other option for the large population. That happened to other cultures also as you will see in some of those links. So, adapting might mean leaving, but to where? Strangers aren't always welcome; and when they do get accepted, they can't always bring their culture with them.

The idea of an increasingly hot climate from global climate change is questioned in this link: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13991003/Gulf-Stream-COLLAPSE-soon-scientists.html What if, due to ocean changes, we get a new ice age as the earth has experienced before?  If you haven't seen the sci-fi film, Day After Tomorrow, this might be a good time... or maybe not.

One of my concerns, which isn't being considered (from what I read) as much as changing the climate, is what do we do about areas that might be less livable with the change, like say oceans rising. It makes a lot of us wonder about the Obamas having a home on the ocean, two actually? Doesn't a rising ocean concern them or maybe they are on the ice age team?

 

Adaptation is about more than changing the climate (how would we change sun cycles, which may impact warming) beyond from a human angle, but instead figure out where can humans still live?

I know many very intelligent people are addressing these things; and for those worried, they are worth searching out for technical papers. For this essay, there are some simple links, which suits my simple thinking. I like to think-- what can we actually do as individuals; and I don't think, for most of us, buying an electric car, with a very expensive battery to replace and questions of getting electricity, isn't what we can do. We can though figure out if where we currently live will be negatively impacted when change happens. We can be sure we are keeping on hand supplies, just in case a big shift abruptly happens, as it seems it has in the past, which might involve new diseases. Be alert and aware.

Voting for those who have smart, realistic answers to our cultures might be a start. Head in the sand won't fix anything.

Sources:

• https://search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=mnet&hsimp=yhs-001&type=type9049412-spa-3583-84499&param1=3583&param2=84499&p=which+cultures+were+destroyed+by+climate+change
• On the Hittites, The Guardian. 8 February 2023. Retrieved 9 February 2023.
•  https://climate.nasa.gov/news/1010/climate-change-and-the-rise-and-fall-of-civilizations/

Heading Down the Road -- Or Not

Looking down my list of issues, one of them is very important, perhaps the most important for the difference between our two American parties, and probably the parties in other countries. Immigration. 

Every nation on the earth, with a few small exceptions, was at one time or another, populated by immigrants in one form or the other. Yes, there are peoples who believe they came different ways, like up through a hole in the earth, but they didn't. Those are popular mythologies but reality is adventurers, explorers, and migrants traveled from their homelands to what they regarded as a more hospitable place. 

The exception would be those who evolved where they ended up. There are several of those locations based on archaeology, but most of them also headed elsewhere when the wanderlust overcame them or their current life became undesirable. We don't generally leave places without a reason.

At a certain point, to avoid wars, countries established borders. It gave clear dimensions to a nation and rules for entering, dependent on each country's concerns. This gave stability and a system possible for governing depending on that country's values. Which, is where we are today.

Before I go into the present on immigration issues, here is my history where this is concerned. The Trueax side of my family came long ago to what was known as the New World. They came out of religious persecution.  I don't know when the first on my mother's family came but it was way back to East Coast communities. Way down the lineage, the last immigrants, my great grandparents came from Germany and Scotland. 

When people came, they wanted to be part of this building nation, speak the language, or at least have their children speak it. They wanted to be part of its future. That's what was needed back then for the many diverse directions from which people came. Of course, I know not all originally came because they wanted to be Americans. Some came as slaves. Some to work before going back from where they had come, and others as indentured servants due to debts or crimes.

Personal immigration seems a good place to share a recent photo of myself. I always like to know what the writers I read look like,  so I took this one during my 81st birthday week. This is in our desert house, sitting at my desk. One more picture is coming, after I've written about our modern immigration problem. 

One more thought, off the topic. Aging is what it is and nobody, who is fortunate enough to live to be old, avoids it even if surgeries may seem as though they fool for a while-- not worth it for me. They won't change the things that matter most in life. Nevertheless, not many savor looking old. lol It is what it is, and the old better find other things that matter more, and there are plenty. Someday I'll write about aging but today is for something else.

