Vindicated and Vindictive

Do you ever come across a word that seems to be carrying a lot more meaning than what appears on the surface?  Well, I do and a statement I heard yesterday about someone being (or feeling) vindicated led me along a bit of an indirect path to arrive at some new (for me) insight.  Because I’m always alert for new insight, I thought I would just document this process and because insight is more valuable when shared, I am making it available to the rest of the world here.

Vindicate seems like a positive, right?  “Finally, I was vindicated in my opposition to their policy.”

It seems that we all have a desire to be vindicated.  We say, “I won’t say ‘I told you so’…” and somehow feel that we haven’t said it or that we have softened the blow.  Even that statement contains the need for vindication.  It’s never enough to be right (either factually, ethically or morally).  No, we need that one additional step of maintaining our “rightness” and, even better, the satisfaction of hearing another person say that we were right.

There is another word, vindictive, that is almost always used in a negative sense.  We say that someone is vindictive and bitter for example.  This is not intended as a compliment.

As you might guess from looking at both words, they are related and come from the same Latin root.

Latin vindicare (claim, vindicate, punish)  [http://www.myetymology.com/english]

While we may have some misgivings about a definition (vindcare) that uses the concept we are trying to define, the association of claim and punish in one word is very interesting.  If you’re still reading it means you find it interesting, too.

We of western (European) descent and culture marvel at the need for vengeance that drives (to our eyes) much of the politics and culture of the Mid-East.  We hear that a killing (murder?) was justified by the perpetrator on the basis of avenging a wrong that was committed many generations previously.  In fact, Albanians everywhere seem intent on avenging such a wrong which they see as having been committed on each of them as members of a specific sub-culture by another sub-culture.

The Basques in Spain and even, to a degree, the Quebecoise of Canada are given to a similar cultural perception.  In the U.S. there is a movement by the descendant of Africans brought to this country as slaves to demand vindication in the form of reparations from the descendants of those who did the enslaving.  More recently, the US cried out with a single voice for revenge following the World Trade Center attack.  The few voices for restraint were completely ignored because  they came from outside the cultural norm.  I note that in each of these cases the original transgression has been attributed to “them.”  “They” did this.  They is a nation or an organization even though the perpetrators were individuals.

The point is that humans seem to feel comfortable with an expectation of (claim for) punishment for a wrong.  Those who “are vindicated” are no less guilty than those who “are vindictive.”  The beneficiaries of vengeance (morally appropriate punishment) bathe in the same blood as the vindicators.

For those interested in the wisdom of the Book, Micah Chapter 6 verse 8 tells us

And what does the Lord require of you?
To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God

Over and over we are told that mercy trumps justice and, in fact, this is one of the central tenets of Christianity.  It is certainly a tenet of Buddhism and, for all I know, of Islam. 

Vindicate and Vindictive tell us much about the human condition and the very long path we must negotiate to achieve our potential.

Words, Meaning and Communication

As I was preparing a speech this week I experienced a flash of revelation--an epiphany.  The context goes back deep into my youth.  I have been convinved for much of my life that a mastery of words, grammar, sentence structure and composition combined with an artful delivery would ensure communication.  I held on to this belief in the face of all sorts of evidence to the contrary.

When I failed to accomplish the communication I was trying for, I first held the receiver accountable; after all, I had taken far greater care than most in crafting my message.  Then (with more maturity) I assumed increasing levels of accountability.  I tried expressing my thought in multiple ways hoping to strike the target with one of them.  I tried using metaphor and stories.  As I became more experienced with the ways of people and life in general, I used stories and experiences from different cultural perspectives.  I tried to hit the point where humanity lived--the common denominator of experience as a human being without regard to culture, education or even intelligence.

Before I continue, let me say that I can successfully communicate even very abstract concepts when I am face to face with the receiver.  Careful observation of a person's eyes, expressions, body language and what they say or the questions the ask--all of these help me to communicate even within a group.  The written word is something else again.

