The Wealthy American
In November of 2003 I embarked on a volunteer mission trip to Haiti. My task was to work for seven days at a medical facility, and perform maintenance on as many medical devices as possible. The decision to volunteer was not easy because I was a financially challenged newlywed with limited resources. There were many risks associated with this trip and I had very little ability to get myself back to the United States if something went wrong. Plus, my wife and I could ill afford for me to contract a dangerous disease such as malaria. I chose to volunteer because I believed my skills were useful to the Haitians; this was a way to serve our country and humanity by spreading good will to other people. I volunteered to help the Haitians, and did not expect it would be the other way around. The Haitians helped me understand and appreciate my own wealth.
Haiti was horrifying at first sight. The plane had not even touched the ground before I found myself in a state of cultural shock. As I looked out of the airplane, we descended on a large city, Cape Haitian, Haiti. This was the worst looking city I had ever seen, tens of thousands of homes but not one civilized structure. Looking down into the homes of the Haitians I noticed that most lacked a roof. Water was everywhere and it was difficult to tell where the ocean ended and the dry land began. The plane landed and somehow managed to avoid a man who was standing on the runway. The man stood on the runway along with an unhealthy looking cow! Someone on the airplane joked, “they must be airport security.” Upon exiting the airplane, I was struck by an unforgettable odor smelling of smoldering charcoal. The air was thick with this smell. I cleared customs and exited the airport, and then I was immediately surrounded by Haitian paupers. For the next several hours my caravan made its way through the city, we were heading toward a smaller community about fifteen miles away. The scenes of Cape Haitian from ground level were increasingly horrific. These people had no running water or organized sewage system and therefore appeared condemned to live in their own waste. Each time our caravan was forced to stop, I literally feared for my life. I couldn’t understand what was preventing these desperate Haitians from robbing the caravan of everything we had. I finally arrived safely at a Catholic compound next to the medical facility. I inspected my room. The humidity was so high that the sheets of my bed were wet. I went to sleep as day one ended.
During my second, third, and fourth days in Haiti, I continued to witness scene after scene of unimaginable human filth. The sights and smells at the medical facility were so incredibly shocking that it all seemed surreal. I kept myself busy by working fourteen hours each day, and this comforted me. I began to make a few friends among the Haitians and I sought to understand their lifestyle. Their language was some version of Creole and seemed to be a combination of French, Spanish, and English. It was very difficult for me to understand the Haitian language, making conversations slow but interesting. I started to recognize the good human qualities these people possess, despite their obvious poverty. Their smiles brought hope into my assessment of their lives. Qualities such as love and sharing appeared to be their best hope. Their government has let them down, and the world at large seems to turn a blind eye toward Haiti. Even the Catholic sisters did not encourage charity, as I was chastised for giving away flashlights.
Days five and six, I was eager for the trip to end. I began to realize that in the United States of America, we are wealthy beyond our own realization. It became clear that even the poorest Americans are actually wealthy by Haitian standards, and wealth is merely a relative term. I ventured out with some of my new Haitian friends, and visited their homes. I was greeted with a new level of shock when I witnessed their actual dwelling places. The poverty and the extent of the poverty were simply breathtaking, but the Haitians maintained their human dignity. These Haitians never threatened me and were as hospitable and friendly as possible. I imagined that if this situation occurred in the U.S., people would certainly behave more aggressively. The Haitians were lovely people despite their living conditions, and this endearing quality started to change my definition of the word “wealth.”
When I awoke on day seven, I was thankful for the humidity soaked bed I was provided. I was thankful for the amazing country I was about to return to. I also felt guilty to be so privileged unlike the millions of desperate Haitians. I was born into privilege simply because I am an American citizen, yet I am no more deserving than most Haitians. I returned to my rich country although I wasn’t the same person who had left it seven days earlier. When I landed in Florida I was struck by the unforgettable smell of Sbarro’s pizza.
I left the United States struggling to make ends meet and returned to the United States as a wealthy American.
January 27, 2007
January 26, 2007
Political Comparison of Left and Right
Left and Right
One day, about twenty years ago, my father came home from work much earlier than usual. He arrived home and his left hand was neatly wrapped and tightly bandaged. While working earlier that day, he suffered an injury severe enough to require immobilization of his left hand. My father wrote with this hand. A few days after his injury, I was astonished to stumble upon my dad. He was standing in the kitchen and signing checks with his right hand. It had never in my life occurred to me that such a thing was even possible. A man can write with both hands? Two lessons were learned from this monumental event. First, I learned that some people are able to write reasonably well with both hands; some people are ambidextrous. Second, as the concept of ambidexterity was explained to me, I realized my thought processes were juvenile. I became vividly aware of a paradigm. Until that moment, I had falsely assumed all people must write with either their left hand or with their right hand. Learning the truth brought an epiphany. While embracing my own ignorance, I determined to stop believing in absolute knowledge. I determined to think critically about things I knew, or at least thought I knew. It became important to analyze concepts from both the left and the right.
