Finally, finally, a sliver of a ray of light from above for the Catholic Church.  The Church is considering, considering, allowing married men to receive “priestly ordination” in the remotest regions of the Amazon river.  Some would call this astonishingly progressive.  Some would call it a crack in the proverbial wall of “the gift of celibacy”.  So which is it?  Is it the Church taking priestly ordination of married men “for a test drive”?  Or is it the course of last resort for the Church having exhausted all other possible sources of priests who could function at a minimally acceptable level in this one of the remotest regions in the world?  It appears quite likely that it could be both. 

Aside from the challenges the Church faced in the early centuries of its existence, the current crisis centers around unthinkable acts by priests.  This, combined with a severe shortage of priests, is shaking this religious juggernaut from its parishioner core to its leadership in the Vatican.  The crisis reverberations, mostly surrounding the priest as a sexual predator, are causing geological fault lines between the Church and many of the Catholic faithful.  Evidence suggests that even some of the most fervent supporters, given the apparently lack of effective and widespread action by Church leadership, are allowing these seismic schisms to fully separate them from any church related activity.  With their faith completely shaken, they are also closing their pocketbooks effectively creating a third crisis. The army of God is having its supply lines so effectively reduced as to create new struggles for the Church in its fight against evil.

Not to suggest that Catholics, or even Christianity, represent the entirety of the legions of God.  It is striking to anyone who takes a moment to ponder it, that virtually all “religions” worship a supreme being.  It’s truly remarkable that these God-centered religious factions have occurred spontaneously around the world in some cases independent of one another. 

Some have stated that these religions are artifacts of a time when science could not explain certain phenomena.  These phenomena were then attributed to the work of a God.  A notion the people could comprehend.  A notion that gave rise to God worship in the hope that these actions would bring God’s favor to them.  The fearing and worshiping of a God removed the fear of a chaotic world where actions beyond one’s control were perceived as completely arbitrary.

For many Catholics, who choose to think more logically about why the Church is good for the people and what the Church must do to remain relevant in a modern world, tough choices must be made quickly.  Especially in a world where everything finds its way to the web instantly. 

Married men are not free of sin, nor are celibate priests, so the time has come to set aside “the gift of celibacy”. The Church should ordain married men, shed the Church of the predators, and you solve two enormous obstacles to the long-term success. Then, and only then, can the process of healing the deep, hideous wounds begin in earnest. 

Obviously much easier said than done.  Yet time is of the essence.  The Catholic Church is on course to lose almost an entire generation, possibly two or more, of parishioners.  Often change within the Church doctrine or dogma has taken decades.  The Church must move much more quickly.  Otherwise the number of engaged parishioners will shrink, the treasury will shrink, and the Church’s relevance will diminish. 

This would not be a good thing for the world.  If you believe evil exists, and we see evidence of it every day in a world of global instant communication, then religions that promote Judeo-Christian like principals of peace, love, charity, family must be preserved to combat theses forces.  The Catholic Church has done so much good in this world over two millennia.  Its charitable acts around the world, with ministries like free or low cost healthcare, are remarkable.  The Catholic Church has erred egregiously for centuries perpetuating this notion of “the gift of celibacy”.  It may yet be the source of its downfall.

Survivors of Peral Harbor

Survivors of the Battle of the Bulge

Many who know more about the generation that gave birth to the “Baby Boomers” will call them “The Greatest Generation”.  The generation that survived the Great Depression, that won World War II and enabled this country to emerge on the global stage as the greatest nation on earth.  These are, in fact, undeniable accomplishments of that “Greatest Generation”. 

No amount of words can fairly represent the many unspeakable sacrifices willingly endured by this generation of Americans during World War II. The debt owed to them by all Americans, and the world, for our freedom from oppression is incalculable.  And because it deserves to be said one more time, the accomplishments of this generation of heroes evokes only one description, The Greatest!

We, in the Baby Boomers, are so incredibly proud of our fathers and mothers and uncles and their friends and relatives, many who are the descendants of immigrants who came here to be a part of this miracle of American democracy and capitalism.  They built and manufactured and governed with the single-minded goal of being a part of the American dream.  And they were incredibly successful.

The enormity of the pressure that success put on the Boomers was expressed in more than the usual ways.  The sixties and its counterculture revolution were a huge expression of pressure avoidance. Although many, many Boomers chose the traditional path, and quite successfully took the proverbial baton, the war in Viet Nam and how it was portrayed in the media, led many to an alternate path.