The issue here on immigration is only about those who did not come in legally. Immigrants can acquire legal status through the government. The US allows in, with a path to citizenship, almost 600,000 immigrants from various countries and walks of life. Yearly, we also have over 300,000 students, and another number yearly, coming in with green cards to work. The latter two generally go home eventually. I got the numbers from this link: https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-immigrants-are-coming-to-the-us/

The problem is not them but the ones coming illegally, by boat sometimes, but most especially across our southern border. Some claim they are refugees, which they have to prove in a court hearing-- except, not all come back for it. Hence, the country has no idea from where they came, what their skills are, nor do we know if they truly want to be residents. What if their desire is to overthrow the country either by sheer numbers or violence? When you don't know, nobody can guarantee these arrivals are safe-- although it's likely most are.

Another complication is for some reason those here illegally get to cities that claim to be refugee spots and they are given hotel rooms, money, and maybe even jobs of some sort. This is all not for US citizens to know... 

When we have so many already homeless people, with no such comfortable rooms, might not citizens wonder what's really going on with tax revenues. Especially regarding our large homeless problem with people in tents, sleeping with a blanket in parks or on the streets. For those interested in the homeless problem in the US, (most recently, the number  was 653,104)  here are some statistics: https://www.usich.gov/guidance-reports-data/data-trends and https://www.statista.com/chart/24642/total-number-of-homeless-people-in-the-us-by-year/ 

You might wonder why suddenly I am posting links. It's because I read someone saying they wanted to know from where writers got their numbers. I usually said research it like I did, but not that hard to add the sites.

Here is a group that looks at the number of undocumented people living in the United States. It makes clear how much confusion there is figuring it out: https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2024/how-many-million-immigrants-america-illegal/

That is the problem, but here is the concern regardless of the numbers. Say we have 11 million here without papers, who are they? Some have worked hard since they got here, took jobs no one wanted, have established families, and value what this country stands for. They are not wanting to overturn the nation. 

As one man said when Victor Davis Hanson asked him at a grocery store, when the professor recognized he was an immigrant, Why did I come here? Well, it wasn't to have it be like Mexico from where I came. That answer said he wanted a stable system without rampant gang activity.

Also most of those who favor open borders don't live in the communities impacted by them with cheaper wages for workers and less housing. The violence is also more of an issue in some areas than others. Most know  about that too.

If you pay attention, you know that gangs from other countries have moved through the US to settle in many communities, including small ones, probably most for drug sales. A lot of their violence is directed at their own communities; so you don't experience that as those people do.

By allowing people to work as undocumented, they often not only get less wages, but so do those competing with them. If an employer can pay someone less and even avoid taxes, there are those who will do it

What is the answer for immigration? In my opinion it is send home the ones who recently breached the system, build a good border fence and have enough agents to protect it. Pay those agents good wages as it's a very tough job.  Then increase the number of people coming in legally to help with the needed work. Keep them fair, not under the table. 

Try to bring in those who value from where this country came, want to keep its best parts, and help improve those parts where it needs work. Encouraging immigrants to learn English, our language, is a good start. They also can, as many have, keep their original languages, but if you don't speak English here, you will have a harder time working for those who don't speak Spanish, etc. and can end up being cheated on wages by some.

So, more legal immigrants on a path to citizenship and way less illegal who we have no idea of their background or intentions. Sending back the ones who cheated in the line might be part of what it takes. Since many of them are being put up at fancy hotels, at government expense, it could save federal and states money.

Do not send back those who have been here a long time with families, having committed no violent crimes, and who have solid jobs. The ones here 10 years or more need to also be on a path to citizenship for their sake and the country's.