Modern American politics is comprised of two main political parties, or bodies of common beliefs. These two bodies are officially called the Democrats and the Republicans. The parties are rhetorically referred to as Left and Right. The Democrats are poised on the left while the Republicans stand ready to the right. The ideas of people on the left are often different from the ideas of those on the right. It is a critical mistake to believe that either side holds exclusive reign over the truth. There must be middle ground. It is an act of laziness to vote a straight party line ballot, casting all votes exclusively for one party, without considering individual candidates and issues. It is important to consider every issue from a theoretical middle ground. On matters of religion, abortion, and government, the Left is often at odds with the Right, sometimes bitterly. A well known cliché comes to mind: The truth lies in between.
People aligned on the left are generally more introverted with regard to religious beliefs and practices. They do not believe in the imposition of religious beliefs on other people. Religion is more of a private matter for them, and this helps to uphold the constitutional requirement for separation of church and state. On the right, people tend to be extroverted and evangelical regarding matters of faith. The Right is not as concerned with the threat of religion imposing itself on the state, even though this seems to contradict the Constitution. The truth lies somewhere between, neither side holds an infallible approach to religion.
The majority of political support for legalization of abortion comes from the Left. They frame the abortion issue in the context of a woman’s right to choose. They generally consider the destruction of the fetus to be secondary in importance to the woman’s right to choose. This stance preserves personal liberty, a constitutional calling. The opposite is true for the Right. They consider the life of the fetus to be more important than the woman’s right to choose. They often invoke religious principles while debating the issue of abortion. They believe the moral consequences of abortion will eventually decay the fabric of America: the American family structure. The truth lies in between. Until the truth is found, Left and Right will remain bitterly divided, without a middle ground.
The Left typically strives for more government influence on the daily operations of the nation. They accomplish this by continually striving for bigger government. They seek to expand the functionality of the government as it applies to everyday life. They find solutions by creating government programs. The Left believes that government is more efficient with the money citizens earn. Government can best distribute the income and better address the needs of all people. By comparison, the Right seeks to shrink governmental influence. Free enterprise and business promotion are the focal points. The Right usually seeks to lower taxes, allowing people to control more of their own money. This illustrates a faith in the wisdom of citizens. Right and Left disagree with each other. Certainly it must follow; the truth lies in between.
It is interesting how persons on both sides may have beliefs that cross over. A pro-choice democrat for example might be completely evangelical and demand that school teachers read a Bible verse in every public school classroom. But does this democrat continue to vote a straight democratic ticket strictly based on abortion? Does he make the critical mistake and commit an act of voter laziness? Alternately, a pro-life republican might believe in vast government control, violating a stereotype, yet continue to vote straight republican. This too is a mistake, and intellectual laziness. The truth often lies somewhere in between, and it is necessary to remember that a left-handed person can learn to use the right hand, accomplishing the same task. The party of choice never holds all the answers, despite what the voters’ perceive—or think they perceive.
One day, about twenty years ago, my father came home from work much earlier than usual. He arrived home and his left hand was neatly wrapped and tightly bandaged. While working earlier that day, he suffered an injury severe enough to require immobilization of his left hand. My father wrote with this hand. A few days after his injury, I was astonished to stumble upon my dad. He was standing in the kitchen and signing checks with his right hand. It had never in my life occurred to me that such a thing was even possible. A man can write with both hands? Two lessons were learned from this monumental event. First, I learned that some people are able to write reasonably well with both hands; some people are ambidextrous. Second, as the concept of ambidexterity was explained to me, I realized my thought processes were juvenile. I became vividly aware of a paradigm. Until that moment, I had falsely assumed all people must write with either their left hand or with their right hand. Learning the truth brought an epiphany. While embracing my own ignorance, I determined to stop believing in absolute knowledge. I determined to think critically about things I knew, or at least thought I knew. It became important to analyze concepts from both the left and the right.
Modern American politics is comprised of two main political parties, or bodies of common beliefs. These two bodies are officially called the Democrats and the Republicans. The parties are rhetorically referred to as Left and Right. The Democrats are poised on the left while the Republicans stand ready to the right. The ideas of people on the left are often different from the ideas of those on the right. It is a critical mistake to believe that either side holds exclusive reign over the truth. There must be middle ground. It is an act of laziness to vote a straight party line ballot, casting all votes exclusively for one party, without considering individual candidates and issues. It is important to consider every issue from a theoretical middle ground. On matters of religion, abortion, and government, the Left is often at odds with the Right, sometimes bitterly. A well known cliché comes to mind: The truth lies in between.