For many of us this war, the war in Viet Nam, was a very different and multi-faceted experience compared to WWII.  No one should diminish the sacrifices made in the name of freedom during the war in Viet Nam.  And although many, God bless them, chose to volunteer for military duty, many more, because of how the war was portrayed, took our chances with the selective service draft.  And there were a significant number, because of the attitudes about the war, that attempted to evade the draft and military service by moving to Canada or elsewhere.  Those of us that “lucked out” with the draft system, we were able to carry on with our own chosen path be it college, a trade, full time work of some kind, or, to just “drop out” and drift with the winds of the counterculture movement.

When we look back at the sixties and seventies, we Boomers are old enough to have enjoyed those times and look back with a big smile.  Those were absolutely the coolest times ever.  Saying societal norms experienced a significant loosening would be an understatement. 

The music of the sixties was by far the greatest musical decade. The list of world-class, genre-creating artists is enormous!  Here are just some of them.

Aretha Franklin	The Beatles	The Dave Clark Five
The Buckinghams	The Chi-lites	The Rolling Stones
Dusty Springfield	The Four Seasons	The Four Tops
Gary Puckett & the Union Gap	The Guess Who	The Ojays
Jay & the Americans	Little Anthony & the Imperials	Martha Reeves & the Vandellas
Marvin Gaye	Tommy James & the Shondells	The Zombies
The Young Rascals	The Beach Boys	The Ronettes
Barbara Lewis	The Supremes	The Righteous Brothers
The Del-Vikings	The Grass Roots	Smokey Robinson & the Miracles
The Vogues	Jimi Hendricks	Dionne Warwick
The Temptations	Fats Domino	Strawberry Alarm Clock
The Doors	Creedance Clearwater Revival	The Hollies
The Drifters	Joan Baez	Blood Seat & Tears
The Isley Brothers	The Mamas & the Papas	Ike & Tina Turner
Buffalo Springfield	The Animals	Stevie Wonder
Neil Diamond	The Yardbirds	Grateful Dead
Jefferson Airplane	Pink Floyd	The Moody Blues
Van Morrison	The Band	Crosby, Stills & Nash
B.B. King	Janis Joplin	The Miracles
Roy Orbison	Simon & Garfunkel	The Kinks
The Byrds	Cream	Led Zeppelin
Sam Cooke	Elvis Presley	James Brown
The Who	Ray Charles	Bob Dylan
Sly & the Family Stone	The Velvet Underground	Jefferson Airplane
Chuck Berry	Wilson Pickett	The Monkees
Herman’s Hermits	The Lovin’ Spoonful	Jackie Wilson
Traffic	Dion	Donovan
Joni Mitchell	David Bowie	Otis Redding
Johnny Rivers	Petula Clark	Peter & Gordon
Jan & Dean	Gladys Knight & the Pips	The Drifters

There are many more wonderful artists of the sixties, and, frankly, the early seventies, not mentioned here.  This list is an assemblage of the greatest icons in modern musical history.  Although this was not intended to be an all-inclusive list, it is a demonstration of the marvelous strength of the creativity and virtuosity of so many artists in a single decade.  Unquestionably unsurpassed!

The impact these artists had on a generation, a culture, a nation was the most profound in the history of any nation.  Never have musical artists had such an impact on the style, language, the fashion, and lifestyle of an entire generation as the artists of the sixties have had on the Boomers.  From the early 60s rock and R&B through to the culmination of its affect in the 1969 event heard around the world, Woodstock. 

And not just in the United States.  So Many artists from the United Kingdom, that honed their craft across Europe, often used the music created by American Blues artists as a creative platform for their inspiration.  With great triumph in Europe, they brought their brand of Rock’n Roll to the U.S. to smashing success with this new generation ready for this new messaging and new freedoms of expression.  As much of this new music emanated from nightclubs across Europe, much of the influence on style and fashion in the sixties and early seventies also emanated from Europe in places like London’s Carnaby Street.

Here in the U.S., one geographic location represented the cultural and generational attitudes more than any other; the Haight-Ashbury district in the City of San Francisco.    This bohemian community, populated early in the sixties by the so-called Beat Movement, became the cultural high ground of the counterculture movement dubbed “Hippies” for their clear turn away from tradition in attitude, lifestyle, fashion and even language. 