Well, I did say one more picture. This is my husband with me taken a few hours after the above one. We celebrated our 60th anniversary in September and both are 81. So far the marriage seems to still be working out well (with, as usual, a few glitches along the way). At our age, we talk a little more about health issues or what about after death-- cremation for both of us. When you get to 80, it feels different than any earlier decades as obviously more likely will go wrong. We try to be positive and both have our strong interests to keep at least our minds alert. *s*

 

That's What It Takes

 warning: spider image ahead and if you have a phobia about them, you might want to skip the picture. We like them, try to protect them as much as we can-- outside, of course *s*

With the election less than a month away, only four topics are left in this series. There are more remaining issues I find important and am torn on which ones to look at with some research and my own insights garnered over 81 years. Yep, I am a Libra and just had that birthday. 

For us, it has been a busy month what with getting a new cat from the cat shelter, who has the energy of a kitten even if she's not. Her rambunctiousness is on and then abruptly off. It has been a long time since we've had a kitten. Being an old woman, I appreciate her level of energy even though it's been a while since I had anything like it. A long while. 

Fortunately,  Raven and Babe adapted to Luna after a week, with only an occasional hiss, growl,and swat-- from all three sides. We knew it would liven things up, and it sure did. When she decided to play with a female tarantula in the cat yard, we figured this was just a kitten thing and she'd grow out of it... *fingers crossed* 

Lady tarantula was relocated amidst some Mesquite trees (lucky we bought an insect net some years back). Hopefully she will lay many eggs-- not in our patio area though. *s* The one we saw earlier was all black and smaller, which they say fits the males. This female could be as old as 30. That would be quite cool if she's been around longer than us.

 

So, back to my topics. Too bad more of you don't comment as you could tell me if one of the issues on my list would be of interest to you. They are all interesting to me, but some are more dicey to cover. I naturally have opinions, but am not out in the world enough to know more than what I read, have experienced and hear-- hopefully from reputable sources. So, I'll jump on one of the dicey ones and give it my best shot.

We still have one grandson in public school. The other grandchildren have gone on various paths. The one in school doesn't talk to me much about his classes; so, that all makes me more than a few years from having personal info in public school.

My own education involved high school and missing one term of a teaching degree (unfortunately student teaching ) due to some lifestyle choices, which means no piece of paper. I don't regret that lack, but I did get a lot of education courses before we took a turn south and lived in Arizona for a year. Still, they were then, even my children's, and this is now

In case you didn't notice, those three paragraphs were disclaimers... lol. To be honest, I am apprehensive to take on the education system in the US. I have many friends and relatives that are or were teachers. I do understand how the system works in the sense that they are given a curriculum to teach, and it may not always be what they would have done had they the free choice that was true in the long ago.

Here goes and repeating that these are my ideas based on the experiences of an old woman. Many feel old people don't understand the new world cultures being entered. Maybe they need to consider the advantages in the educational one our country left. Before leaving something of possible value, it  should be evaluated.

Starting with home economic and shop classes. I don't recall how many years we took of each, but in my home ec, I learned the basics of sewing a skirt, using a pattern, putting in a zipper, and a home budget. Then we learned the basics of cooking. It was all girls back then as the boys took shop, which meant learning how to draw plans and make things with raw materials like wood or metal. 

Both skills are useful in life. For years, I made all our family's clothing and loved doing it. My brother said he learned to weld in shop and used it later in his work. i suppose this was dropped due to a feeling it was sexist. Easy fix, let boys and girls choose which classes they wanted. Boys benefit from knowing how to cook and girls could find it handy to know how to use a hammer or saw. We are all different in what we enjoy. The big thing is these are survival skills.

I also had the option (and suspect that most kids do today) to take some work oriented classes. As in for me, it was shorthand, typing, and then working in an office, which in my case was secretary for our head health teacher.

Now we get to one of the main things inspiring me to choose education as a topic. Atlantic magazine had a piece from someone researching how college literature teachers in the US felt about the students they get. One after another said that today's students cannot read a whole book, especially not complex novels of the past. One professor said not even a full sonnet. They are not getting students out of high school, even the top ones in top universities, who are prepared for complex thinking. The students have told their profs that they can't accept an entire book as an assignment. It's too much work with all they have going.

