How do you define....?

The first time I used to word "troll" to describe my mother (she is, it's cute) I got an odd look from her and my father both. This is not the first time I've used words that have not entered their lexicon, so I explained, because a common vocabulary is the baseline to good communication. My parents laughed.

Apparently, when they were young (60's and 70's) "trolling" was cruising for a date. In my hometown in Shawnee, you'd "cruise the 'Poo" (Kickapoo is the main street). For them, it would have been "trolling the Poo", which doesn't have the same ring.

It was the result of a generational difference in language. I love how language evolves and changes over time, the way words take on new meaning or context. I find that people who seek, as my parents do, to understand the way the generations after them use language rather than dismissing it as irrelevant have an easier time adjusting to the changes in the world...and the world changes quickly with technology connecting us in a way that would have been unheardof to my grandparents. That said, I text with my grandparents often. People can change with the times, if they aren't afraid of the changes or holding too hard onto a past that's gone.

I think another word that has had both a change of meaning but also a generational difference in understanding is socialism. My podcasts have talked a lot about the way many Democrats are embracing the word and how defining it will likely be something we will be seeing a lot over the next couple of years.

The Iron Curtain fell when I was about 9 so most of my life has been spent post-Cold War. I have an aunt who is from Russia and who has talked a lot about the terrible of living in the USSR and it's fascinating. But when my generation and later is talking about socialism, we're not looking at other countries, we're looking at ours.

At how Social Security and Medicare are regularly spoken of as two of the most important programs we have (and which our grandparents fight for zealously) and which are prime examples of socialism.

We look at the failings of rampant capitalism, how a lack of government involvement makes our country the most expensive healthcare in the world but we don't even have paid leave when someone gives birth; how people have a 4-year degree, student debt they can't pay, and are working for minimum wage, which can't even cover their housing costs. Housing costs that continue to rise while wages remain flat.

So we look at this country, which has a few really successful programs that are clearly socialism but a bunch of really failed areas (areas that effect our generations in way they don't effect the ones before us) that have been left to the ravages of unchecked capitalism. We aren't afraid that socialism will lead to communism because...well, it doesn't. We're more interested that democratic socialism would lead to homes, job, wages, healthcare, a chance at a life our parents and grandparents got a chance at...and then voted to dismantle for us.

For us, socialism isn't a scary threat from outsiders. We have time and history to look at and since our history books focus almost solely on European and Western history, we had them fed to us year after year. We can see what has gone well and what has gone terribly. And our thoughts have been formed accordingly.

If the word "socialism" causes you distress coming out of the mouths of your loved ones, I think the first thing to do is to ask them what they mean. Listen to what they're saying. It's possible that you and they are using two very different defintions for the same word. And try to look at the world through their eyes, through the eyes of their contemporaries. Our world is different than the one you were in at our age. We may well need some different definitions to navigate it. The question is, will you hold onto the past that is gone, afraid to change your understanding or adapt your definitions, or will we navigate it alone?

Peace vs Victory

I was listening to Morning Edition on NPR and there is a story about the President of Columbia, President Santos, winning the Nobel Prize for Peace, even after the voters rejected the peace plan he brokered to stop 50 years of war (http://n.pr/2dxcFcm). As they were discussing how Santos became president, with his history of fighting the insurgents, and then his transition once he became president to peace talks, it struck me that, suddenly, he is incredibly unpopular. He brokered a treaty to end a 50 year war...what else do people want?

The answer, I realized, is that the people don't want peace. They want victory. They don't want the fighting to end, they want their enemy destroyed.

Victory is a win-condition. It decimates the enemy, creates a clear victor, deliniates right and wrong. The Civil War, WWI and WWII - these all had victories, where the winners could proclaim themselves to be advocates of peace while the losers were trampled under heel, buried in reparations and debts, stripped of economic strength and, most importantly, their dignity.