The War in Viet Nam was a potent ingredient in this sixty’s cultural cauldron as the anti-war activists were a glove fit to the themes adopted by the counterculture movement.  Peace, free love, the brotherhood of man populated the banners and placards carried by anti-war protestors.  The country was in crisis.

Despite this turmoil and political strife, the peace and free love generation had a hell of a lot of fun in the sixties and seventies before, for the most part, settling down and pursuing a more traditional American lifestyle.   For the coolest generation, the sixties and the seventies represented extended “recess” in a giant American playground.  Some had jobs, some began careers, some just chose to turn on, tune out, and stayed out for decades.  A luxury afforded to them by the changes in American society and success of the American economy. 

But for most of the Boomers, a more traditional way of life eventually called.  Those of us who decided they wanted a family of our own, to own a home, raise children well and send them to college, knew this required a regular, substantial income.  Time to put away childish things and don the harness.  There were many Boomers who never strayed from the traditional path, but, for us late bloomer Boomers, the opportunity was there to have that life.  Hard work; LOTS of hard work lay ahead, and it was all worth it. 

But man, the sixties and seventies were fun!

The Richmond Virginia community has so much to celebrate.  The Richmond Times Dispatch (RTD) exclaimed, in a January 16, 2019 editorial titled “We’re No. 100”, the many virtues of our city.  “In 2017 Richmond was ranked as one of the nation’s top five hipster paradises.  Ultra-artsy VCU, the Fan district, plentiful (widely celebrated) restaurants, and great breweries all helped to make Richmond one of America’s hippest cities, according to rankings by MovieHub.  The plentiful thrifts shops, tattoo parlors and vegan options throughout the area also helped win us that ranking on the ‘US Hipster Index’. “

“In 2018, Forbes magazine named RVA one of the country’s top 10 coolest cities.  Once again, some of the reasons for that ranking included the vibrant craft beer scene and the multitude of great places to eat.” 

“Also in 2018, a travel-guide book publisher, rated River City as one of the top 10 ‘underrated, rejuvenated and out-of-this-world’ places to visit.  The company said it traveled around the globe to find the world’s best cities.  Again, Richmond made this list in part because of its ‘microbreweries, cideries, and buzzworthy restaurant’.”

In another exclamation of the City’s virtues, RTD’s May 14, 2019 story about a start-up credit card company (Petal) choosing RVA (in this case selecting a location in Chesterfield county) over Austin Texas and Salt Lake City Utah.  Petal, choosing RVA to locate its first offices outside NYC and committing to hire 80 people over the next three years, said this. “We chose Richmond after looking at a number of other locations around the country.”  “We looked at the depth and richness of the labor pool, affordability of living and the proximity of colleges.”  Also stating “Richmond was an easy choice….and it is a very livable city”. 

These accolades only scratch the surface of what makes our community great with wonderful architecture, history, museums and natural resources galore. This list of the area’s riches can go on and on.  So what is holding this obviously very attractive community back from greatness? 

City government is at the core of the remaining detractors facing this community.  The city’s inability to effectively and efficiently govern are the hands pulling back the reins on a galloping city appearing destined for greatness. 

The city’s schools are a continuing embarrassment with a majority of schools failing to be accredited and a majority of third graders unable to read at grade level.  Crumbling roads and bridges cast a pall on the city’s appearance and resident safety.  City leaders appear unable to restrain cost while consistently seeking additional sources of revenue.  Yet, reaching many important goals remain elusive year after year.

Its elected governing body, the City Council, is under constant pressure to address rising cost while attempting to protect its citizens from the burden of new requests for additional tax revenue.  All while the city’s schools and infrastructure crumble beneath them.

To achieve the greatness this city has strived for, city leadership must find the strength and wisdom necessary to dig deeply into the core issues of effectiveness and efficiency.  They must face the final obstacles to greatness and transform agencies of city government into the paragons of cost management and service delivery so often found in surrounding local government, as well as the private sector, right here in our community.   

In fact, if our Commonwealth’s own Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee’s (JLARC) charter could be altered to include exercising its powers on behalf of City Council, for say a single biennium, then possibly much good could be accomplished.  JLARC is credited with assisting the Commonwealth in its recognition for being among the most well-run states in the union.  Having personally observed JLARC in action, the city would be well served to have this level of independent review by such a prestigious body.

For many years Richmond has been regarded as a poorly managed city.  All of Richmond’s citizens, and those of the affected surrounding communities, deserve better.