So, what's causing this? One prof guessed smart phones and short bits of information. Whatever the case, high schools are not challenging these kids. Now, when I was in high school. the literature class not only involved Moby Dick, but also complex sonnets and other short stories by classic authors to discuss. We didn't get to say we couldn't. It meant a grade. Do kids run the classes now?

I saw a sign of what might have been to come in my daughter's grade school class, maybe second. The kids were hanging out the windows, totally acting uncivilly. The teacher told me my daughter was so refreshing. I replied, Not really. She's just doing what she should do.  Somewhere teachers apparently lost control, and I don''t know why but have some ideas, which I won't go into, but you might consider your own.

Finally, we have the math and science classes-- if they still exist. I read one education theory that math isn't fair to minorities as they can't do it. From where did that dumb idea come (yes, I call it dumb or ignorant. My husband worked with minorities many times as an engineer. They are as sharp as anybody if they had a natural aptitude or been encouraged and feel the teacher has faith in them. 

Schools are the foundation of a wise society-- or better be.

What I seem to see now are students spending more time being taught how they should think as in politically. Instead of classes in literature, mathematics, algebra, science for the basic facts, it looks as though they are being taught an agenda that maybe was handed to the teacher by school boards or curriculum committees. 

Over and over I hear today's young people aren't willing to work hard. especially GenZs. Was that parents or our system? Maybe, games, entertainment? I don't know, but it does not bode well for the future if this continues, as a people who do not know how to work will fail. The idea it can be handed to us comes to an end when nobody is there doing the work

You know, we used to be encouraged by what came before us. My age group grew up with parents and grandparents that lived through the Great Depression. They not only knew how to work hard, but taught their children as they feared the results for our personal lives if we could not.   

We need teachers like that. There's one thing it takes to teach children where it didn't come easily to them. Believe in us and we will move whatever necessary to make it happen.  

 Encouragement doesn't mean phony praise. It means helping someone go in a direction they were headed and succeed. It means making something more likely to happen. I don't believe in no grades. Grades are something to work for because they mean something was accomplished. To deny them because one isn't willing to work for them helps nobody.

Our daughter was brilliant in reading but where it came to math, she was in a remedial class. The school actually asked us if that was okay. Are you kidding! We were delighted as it gave her the chance to get past her math barrier. I remember asking her what is 1 + 1 and she would panic. So, if kids don't find a subject in their sphere, get them extra help. It  moves mountains.

I don't blame the teachers for the current failure of the educational system. They have to also be encouraged and given the basic materials with which to work. I had some great teachers in high school and college-- but also know what it was like when a teacher didn't believe in me. 

When we don't have a good teacher, then challenge ourselves. I did that when toward the end of high school, I wanted to read all the classics of literature. I'd take an author like John Steinbeck and read every book they wrote. Libraries were my hunting ground. I had started in the toddler's room, moved down to the children's, and then to the adult's. Each one challenged me in its time.

I want to add that what I just said about being able to work hard does not mean liberal or conservative. I know both sides that work very hard. It's the attitude within the parties that might change that work attitude.

We can challenge ourselves; and if we want to have the ability to apply philosophy, logic, and then vote with wisdom, we better learn! The world is full of lies. Short bits are not much oriented toward building a solid base for a life or a culture.

 

photo from Stencil

 

Poverty we always have with us. Do we have to?

 As best I know it about mass shootings in the United States, they are not related to poverty. So, why is poverty a topic for issues? There are other kinds of violence that don't involve mass killing (over 4). Instead, they involve thefts. rape, abuse, and destruction of property.  Many would believe those things relate to poverty. I am not so sure. Many poor people commit no burglary, shoplifting, or other kinds of theft. In fact, some rich people have been caught shoplifting. Still, we are told it's poverty that justifies what the poor do. 

The belief in reparations for descendants of slavery or of Jim Crow offenses, is based on thinking they deserve it, though people today experienced none of that. Some are believed to have been pushed back in the ladder of success.