People aligned on the left are generally more introverted with regard to religious beliefs and practices. They do not believe in the imposition of religious beliefs on other people. Religion is more of a private matter for them, and this helps to uphold the constitutional requirement for separation of church and state. On the right, people tend to be extroverted and evangelical regarding matters of faith. The Right is not as concerned with the threat of religion imposing itself on the state, even though this seems to contradict the Constitution. The truth lies somewhere between, neither side holds an infallible approach to religion.
The majority of political support for legalization of abortion comes from the Left. They frame the abortion issue in the context of a woman’s right to choose. They generally consider the destruction of the fetus to be secondary in importance to the woman’s right to choose. This stance preserves personal liberty, a constitutional calling. The opposite is true for the Right. They consider the life of the fetus to be more important than the woman’s right to choose. They often invoke religious principles while debating the issue of abortion. They believe the moral consequences of abortion will eventually decay the fabric of America: the American family structure. The truth lies in between. Until the truth is found, Left and Right will remain bitterly divided, without a middle ground.
The Left typically strives for more government influence on the daily operations of the nation. They accomplish this by continually striving for bigger government. They seek to expand the functionality of the government as it applies to everyday life. They find solutions by creating government programs. The Left believes that government is more efficient with the money citizens earn. Government can best distribute the income and better address the needs of all people. By comparison, the Right seeks to shrink governmental influence. Free enterprise and business promotion are the focal points. The Right usually seeks to lower taxes, allowing people to control more of their own money. This illustrates a faith in the wisdom of citizens. Right and Left disagree with each other. Certainly it must follow; the truth lies in between.
It is interesting how persons on both sides may have beliefs that cross over. A pro-choice democrat for example might be completely evangelical and demand that school teachers read a Bible verse in every public school classroom. But does this democrat continue to vote a straight democratic ticket strictly based on abortion? Does he make the critical mistake and commit an act of voter laziness? Alternately, a pro-life republican might believe in vast government control, violating a stereotype, yet continue to vote straight republican. This too is a mistake, and intellectual laziness. The truth often lies somewhere in between, and it is necessary to remember that a left-handed person can learn to use the right hand, accomplishing the same task. The party of choice never holds all the answers, despite what the voters’ perceive—or think they perceive.
January 23, 2007
The Patriot's Dream
The Patriot’s Dream
It is the early 1600’s, and pilgrims are making a perilous one-way journey to the Promised Land. They already have a vision of what their country is and what it will become, though they will not see America for another two months, praying they will survive the voyage. Small groups of about one hundred prospective settlers are risking their lives together. If their vessel sinks, they will probably all die. If these delusional pilgrims make it to their destination, they plan to build a nation for each other. Most of these brave and faithful travelers seek to craft a brotherhood based on Godly principles; they plan to build a nation based on family. What has become of their legacy? Have later generations upheld these pilgrims’ spirit of hope?
When national loyalty was split, and the federal government was overwhelmed by multiple states acting to secede, we found ourselves in a civil war. In his Gettysburg Address, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln insisted that all Americans be free, regardless of ethnicity. President Lincoln was not willing to compromise on his agenda to free the slaves, despite the strength of opposing arguments. Instead, he zealously determined to restore the union between the states and the federal government; while freeing the slaves. President Lincoln believed that his principles were correct, and as Commander-in-Chief, he directed the military accordingly. As a patriot, President Lincoln led the nation according to his fervent beliefs.
In 1895, to commemorate the Fourth of July, The Congregationalist published a poem written by Katherine Lee Bates. We know this poem today as the song America the Beautiful. Katherine Bates, a patriot, vividly described her view of patriotism in verse four:
Oh beautiful, for patriot’s dream
That sees, beyond the years,
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
The dream as depicted by Bates, is undimmed by human tears. Natural disasters and deliberate human attacks may injure or kill thousands of our citizens, but our belief in righteousness is not dimmed by human suffering. The patriot has a dream for America, and does not seek to blame America. At night, the patriot revels in the warm gleam of city lights.
In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his speech I Have a Dream. He repeatedly declared that he had one—a dream. He spoke with an intense, conquering voice, and declared his dream as if it had already happened. In another speech I’ve Been to the Mountaintop, Dr. King spoke with warmth and intensity. Dr. King, a patriot, described a scene of himself standing on a mountaintop and looking out over the Promised Land, as if it were already established. This dream was a hopeful vision of our destiny; it looked beyond the years.