Who wouldn’t want a cushy life?  This is not a description of the life of the rich and famous, cushy as it may appear. That life is one you are born into, or, having the ability (as well as the grit and good fortune) to turn a bit of brilliance into the American dream.  No, this is not about that.

This is more about that other American dream.  The one where you work hard.  Not just at your job but the harder work of making a better life.  It starts early in life with good parental guidance.  Working hard at school to have a shot.  Working hard on becoming a better person.  Working hard, really hard, on life skills to give yourself the tiniest of openings.  

And let’s say you, with great tenacity and decent intellect, manage to squeeze through that crack.  Well that’s not the end, its just the beginning!  Even with a decent start, and an amazing spouse/life partner by your side, the slaps in the face and the gut punches just keep coming.  The tests of your character, intestinal fortitude, integrity, physical stamina and intelligence are one tsunami after another the rest of the way……..until your eyes close for the last time.

In this following excerpt of the script from the television series “Deadwood” Season 2 episode 19, one of these tsunami-like challenges has come the way of the owner of the camp’s newspaper The Pioneer. In raw, Americana Shakespearean prose the last paragraph crystalizes this notion most succinctly.

(Early morning at the camp, we see Al open a door…)

Al:       Did you know this fucking walkway connected us? 

Merrick:         (Sitting below, at his desk at the Pioneer) Several of your patrons, in different stages of undress, have illuminated me.

Al:       (Closes door) What happened there? (Walks downstairs)

Merrick:         Not only was my press disabled, but my office was ransacked and feces mounded in the corner.  A message of objection to my handling of Yankton’s notice on the claims.

Al:       Posting rather than publishing, huh?

Merrick:         The camp’s new school teacher, a lovely woman, was so traumatized by what happened that she left!

Al:       Cy Tolliver.

Merrick:         Who didn’t even trouble, when confronted, to deny it.

Al:       (Sits, lets out a sigh) Why ain’t you up and running again?

Merrick:         I’m in despair.  The physical damage is repairable, but the psychic wound may be permanent.

Al:       (Leans forward, concern on his face.) You ever been beaten, Merrick?

Merrick:         (Rolls his eyes) Once, when I thought I had the smallpox, Doc Cochran slapped me in the face. (Al slaps him quickly) Ah! (He stares at Al, touching his cheek – he leans forward) Stop it, Al.

Al:       Are you dead?

Merrick:         Well, (touches cheek) I’m in pain, but no, I’m obviously not dead.

Al:       And obviously you didn’t fucking die when the Doc slapped you.

Merrick:         No.

Al:       So including last night, that’s three fucking damage incidents that didn’t kill you.  Pain or damage don’t end the world, or despair or fuckin’ beatin’s.  The world ends when you’re dead.  Until then, you got more punishment in store.  Stand it like a man—and give some back.¹

Besides the brilliance of the writing, acting and production design of Deadwood, it brings a wide-eyed, lucid parable to the screen about truth.  Deadwood is both a wistful window and a harsh portrait that Shakespeare would find admirable. Its most prophetic message is about the truth.  The truth that “free” is more than a myth, it’s a dangerous lie of evil origin.  Only hard work, risk-taking (amid many imminent potentially “deadly” dangers), some good fortune, an ability to ride the many ups-and-downs, and an impenetrable resolve to succeed brings the mere possibility of survival and a good life.

Anyone……anyone…..politician, parent, professor, priest, rabbi, Imam, et al, who promises anything but a life mostly filled with struggle, especially in America (despite the delusional impression widely held outside this country, “easy street” it aint), is betraying whatever trust may exist with the person at hand.  Preparation for that struggle, physically, psychologically, educationally only affords you a shot at squeezing through that crack. Then its all uphill from there……

¹Episode 19: “E.B. Was Left Out”

“There’s no question about it: the corporate conservatives and their allies in the political and religious right are achieving a vast transformation of American life that only they understand because they are its advocates, its architects and its beneficiaries, in creating the greatest economic inequality in the advanced world, they have saddled our nation, our states and our cities and counties with structural deficits that will last until our children’s children are ready for retirement and they are systematically stripping government of all its functions except rewarding the rich and waging war.”

Bill Moyers

I am certain Mr. Moyers is a fine human being, but these gross exaggerations are not only inaccurate but serve to inflame and diminish the possibility of honest dialogue between the parties who must work together to solve the systemic problems of this nation.  Please, regardless of your political affiliation, hear me out to the end of this short piece.

Some simple facts.