I had believed affirmative action was intended to help people rise up from poverty through college degrees and a boost in terms of jobs. We don't hear anything about that right now. I think it's still there but don't actually know. If you are interested in its various forms in countries around the world, do some research. Affirmative action, as a way to deal with poverty and racial unfairness, is called different things in different countries.

 (these work horn hands are an image from Deposit Photos. I bought a package a while back)

When my husband and I first were old enough to vote, President Johnson began talk of a War on Poverty. If there was much of an attempt to get rid of poverty, it likely got lost in the cost of the Vietnam war. Whatever the case, it seems we have more poverty than ever-- especially given our current large homeless population in cities around the country. 

Back to violence and poverty. For a while, there was a pressure to not do anything about the gangs that rushed into stores and grabbed all they could get. Some of that is still going on. Sometimes the thieves are picked up in a fancy car, like a Rolls Royce. Does that sound like poverty? 

The violence has extended to breaking windows, blocking cars on freeways, hitting strangers  and burning buildings in some big cities. The booty is often sold for cash rather than using it. Drugs?

What was done about such destruction? Almost nothing. If they got arrested, they were immediately released. Was that thinking a kind of reparations? If it was, it wasn't helping the ones committing the crimes or their victims.

The police often stood by, due to orders from higher ups. So, it was okay to destroy businesses, sometimes small ones but also there were major stores. Some people want to defund the police (until their homes get burglarized). Without active police, what keeps mobs in order? Who do you call for help?

Were the thieves encouraged to take what they could get out of some kind of missed concept of reparations? There seemed to be an attitude that if people were poor, it was fine for them to steal. Except, it wasn't fair to the victim or the perpetrator. 

So next comes a question regarding poverty. Is it the fault of the poor for being poor? I don't think so, at least not all the time. It can be though with those who turn to drugs, which makes them unable to function in society and hold down jobs. Some don't want to work; but if so, how do they then get money for food or shelter? Begging, hoping for charity, or stealing? 

We live in a society where people work for what they want; so how do we deal with the ones who don't? How do we deal with tents pitched in parks or other people's property? Once in a while, the police go through and destroy these makeshift communities, but it doesn't last long before they are back.

The US has shelters for some of the poor, but they don't cover all.  A lot of homeless have resisted rules and shelters have to have rules. Charities also offer beds at night or meals; but in the end, it's stopgap. It's not fixing anything.  

One of my answers is to provide training for new jobs if they lost the one they had, which can happen with companies upgrading their automation. If though, the poor person has no interest in working for everything they want, do we let them starve? I don't think that would work well for a compassionate culture. If the poor person is using drugs that are not legal, maybe time in jail where they get the training they didn't want. Will that work? 

Another possible idea for the homeless people as well as new immigrants, see if they can, with some help, start a business. You know, at one time, most families in the US had a parent, sometimes both, working at their own business, like say carpentry. We don't know how many skills the homeless might have if they could get a start. There is pride in creating a product. We've traveled a long way down a road where only corporations provide jobs. It didn't used to be that way and maybe doesn't need to now. Find out what people's skills are and then help them exploit them.

At any rate, dealing with homelessness and poverty is one of the issues we do care about when we vote. Are good suggestions offered? Right now I haven't heard solid answers other than handing out money. It doesn't take long for that money to be spent and the person is back on the street. One possible answer seems to be offering training for not only jobs but for taking care of property and possessions. 

Our culture has also traveled a long way toward television, computers, games, and phones to entertain ourselves. There is more to that in life. Let's remind ourselves.

What is mental illness?

 When we hear about mass killings, the next we hear is it has to be mental illness. It must be someone insane. I think that's at least partly because we can't imagine anyone doing such a thing, who was totally sane. 

When I began to think about how mental illness impacts violence, I thought somewhat the same. Until, I researched technical papers that said of all the mass killings in our country (numbers in last blog), only 25% are linked to a past clinical diagnosis of mental illness. 