My epiphany was this: words have little value in themselves.  Even when we link them together with art and experience the best that we should hope for is to separate the little bit of meaning that we're trying to communicate from all of the other meaing that's out there.  We should think of language as fencing materials--posts, boards, nails, wire, staples, etc.  Our goal (as a sender) should be to place the posts strategically to close off meanings that we do not intend.  Then we should use the rest of our materials to hold and direct the receiver's thoughts within the meaning we intend.  I will say that some words are more suitable fenceposts than others and, like any fence, the materials must suit the purpose.

As the receiver, we must cease getting caught up in the construction of the fence and instead give our full attention to what's inside the fence.  Inside the fence is where the real meaning lies.  We must read between and beneath the language with the idea that there is something there that we will be better for having understood.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the two political conventions we have just witnessed.  Clearly Republicans and Democrats have different ideas about communication.  The fences they build are very different in nature.  Of course the nature of national politics yields big ideas and the meaning that must be conveyed seems like the pioneers' perception of the Platte River--a mile wide and an inch deep.  Those who are involved in the parties and the political processes can perceive much more depth than the casual listener.  This is the weakness of the process, that understanding the communcations requires insider knowledge that most of us don't possess.

For this reason, the fences being built by the language of the speeches, advertisements, platfom documents... don't always seem well-constructed.  They may not appear to atually enclose anything and we begin to hear the words in contexts of our own making.  We become alarmed when we hear something we recognize as untruthful ("inaccurate" is the euphemism most often applied) and we focus on that single fence post to the exclusion of not only the rest of the fence but whatever the fence was enclosing.  My advice: hear the words but rely on observations of behavior to provide the meaning. 

No politician will knowingly fence himself in and this is wise.  National and international policy are a seething cauldron of competing forces and it's dangerous to try to reach in to isolate one ingredient.  It isn't reasonable to expect a government leader (or would-be leader) to limit his or her options for dealing with an issue that, when it arises, will be absolutely unlike anything that we have ever dealt with before.

When we do (unreasonably) demand that the candidate tie himself firmly to a future course of action it can never end well either for us or for the candidate/politician.  BUT, we can look carefully, not only at individual past behaviors, but past group behaviors to get some idea what to look forward to. 

Taxes Simplified

Talk of a federal sales tax recently had me thinking.  As a replacement for the income tax, this has some traction.  To make it work, there are just a couple of things that will need to be resolved.

1. We would need a law effective in every state to the effect that a price attached to an item is inclusive of all taxes.  A big tax bite added at the register just won't be acceptable but if the taxes are part of the price sticker, then they will quickly blend into the background.  A breakdown of the price could be printed on the sales receipt.
2. All of the attorneys and accountants who currently earn their living by guiding you and me through the maze of tax law would have to be re-tasked.  This is almost certainly the bigger problem and one that has prevented US tax law from being reformed since the income tax became law in 1861 via the 16th Ammendment.  Note that this was a Republican government (under Abraham Lincoln) actually trying to pay for the war they were getting into.

If the millions (OK thousands--all right the meager few) readers of this blog will begin to come up with ways of redeploying the army of lawyers and accountants, we could really simplify our lives.  Think of it--no more April 15th tax filing.  In fact no more tax filing at all.  If I should only live so long!.

What Should I Do?

A few weeks ago I was driving on a two-lane state highway and listening to the radio.  I was listening to a "news" station and found my blood pressure rising as I listened to report after report concerning the political campaigns.  If you've read previous posts here, you might empathize a bit. 

Each report delivered essentially verbatim the latest sound bite from one of the candidates.  There was no real attempt at critical analysis (who has time for that) and "big lies" were coming one after the other.  Fortunately for me, I recognized my condition (rising blood pressure) and took action in the only two ways that ever work.  One: a series of deep, cleansing breaths and two: prayer.

Wherever you may find yourself on the God spectrum, you'll find that these two approaches can work wonders.  There is a wisdom out there that will take every trouble that you hand to it and give back something that is for you.

I asked, "What should I do in the face of such lies, fear and anger?"  An old testament injunction came to mind immediately.  "...what does the Lord require of you?  To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God." Micah 6:8

"Yeah!" I thought, "that's what they should be doing!"  The answer to my prayer wasn't complete yet, though.  The rest of the story came then, "No, you."  I was busted (again). 