• Cities, counties and states are statutorily prohibited from operating budgets containing deficits.  Every budget, every year must be balanced.
• Nearly 70%³ of the annual federal spending goes to the administration and delivery of wealth transfer programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and so-called welfare programs including cash assistance, healthcare and medical provisions, food assistance, housing subsidies, energy and utilities subsidies, education and childcare assistance, and subsidies and assistance for other basic services administered either at the federal or state and local level.
• That means 70% of deficit spending goes toward these expenditures.  Actually, these expenditures represent much more of the deficit if you remove defense spending, the Supreme Court and law enforcement, as well as the cost of the legislative & executive branch, all constitutionally mandated functions of the federal government.
• More federal debt, approximately 9 trillion, was accumulated during the Obama administration than the deficits accumulated by any previous administrations by trillions.¹
• The current total federal debt is approximately 20 trillion which exceeds the entire U.S. annual GDP (hopefully that scares the pants off you).  The current federal spending is approximately 4.5 trillion on revenues of 3.4 trillion.²
• In round figures the top 1% most wealthy have an average net worth of approximately 10 million dollars.   If the top 1% of the population is approximately 3.3 million people then their total approximate wealth is 33 trillion. 
• If you taxed the top 1% with a 10% wealth tax (well, first of all, you would unequivocally collapse the economy in an apocalyptic fashion, but for argument sake let’s say a socialistic president and legislature took power and enacted such a wealth tax) that’s 3.3 trillion per year in additional tax revenue.  If not a single additional dollar in federal spending were enacted, not “free” healthcare, “free” college”, the green new deal, none of it, it would be nearly a decade for the total federal debt to be paid back with federal spending frozen at the current level.

So lets face facts, none of that is going to happen.  Collapsing the economy in that way serves no one.  Given this reality, what can be done to address social justice issues like income disparity, the cost of education, the cost of healthcare and other topics like climate change?  Two primary realities must be addressed.  How do we raise taxes enough on the ultra-wealthy to reduce deficit spending to a manageable level and squeeze out enough after that to begin to reasonably fund programs to address the social injustice issues without driving the economy into recession? Of course, the trend line in deficit spending and the cost of social programs like Social Security and Medicare must be bent by affecting benefits for future generations. Because even a reasonable tax on the ultra-wealthy will not prevent insolvency for those programs.

That’s it.  Anything more radical than that, like re-raising taxes on businesses, would only serve to reduce GDP that will reduce tax revenues and reduce the federal government’s ability to spend more to make things better for those seen as being treated unjustly.  It has to be a reasonable plan that will probably take five to ten years to have a significant, measurable impact and not drive us into a low growth, high tax, perpetual state of misery, Euro-style economy where nothing material is accomplished.  Just ask the French how it’s going.

And there are those, economist and politician alike, whose incredulity would rupture the Richter scale, that this nation is basically at full employment with GDP in excess of 3% and still producing annual trillion-dollar deficits in federal spending.  Some aghast that federal tax revenues approximating 3.5 trillion is not enough to serve the needs of this nation.  Others will zero in on this as further evidence that supply-side economics are fantasy.  Regardless where you sit on that full spectrum, we are spending a TRILLION DOLLARS MORE EACH YEAR than we collect.  If we call it a 30% spending deficit then across the board 30% tax increases will only stop the current bleeding of red ink and offer nothing new in help.  The enormity of the problem cannot be overstated. 

So Mr. Moyers, can we please set aside the inuendo, the vague fact-free attacks and help us ease into a dialogue that can really start to help people who need it with a reasonable plan that has a real chance to succeed in the long term?  If we are going to have any sliver of hope for success, we must demand all the attack dogs (left and right) be silenced, or, minimally ignored, and allow reasonable men and women from both sides to begin material discussions about what is fiscally feasible in addressing the social justice issues before us.  Nothing meaningful can be accomplished in one year or maybe even one term but certainly in the next decade we can do what Americans have always done……find a way.