That led to another question for me. If that is the case, what is mental illness? Well, according to these articles, it's schizophrenia, bipolar disease, major depression, and assorted other things that impact quality of life. 

Of course, even with the numbers being 25%, how did they get their hands on mass assault weapons when buying guns requires background checks? Well, the issue anyway, with such a diagnosis-- most people with mental illness are not violent. One article claimed that in 2020, 20% of Americans have been clinically claimed to fall into one of those categories. Obviously, 20% of Americans are not committing violent crimes.

The other thing about 'legit' mental illnesses is that you don't get off anyway, if you get violent. It takes being insane, which means the perpetrator does not know what they did is wrong, hence does not fear getting caught. That does happen, but we can see from what we read that it's not the norm with mass killings. Many of them kill themselves when it's obvious they can't kill more innocents.

The desire to commit suicide fits what another article I read claimed as the main reason for mass shootings-- either by their own hand or that of the authorities. 

I don't actually buy into that theory as the main reason for their violent acts. I think other things fit the reason better.

So, if not certifiable mental illness or desire to commit suicide, how come so many instances of violence? What leads someone to commit a violent act, whether a mass killing or of family members or loved ones?

The next reasons given are what I group as behavioral: nihilism, emptiness, anger, noteriety. We have to find that based on social media postings, friends, or families because as soon as someone is charged, defense lawyers get into the picture and make it difficult to question the assailants, assuming they survived. This is supposedly about them not incriminating themselves, the Miranda Act, but come on-- many of them have been clearly identified by survivors or photos. To me, this becomes a sad act that prevents a culture from more clearly understanding why these tragedies happen. (Obviously, I am no lawyer; so this is my view as a citizen, you know what we used to call commonsense.)

Looking at the possible behavioral reasons, I will start with nihilism, which means life has no meaning. What the heck leads someone to feel that way at an age old enough to commit these massive crimes? Is it in the family? how about the community? Schools? Media? Or if they are middle-aged, what in their life had led to that feeling of emptiness?

In my personal life, I have no experiences that would have led to a feeling of hopelessness. Was that because I grew up on a farm, where you sure see a lot of death and suffering but you adjust to it. Life has tough
elements but hard work is what you have to use to get through bad times. I learned that from my parents, who both outworked me and never let me make an excuse.

Same thing with school for me. I got good grades but because I worked for them. I began first grade in a two room school with no buses to deliver us. That meant, I walked a mile and a half since my mom did not drive, and dad worked nights into mornings.  The walk from the school went past some homes, a dairy, then open farm land, timber and eventually through more timber to get to the top of our hill and my home.

For the first grade, I read all the second grade work before our district consolidated and there was a bus with a bigger school. I had to redo all that second grade work as the bigger school had no ability to skip ahead with the work. I have heard of kids who feel bored with their school work. Maybe the farm life helped, with just going through it.

So, I have no experience to know  about a feeling of nihilism, even though I grew up during the Cold War where my bigger school had 'bomb shelters' to go to in case of a nuclear attack. Seriously, that's what we were told lol

Again, back to that feeling of emptiness where I just can't get what would cause that or anger for that matter. I had some things happen that could have made me mad, but I just took it, felt disappointed but can't remember being mad at the one who caused the hurt. 

As for social media, again no experience at all. We only got a TV, black & white with one channel, when I was already in school. Not a lot there to entertain kids, not yet anyway.

And, where it comes to wanting noteriety. Heaven forbid. I am an introvert, which means not wanting too much attention. Stay in the middle worked for me, then and now. 

Was I lucky when I grew up? I have often thought so. I think today's kids grow up with a lot more awareness of what can go wrong... maybe. I did read though that most mass shootings aren't kids but middle aged men. What went wrong for them? What can we as a culture do about it before it happens and innocents pay the price?

Blaming someone else for everything that goes wrong doesn't seem like a good way to grow up. Are schools doing too much of that, some schools anyway, and not enough of the basics, like reading, writing, mathematics, history, and once upon a time how to cook and sew for girls and do wood and metal work for boys. Maybe too sexist for today's world? Well, let the kids choose whether they want home skills or shop abilities. Why not?