Peace is a process. It takes time, it requires that both sides give a little, it takes negotiations. It's hard. No one may come out a clear victor, but the goal is a standing, lasting peace, one that, over time, heals, which means that both sides must retain their dignity, must be able to live and grow under the terms. For true peace, the conflicts will fade away over time. New ones may arise, but they will not be a rehashing of the past, because peace allows wounds to heal.

If we had focused on peace after the Civil War, would we still be fighting the culture wars that arose from making our own citizens feel as their own was endangered, disregarded, wiped out?

Would WWII have happened if Germany hadn't been stripped of their dignity in the Versaille Treaty after WWI?

Would we be fighting ISIS if we had found a better way in the Middle East over the decades of European and American involvement in the region, rather than cutting up their borders and gutting their culture?

Peace is not popular. It does not generate parades. It costs both sides. When you call for peace, ask yourself: Do you want peace or victory? Be honest with yourself. Do you want to be able to sit down at a table with the people you were formerly in conflict with, with dignity preserved on all sides, prepared to give some up yourself for a lasting, true peace? Or do you want to bring them to heel, to show them who is boss, to ensure they don't dare mess with America again?

These are different. They require different tools to achieve. You cannot call for peace and then support actions aimed towards victory, thinking they will achieve the same result.

So be honest with yourself. What do you want? What are you willing to support?

And the President Makes Me Proud

So today, President Obama officially supported same-sex marriage. I'm on his mailing list and received this message:

Jenn -- Today, I was asked a direct question and gave a direct answer: I believe that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. I hope you'll take a moment to watch the conversation, consider it, and weigh in yourself on behalf of marriage equality: http://my.barackobama.com/Marriage I've always believed that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally. I was reluctant to use the term marriage because of the very powerful traditions it evokes. And I thought civil union laws that conferred legal rights upon gay and lesbian couples were a solution. But over the course of several years I've talked to friends and family about this. I've thought about members of my staff in long-term, committed, same-sex relationships who are raising kids together. Through our efforts to end the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, I've gotten to know some of the gay and lesbian troops who are serving our country with honor and distinction. What I've come to realize is that for loving, same-sex couples, the denial of marriage equality means that, in their eyes and the eyes of their children, they are still considered less than full citizens. Even at my own dinner table, when I look at Sasha and Malia, who have friends whose parents are same-sex couples, I know it wouldn't dawn on them that their friends' parents should be treated differently. So I decided it was time to affirm my personal belief that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines. But I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them.

I've been watching responses from bloggers and news outlets. I've heard responses from friends. Here's what I know - I've always supported same-sex marriage because it seems like a no brainer to me that all people who are citizens should be treated the same. I am incredibly proud of President Obama's stance. Even if it was a calculated political move (in which case I'm also impressed by the shrewdness), it's an important move. The presidency may not have the legal authority to make same-sex marriage legal, but the president's words mean a lot to this country, and in this case, a lot to a portion of this country who is currently in the struggle for what is a basic freedom taken for granted, and exploited and abused, by many.

Well done, Mr. President.

Osama bin Laden is Dead

Kind of hard to imagine I'm typing those words. As I read the live blogs and the NY Times articles about it last night and heard the President's words, I could not believe that after 10 years, we can finally say those words.

Osama bin Laden is dead.

I felt relief, of course. Andrew Sullivan, who was live blogging the progression of events, included a pretty shocking video of the towers falling, to remind people of why this matters, of what this man did to our country. I watched the video and was moved by it all over again.

Osama bin Laden is dead.

I'm not one of those who is overjoyed by it. I would have preferred him to be tried and found guilty, not just for the attacked on September 11, but also for the attacks around the world that were orchestrated and carried out under his orders. I would like him to be tried by sharia law, the only law he and his followers recognize. Standing in a square in Saudi Arabia with an executioner at his side, while a judge asks his gather victims if they can forgive the man. If any of them can not, he is executed and buried in an unmarked grave, per Islamic tradition. That is how I wanted Osama bin Laden to die. But he didn't.