¹https://www.businessinsider.com/national-debt-deficit-added-under-president-barack-obama-2017-1

²https://www.pgpf.org/the-current-federal-budget-deficit

³Chart below – Obama Administration proposed total 2015 spending – Source OMB – https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&id=44AF99C5E38441EFE27FD6AE5F7D9BD05CB326AD&thid=OIP.wUuh6e0eYXD0apQoLdNkAgHaFf&mediaurl=http%3A%2F%2Fbluedasher.co%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2018%2F09%2Fgovernment-spending-pie-chart-2018-federal.jpg&exph=480&expw=648&q=Federal+Spending+Chart+2018&selectedindex=15&ajaxhist=0&vt=0&eim=1,2,6

It appears the most progressive members of society are in a frenzied rush to homogenize all the world’s people.  They want to eliminate any sort of ethnic identity.  Their assertion is that ethnicity is at the root of all the troubles with the world.  The assumption is this will create a world where someone’s appearance or religion or ethnic origin is indiscernible from the next person.  A world where ethnicity, race and even physical appearance will be blended into a human race devoid of differences.  Skin color, eye color, physical stature, facial features will all disappear as differences into a homogenized, androgynous, atheist global persona.

This may indeed be a cure for all that ills the human species on this planet, or it may not.   They speculate the need for constructs like religion or sovereign states would fade away.  Without those constructs war among “tribes” would be devoid of purpose as tribes would only be an artifact of ancient history.  That “tribalism” is the root of evil as it may be described.

This notion of tribalism as a source of evil is one conceived of, or fashioned by, Former President Barrack Obama in his public addresses on tribalism.  Here’s an example from the Chicago Tribune.

—————————

Obama warns against ‘a crude sort of nationalism’ or ‘tribalism’ taking root in the U.S.

President Barack Obama warned Tuesday that Americans and people around the world “are going to have to guard against a rise in a crude sort of nationalism, or ethnic identity, or tribalism” taking root amid the populist movements that are gaining currency around the world.

“We are going to have to guard against a rise in a crude sort of nationalism, or ethnic identity or tribalism that is built around an us and a them, and I will never apologize for saying that the future of humanity and the future of the world is going to be defined by what we have in common, as opposed to those things that separate us and ultimately lead us into conflict,” Obama said.

“Take Europe,” he continued. “We know what happens when Europeans start dividing themselves up and emphasizing their differences and seeing a competition between various countries in a zero-sum way. The 20th century was a bloodbath.”

“In the United States we know what happens when we start dividing ourselves along the lines of race or religion or ethnicity. It is dangerous. It is dangerous, not just for the minority groups that are subjected to that kind of discrimination, or in some cases in the past, violence, but because we then don’t realize our potential as a country when we are preventing blacks or Latinos or Asians or gays or women from fully participating in the project of building American life,” he said.

“So my vision is right on that issue, and it may not always win the day in the short term in any particularly political circumstance, but I am confident it will win the day in the long term,” Obama added. “Because societies which are able to unify ourselves around values and ideals and character, and how we treat each other, and cooperation and innovation, ultimately are going to be more successful than societies that don’t.”¹

—————————-

Given a broader perspective, tribalism can be defined in more than one way and devoid of evil intent.  Former President Obama’s notion revolves around specific aspects of tribalism (race, religion and ethnicity) that certainly have been an incendiary force or cause of conflict, war and bloodshed between “tribes”.  Yet there are also some real positives in tribal affinity. 

On a very personal level, members of a tribe e.g., Scandinavians, Jews, Slovaks, Native Americans, Chinese, Mexican, among many, many others, find natural attraction in couples’ relationships, and a sense of personal security, among tribe members.  The notion of security is proven and profound. The attraction is deep-seated and multi-faceted.  It is physiological and psychological. 

In this excerpt from a piece on Psychology Today.com “Are We Attracted to People Who Look Like Us?”², the reality of who we are attracted to and why, finds some scientific basis. 

————————

As it turns out, then, we are much more likely to fall for someone who looks like us or our opposite-sex parent. This may indicate that our incest taboos are social constructs instituted to prevent people from following their instincts. However, there are other explanations of why we are attracted to people who look like us.

Researchers at the deCODE Genetics company in Reykjavik, reporting in a 2008 issue of Science, found that marriages between third or fourth cousins in Iceland tended to produce more children and grandchildren than those between completely unrelated individuals. The researchers suggest that marrying third and fourth cousins may be optimal for reproduction because this degree of genetic similarity may produce the best gene pool. Sibling and first-cousin couples, were they to mate, could have inbreeding problems, whereas couples genetically far-removed from each other could have genetic incompatibilities. Third- and fourth-cousin couples, though, tend to be genetically compatible while having no serious inbreeding problems.