Somewhere, we need to let kids find a sense of accomplishment and purpose, ones that let them feel proud of real skills, ones that make their world and the ones around them better-- and that means middle-aged men who are still blaming others for what they must find in their own ability to turn it around when they work for something that can make them feel fulfilled, instead of blaming someone else whether someone they think let them down or a stranger.

For those wanting noteriety, how about less publicity for the killers? No photos (unless they are needed for a capture) and minimal information; it's not a lot. A concept that fame comes with doing an evil act has to be knocked down. 

I realize that's no real answer probably but it's all I've got. Does working for what you want seem too simplistic?. You might be surprised how that turns out. Also FBI needs to take more seriously tips, for which, they request and then we are told they sometimes ignore. We need a place for those who are threatening-- before they do it. Try to turn their thinking around. It wouldn't hurt if we stopped admiring old time outlaws as if we don't want modern ones, why act like the old time ones are kind of heroes.

Okay, why the cat pictures. Because, this week, literally last Saturday, we adopted a shelter cat. We had two cats after having lost one a year and a half ago; we decided it was time for us to expand our fur family. The two cats haven't agreed. They are adjusting, as is Luna, a tuxedo cat, our new addition. We hadn't intended to get another black cat, well, Luna is a tuxedo but mostly black. We fell in love :). Hopefully the other two also do, eventually. Last Saturday was not fun for us or the cats. lol

I thought pictures of cats would maybe lighten the blog here as this is a dark topic, with currently no answers for the horrible tragedies, that impact all of us when we learn of them. Although the US has the most, other countries have experienced the tragedies with different weapons. Some say it's all about guns, I don't think so, since many weapons are effective ways to end lives. We need to get at the WHY, and do something to redirect these troubled souls, beforehand.

Something to Think About

 

Thinking what might lead to violent actions, involves a lot of possibilities and differences of opinion. Maybe it takes a combination of things that come together in one, weapon-toting individual, who generally is male when it involves hurting more than one person and generally random strangers.

There are seven Saturdays, counting this one, before the election for President of the United States. Below, I have issues, some could impact violence. Many don't seem they could as I thought on them. All impact quality of life one way or the other, which might be a factor in violence. Obviously, I won't be touching on all of them. You might look at the list and see which matter the most to you.

I will share no thoughts on personalities of the candidates or who to vote for, because I feel issues are where we need to concentrate. So many say they'll vote for this or that one, but have no idea what they will actually do in supposedly forming a perfect nation (which we know won't happen as nations are made up of imperfect humans--well, maybe a few perfect but I've yet to meet that one).

Because this blog has readers from around the world, I will try to choose topics that could apply anywhere.

After the election for a long time, no more politics, no matter who wins. I do not want to be one of those who lives on hate. I will hope that whoever wins, it will be good for the country. and the world.

Some of the issues listed can lead to increasing/decreasing violence. Some might join together in a blog. I think all have varying levels of importance to voters and life.

• climate change
• mental illness
• health care
• abortion
  
• taxes 
• voting IDs
  
• educational system
• socialism/capitalism/communism
  
• poverty
• games/movies
• globalism-- one world government
  
• news media
• policing
• legal system
• immigration
• economy
• divided country
• environment
  
• guns. 

None of those are easy to break down and discuss, but I'm going to start with the last one: guns. In my country, that involves a Constitutional Amendment, which was ratified along with others in the Bill of Rights in 1791.

Second Amendment. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Rather than go into our history with regulations, state and court opinions, I give you a link to a pretty extensive look at it on Wikipedia. Some don't like it; but this time, it seemed to give a lot of validated information. Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

Okay, now for how guns relate to violence or they don't. They have been used in most mass killings. The ones used tend to look like military weapons as they can fire multiple rounds without cocking. None are fully automatic rifles unless they have been modified (finger on trigger keeps it shooting) as those are illegal in the US for ownership by citizens.