When we attempt to control the lives of others by limiting what they may (legally) do or think or discuss or write, we fail in our obedience to this simple advice.  We fail in mercy or justice or humility or all three at once.  I can do it.  You can do it.

The Big Lies do not come from God (in spite of what their speakers may try to imply) and, in fact, do not come out of any kind of relationship with God by whatever name.  Government that can't effect mercy or justice or humility is no government at all.

"Job Creators"

If I hear one more Republican official tell me that a tax on citizens with incomes over $1 million is a disincentive for the "job creators" in our society...  If you happen to be in the car next to me at the traffic light you may be entertained by a man beating up his car.  You may even be able to hear me (though it is winter and the windows are up) as I scream my frustration.

The people that our GOP friends are talking about are the same people who have systematically exported jobs for the past 20 years.  Oh, maybe the jobs they're talking about are the au pair, housekeeper, driver, personal assistant, trainer, lawn care positions they've advertised recently.  Probably not though because those are usually filled through the undocumented pipeline.

What really drives me crazy is that apparently We, the People, are simple-minded enough to buy this. There is no other way that they could have received enough votes.

Friends, when someone is telling you that you should be afraid of "illegals" taking your job and that the investment bankers, financiers and CEOs of multinational corporations have your back, you should turn and run.  Give your support and your vote to the other guy.

Now

We don't value now. We talk about it all the time. We use it for emphasis. We mostly use it to separate the past from the future.

Often when we talk about now we have only the fuzziest of notions, the flimsiest of definitions in mind. "Now is the time for men and women of conscience..." The concept of now in this instance could mean anything from a generation to a session of Congress to a particular crisis. Sometimes we use now to mean very soon or as soon as humanly possible (the future) as in, "I need it now!" Occasionally we use it to bound some time in the past as in, "Now in those days..."

Now has power that, for most people, is unrealized because it is unrecognized. For our purposes now is the moment of decision. If we are able to grasp that moment, that now, and use it, we can change our own life and the lives of those around us. We can use now to create a new future.

In the gap between stimulus and response there is a piece of eternity--now--in which we can decide what the future will look like and decide on the response that will launch that future. Please be aware of now and use it as it is intended to be used.

When we are present in our life we are conscious of each now and we use them to create a future that matches our vision. What is your vision, your ideal? What will you use to direct the decisions you make in each of your nows?

Whose Candidate?

The Ames Straw Poll, conducted last week produced a surprising result for many (including me). Since I lived in Minnesota for nearly twenty years, I am familiar with two of the candidates. I have never voted for either of them and have often wondered who did and what their motivations were.

As it happened, one of the candidates (Gov. Tim Pawlenty) made such a poor showing that he withdrew his candidacy immediately after the count was announced. The other, Rep. Michele Bachmann, emerged with the most votes and was immediately included (by various of the talking heads--mostly from FOX) in the "top tier" of candidates.

Yesterday, it was reported that the long lines waiting to get into the Bachmann tent prior to the vote were caused in part by the fact that her campaign had purchased 6000 ballots @ $30 ea and was handing them out.

From this several lessons can be learned:
1. The Ames Straw Poll is, in fact, a fundraiser.
2. The results should be treated much the same as the "best homeroom" contest at the local school. The only part the Iowa GOP missed was the opportunity to cast negative votes. They'll probably include that option next time.
3. I'm sure Tim Pawlenty is kicking himself for allowing Bachmann to jump past him in this way.
4. Someone on the Bachmann campaign is capable of thinking outside the box.
5. Politicians and their campaign staffs think in terms of elections and votes and the reporters seem to follow suit. Bachmann taught everyone a lesson--that votes can be bought. I wonder if it will work again?
6. Fund raisers, straw polls and popularity contests aren't the same as elections (are they?)

She better be able to ride this a long way because she won't have this opportunity again. At the very least other candidates will use the same tactics and cancel each other out. I also have to wonder about the economic smarts of burning your capital to create funds for replacing your capital. There is some kind of natural law that governs these situations. It's the same as cranking a generator to power a light so that you can see your surroundings. Of course you can't leave the generator or the light goes out. At least while the light was on everyone was able to see Rep Bachmann. I hope they got a good look.