He was killed in a carefully planned and executed mission by the US. A beautifully handled mission that shows both dedicated and discretion (not our greatest pairing of skills as of late). The goal was to take him alive, but there was no way that was going to happen. A man like Osama bin Laden doesn't live in the culture he does and do the things he had done only to be taken away quietly. Of course he fought. Even if he had been captured, he would have tried to escape again and again. His followers might have chosen to kidnap Americans in retaliation or struck out in attempts to get him back.

So last night a breathed a sigh of relief and shed some tears for all those who have died in the process. And this morning, I woke up thinking...

Now what?

Shootings in Tuscon

I've been following all weekend the horrific shootings in Tuscon, AZ. I've read the suspect's Myspace and the reports on his behavior from school. I've listened to Keith Olberman's call for a change in political rhetoric and call for politicians and commentators to repudiate* their previous statements involving violence, even if it was unintentional and heard him apologize for his own such comments. Lots of political commentators have weighed in.

I posted last year my own disgust at the tone that politics has taken. I am so very tired of the shouting, the over-the-top rhetoric, the hysteria. Our country was designed to have multiple political standpoints and the entire point of a democracy is to have a bloodless change of power as a reflection of the will of the people. We're supposed to disagree. We're supposed to discuss and argue. But I never thought politics would reach the point where it is now.

I don't know if the shooting was politically motivated. I don't think that you can blame anyone for the shooting but the shooter. However, I do think that the politicians and pundits who have let the conversation reach this fever pitch have got to bring it down. Maybe this shooting wasn't about politics, but do you think we're going to always be that lucky? I don't. And we don't know where the gun will be pointed next.

This is not a call for gun reform or change and I've been happy to see sparingly little call for that. It's not the gun's fault. It's not Palin's fault, though I think her irresponsibility has finally been called into question on a large scale thanks to this. It would have been nice to see her grow a pair and say something meaningful in response, but so far she's just dug in her heels and proven to us, yet again, that she has no business being a politician.

Mostly, I'm just very tired of our elected officials behaving badly. I am so very tired of the poor manners, the name calling - actions we wouldn't accept from children are running rampant on the Senate floor. The refusal to work together is childish - it's taking your ball and going home. And the disgusting use of violence in our political atmosphere is disturbing. There is nothing wrong with supporting guns (I do) and being proud of your military background (I am). There is, however, something very wrong about turning political rallies into gun shows and using incendiary language in political ads and campaigns. I am very tired of it. And I'm really done.

Over the next few days I will be writing my Representatives of both parties and asking them to demand a return to a sane political landscape and to expect the same from their colleagues. I will write the same to the Speaker of the House, the Minority Leader, the Secretary of State and the President. I don't think for a moment that my letters will have much effect on Washington. But I can hope that someone will read them and know that there are citizens who care very much about the tone that Washington has set...and that I don't like it.

*He used repudiate at least a dozen times in that broadcast. I have to wonder if it's an attack on Palin's inability to use the word correctly.

So tired of politics

I like politics usually. I find it interesting and, more importantly, I think being well informed about what's going on is important. For the most part, I keep my specific opinions to myself. One of my closest friends is a Republican, very devoutly. Though I'm not 100% liberal (I like my guns and military), I am generally to the left of center.

This election season has completely zapped me of interest. For the last month, I have had to endure not only the plethora of national politics chatter on NPR and Andrew Sullivan (my favorite blog), but the gruesome NY state politics. I voted, of course, because I do, but I was so happy to be done with election season. So you can imagine my irritation when I tuned into NPR today and they were discussing the election. The Republicans won, shocker! People are upset with incumbents across the country and the Democrats previously had the majority. This should not be a surprise. But it's all everyone can talk about.

I think the major reason that I'm so tired of this election season is the very poor taste in which this election has been conducted. The thing I dislike about politics is the mudslinging and attacks. It's tacky and low brow, everything I hate in the world. And I'm just fed up with it.