For 2024 statistics, 527 people have been killed in such shootings.1,755 have been wounded in 432 shootings. Victims have been all ages but many have been in schools and children. Some of the shootings are gang related. A few involve someone the perpetrator wanted to kill with innocent bystanders caught in the action. Of course, there are also those who use their guns, or other weapons to kill one person, most often a family member or ex-partner.

Some of the shooters should not have been allowed to buy any guns, if background checks meant what they should. Some of the shooters got their guns through family members and some of those enablers are being charged also-- as they should be, (In my opinion).  There is also the black market and the most recent attempted assassin, evidently got his from the mail (from another country)-- neither of which are legal, but if you want to kill, legal doesn't matter to you.

Background checks have been resisted by some of the most ardent pro-gun people who have a strong need for guns to protect themselves and others. Some even believe they might be needed against an out of control government.

The argument against confiscating all guns comes down to ... the real outlaws will never turn theirs over. There is also fear that signing anything admitting to having a gun can end up with confiscations as has happened in other countries. 

There are those on the anti-gun side who want all guns taken by the government. The problem with that reasoning is knives, machetes, bombs and even vehicles can be used to kill by those with warped thinking. What stops them?

To me, fear and hate are the main reasons why the gun situation is never settled.

Now, about my own beliefs where it comes to guns. I believe in the ownership but not of guns only meant for killing people, like the AK /AR types. But, watch how that gets defined as the 22 Mag that I use when at the farm allows me to shoot as fast as I can pull the trigger  to protect our sheep from marauding coyotes, yes, they do kill sheep when they can.

I would be fine with no more AK 47s or AR 15s in this country, but they are in so many hands that I am not sure it's possible. I also believe in background checks that should involve animal or human abusers, red-flag laws. The issue is making the background check work. Many gun owners would have no problem with that.

The Christmas when I had turned 12, I got my first .22 rifle. I asked for it since our sheep were having their guts ripped out by the neighbors' dogs,  that were allowed to run free. 

One of the main memories I have is walking with my .22 to the back of our property, hoping I'd see those German Shepherds when the sheep were out grazing. I was by myself, trilliums were blooming on the side hill and no people or dogs were to be seen. No black bears either, as they did also patrol our property. I felt no fear because of that gun. To kill a bear with it would require a perfect shot, but I wasn't worried.

I still have that gun and now there are a lot more in our home of various types, but no AK47s or AR15s. We have no need for them. I do though have a loaded handgun within reach if someone broke into the house and didn't immediately leave. I can only imagine shooting in self-defense, which is how I consider the times I shot at a coyote to get it to leave our sheep alone.

I don't hunt, never have. Ranch Boss used to but hasn't for years. For us, guns are for self-defense or fun target practice. I believe in gun ownership. I also believe in gun safes, which we also have for storing guns we don't need handy for use. I also don't keep my finger on the trigger until I am ready to fire it. More than a few have shot themselves by making that mistake.

Knowing my revolver was handy was why I didn't fear being by myself when Ranch Boss was on business trips. Because  we learned when we moved here that there had been two women shot at a business and a woman raped not that far from our Arizona home, I could have been afraid with good reason. 

Some think they'd never need a gun for protection. I hope for their sake they are right. So far, I never have, but it's given me security many times over many years just to know it's there. As for shooting someone innocent, if they broke into my house, they are not innocent by definition. And, outside the house, I'd never shoot anyone. They would have to show themselves a danger.

To have a gun means you should be trained to use it. For those afraid of guns, don't get one. Be a good shot when you do have one and only use it when needed. Do NOT point a gun at anyone unless you know you could pull the trigger if they approached closer.

For me, gun ownership is an important issue when I vote. Not the only one, but important. Oh and photos here are at our Oregon farm and in 2004 (I think lol) with same .22 that I got when I was twelve. Fortunately, Ranch Boss is good at gun repair and has kept it in great shape.