At first glance, such findings seem to go against the so-called “Westermarck effect,” which posits that people who grow up together are disposed not to fall in love with each other after they reach sexual maturity. But the Westermarck effect—based on a series of studies done by Finnish anthropologist Edvard Westermark—actually is consistent with the recent findings—living in close proximity is no doubt the decisive factor for desensitization in terms of sexual attraction, not the degree of the individuals’ resemblance.  in fact, the Westermarck effect has been confirmed, in the Israeli kibbutz system of communal living, in which people who grow up together are typically not directly related to each other and do not look alike. And consider how traditional sim pua marriages, mostly dating from pre-modern Taiwan, also confirm Westermarck’s theory: Sim pua means “little daughter in-law.” In the system, a female infant is given to a family to be reared as their own daughter. When she grows up, she is to marry a son in that family. But sim pua marriages have produced a low fertility rate, a high divorce rate, frequent adultery, and lack of sexual attraction. In some cases, the son or “daughter-in-law” has refused to marry their destined-for spouse. So, the degree to which a couple resembles each other could be a defining factor in relationship satisfaction after all.²

————————-

Not to say this is an absolute, and more frequently than ever successful trans-tribe relationships are occurring.  Without a doubt, when the possibility presents itself, do what makes you happy.  One of the most important and unique American constitutional rights is the pursuit of happiness.  But, none of us should be made to feel as though we are Neanderthals because we have strong positive feelings about our connection to our tribal origins.  We are attracted to who we are attracted to, simply as that.  We are attracted to potential partners for any number of possible combination of reasons.  For centuries attempts to force couple relationships, for political alliance or cultural reasons, nearly always end in disaster and unhappiness. There appears to be strong evidence that this tribal affinity thing is a significant force in who we love, who we are comfortable around, who makes us feel safe and with whom we procreated.   

This homogenized, borderless, raceless, religion-free society some desire may be coming our way as humans.  Those in the media and the like, that produce the images we all see every day, wish to portray us as well down that path.  It just isn’t so.  It will have to overcome many millennia of tribalism, deeply seated in our very being, to become the dominant human condition globally.

¹https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-president-obama-greece-20161115-story.html

¹http://saharareporters.com/2016/09/21/obama-condemns-racism-tribalism-final-un-speech#.XKRP8Dsylcw.email

²https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-mysteries-love/201505/are-we-attracted-people-who-look-us

Seriously, have you thought about it?  There, it did it again, where did that last moment just go?  We were there, it was as real as anything can be, and now it’s gone.  Where in the vast universe and beyond does the past, a second ago and ancient past, go? It has to go somewhere doesn’t it?

Many have tried to explain it.  The notion of entropy, in the “arrow of time”, is presented as an irreversibility.  That the universe is a system with a certain known macrostate order regardless of the variability of what occurs in the microstate.  That the cosmological arrow of time points in the direction of the universe’s expansion (above diagram²). It may be linked to the thermodynamic arrow, with the universe heading towards a heat death (Big Chill) as the amount of usable energy becomes negligible.¹   That the radiative arrow of time moves away from its source, with a causal arrow of time notion that each event has a cause with the causal event preceding the event. 

,An epistemological problem with using causality as an arrow of time is that, as David Hume maintained, the causal relation, per se, cannot be perceived; one only perceives sequences of events. Furthermore, it is surprisingly difficult to provide a clear explanation of what the terms cause and effect really mean, or to define the events to which they refer. However, it does seem evident that dropping a cup of water is a cause while the cup subsequently shattering and spilling the water is the effect. ¹

Physically speaking, the perception of cause and effect in the dropped cup example is a phenomenon of the thermodynamic arrow of time, a consequence of the second law of thermodynamics.  Controlling the future, or causing something to happen, creates correlations between the doer and the effect, and these can only be created as we move forwards in time, not backwards.¹

All of this speaks to the how of time passing but nothing of the location of the past beyond our own memories.  Does it pass into a new universal dimension?  Some papers theorize that the past does remain physically with us, no different than the present.  That the future is out there in the ether waiting to “happen”.  So, if the past is somehow physically available, how do we, or is it possible to, “visit” the past as well as the future?  These are all notions considered by what’s called the “A Theorists and the B Theorists”.

The “A Theorists” notions are akin to the Arrow of Time view with us traveling down a metaphorical “road”.    There is the past, the portion of the road already traveled, the present, and the future, the portion of the road yet to be traveled.  The A Theorists propose that the past may be a “real thing” that exists beyond just in our memory.  Those subscribing to a physical past appear to gain support from the nature of mathematical space-time.  The metaphysical view has the past only existing in memory.