When President John F. Kennedy gave his inaugural address in 1961, he uttered a phrase of pure patriotism: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” President Kennedy, a patriot, said these words with enthusiasm, and they ring true for every generation.
Today, the government of the United States is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Active participation in the democratic process is not enough; the success of our government depends largely on the loyalty and vision of each individual. The same applies for the fledgling democracy in Iraq; participation in the voting process is not enough. Iraqis must strengthen their loyalty toward their nation. Iraqis must learn what it means to be patriotic.
The success of all free democracies is permanently linked to the level of patriotism among its citizens. Every patriot has a dream based on a philosophy for life. It may be a hopeful aspiration for the future, a flag flown in honor of veterans, or a five dollar handout to the beggar at the stoplight. Several character traits and beliefs are common among the American patriots. Fervent belief in principles is one such trait. Patriots do not forget how pilgrims continually travel here together, risking everything to fulfill the dream. The patriot sees, not just with eyes, but across time. As patriots, we do not dream for ourselves but for our children, grandchildren, and beyond. The patriots’ dream is positive and not defeatist. Complaining about present problems accomplishes nothing; we preserve our future with every vote, and the patriots’ dream. In the future, we live in a good, prosperous, and successful nation.
It is the early 1600’s, and pilgrims are making a perilous one-way journey to the Promised Land. They already have a vision of what their country is and what it will become, though they will not see America for another two months, praying they will survive the voyage. Small groups of about one hundred prospective settlers are risking their lives together. If their vessel sinks, they will probably all die. If these delusional pilgrims make it to their destination, they plan to build a nation for each other. Most of these brave and faithful travelers seek to craft a brotherhood based on Godly principles; they plan to build a nation based on family. What has become of their legacy? Have later generations upheld these pilgrims’ spirit of hope?
When national loyalty was split, and the federal government was overwhelmed by multiple states acting to secede, we found ourselves in a civil war. In his Gettysburg Address, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln insisted that all Americans be free, regardless of ethnicity. President Lincoln was not willing to compromise on his agenda to free the slaves, despite the strength of opposing arguments. Instead, he zealously determined to restore the union between the states and the federal government; while freeing the slaves. President Lincoln believed that his principles were correct, and as Commander-in-Chief, he directed the military accordingly. As a patriot, President Lincoln led the nation according to his fervent beliefs.
In 1895, to commemorate the Fourth of July, The Congregationalist published a poem written by Katherine Lee Bates. We know this poem today as the song America the Beautiful. Katherine Bates, a patriot, vividly described her view of patriotism in verse four:
Oh beautiful, for patriot’s dream
That sees, beyond the years,
Thine alabaster cities gleam
Undimmed by human tears!
The dream as depicted by Bates, is undimmed by human tears. Natural disasters and deliberate human attacks may injure or kill thousands of our citizens, but our belief in righteousness is not dimmed by human suffering. The patriot has a dream for America, and does not seek to blame America. At night, the patriot revels in the warm gleam of city lights.
In 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his speech I Have a Dream. He repeatedly declared that he had one—a dream. He spoke with an intense, conquering voice, and declared his dream as if it had already happened. In another speech I’ve Been to the Mountaintop, Dr. King spoke with warmth and intensity. Dr. King, a patriot, described a scene of himself standing on a mountaintop and looking out over the Promised Land, as if it were already established. This dream was a hopeful vision of our destiny; it looked beyond the years.
When President John F. Kennedy gave his inaugural address in 1961, he uttered a phrase of pure patriotism: “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” President Kennedy, a patriot, said these words with enthusiasm, and they ring true for every generation.
Today, the government of the United States is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Active participation in the democratic process is not enough; the success of our government depends largely on the loyalty and vision of each individual. The same applies for the fledgling democracy in Iraq; participation in the voting process is not enough. Iraqis must strengthen their loyalty toward their nation. Iraqis must learn what it means to be patriotic.
The success of all free democracies is permanently linked to the level of patriotism among its citizens. Every patriot has a dream based on a philosophy for life. It may be a hopeful aspiration for the future, a flag flown in honor of veterans, or a five dollar handout to the beggar at the stoplight. Several character traits and beliefs are common among the American patriots. Fervent belief in principles is one such trait. Patriots do not forget how pilgrims continually travel here together, risking everything to fulfill the dream. The patriot sees, not just with eyes, but across time. As patriots, we do not dream for ourselves but for our children, grandchildren, and beyond. The patriots’ dream is positive and not defeatist. Complaining about present problems accomplishes nothing; we preserve our future with every vote, and the patriots’ dream. In the future, we live in a good, prosperous, and successful nation.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