The “B Theorists” in contrast, suggest the past and the future have the same physical or metaphysical status of existence as the present. The “Bs” theorize that the future does exist but has an element of indeterminacy, with a kind of physical free will causality.  It is said that time travel buffs bend more toward the “B” perspective with a more metaphysical view as time travel presents a number of very difficult mathematical obstacles.

So, if the past does physically exist could we travel to it?  Wouldn’t we have to travel faster than time?  If we could travel to the past, in what state would we be in?  If the past were physical is it still like a photograph or fluid like video or film?  Could we interact with it or is it as fixed as our memory of it? 

Future generations may conceive of and create answers to these many questions, problems and conundrums.  When we stop to think about what just occurred, there, that moment that just past, whether cosmically consequential or not, it would be fascinating to know if that moment still exist somewhere not just in our memory.

¹https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time

²https://www.quora.com/Does-the-past-still-exist

Although the Virginia General Assembly 2019 session was very active including passing several bills that can be described as positive for the commonwealth, there were also a couple important misses.  The bills passed must yet either be signed by the governor or survive veto challenges.

The most important of these is the new budget.  The budget had to address the thorny issue of federal tax conformity.  What was approved, for the most part, was in the best interest of the commonwealth.  Most importantly it achieved the goal of ensuring the governor wasn’t allowed to abscond with a billion-dollar tax increase, that he would have spent primarily on wealth transfer programs, and returned the majority of the unintended tax increase to the taxpayers.  In fairness some social programs, much desired by the left, were funded in negotiations with the Democrats. Notable among several other accomplishments of the session is a pilot program to address homelessness at its core by preventing evictions.  This could have a backfiring effect in that those wishing to rent their properties will be more risk adverse in selecting potential renters.   Homelessness is an ever present and growing problem where remedies for those at risk, and in need of some support to return to regular rent payments, should be made available.

Ranking high on the list of importance was addressing the issue of redistricting and the legacy of gerrymandering in the state.  Efforts to place the 2020 census redistricting responsibility in the hands of an independent commission appears reasonable and in line with efforts in other states.  Commissions will be as imperfect as the human beings who inhabit them.  But something had to be done to bring greater fairness back to representation for all citizens as intended by our founding fathers.

Now to a couple misses that were just so puzzling.

First and foremost among these is the failure to outlaw handheld mobile phone calls while driving a motor vehicle.  For all of us who have suffered foolish distracted drivers while holding a mobile phone to their ear, this is the biggest no-brainer of the decade.  Handsfree, Bluetooth calls should be allowed but still can be distracting.  A kissing cousin to texting (already outlawed), the use of a mobile phone by drivers to do anything requiring use of a keypad (other than handsfree use of a mapping/directional application) should also be made illegal.

The second failure in my mind, certainly not a no-brainer but loaded with commonsense, was the failure to decriminalize the use of marijuana.  Authorizing recreational use may be a “bridge too far” at this point in Virginia, although there are many sound reasons to consider this in the near future.  But to create criminality in those who are not doing anything different than what is possible with alcoholic beverages defies logic.  Over crowded jails and prisons, providing informal schools of criminality for fresh inmates whose only crime was marijuana use, just exacerbates the troubles with the already overburdened criminal justice system.

Finally, a mention of disappointment in the retention of the Pease limitation¹ on tax deductions for high earning taxpayers.  Eliminated in the new federal tax code, Virginia’s attempt at federal conformity conveniently failed to eliminate the Pease limitation.  Those who believe high earning families should pay taxes at a significantly higher rate will cheer this disparity with the federal tax code.  The charitable organizations who rely on large contributions from these same families may not.

¹It works by reducing the value of a taxpayer’s itemized deductions by 3 percent for every dollar of taxable income above a certain threshold ($254,200 single; $305,050 married). The phase-out of the value of itemized deductions is capped at 80 percent of the total value of itemized deductions. Due to its structure, Pease is not really a limitation on itemized deductions, but rather a stealth surtax on high-income individuals.¹https://www.bing.com/search?q=pease+tax&qs=HS&pq=pease&sc=8-5&cvid=1AF0672E650C4D1097DD1B75D00F426C&FORM=QBLH&sp=1 taxfoundation.org/pease-limitation-itemized-deductions-really-surtax f

• 

Over the past few years Richmond Virginia has and is experiencing a bit of a resurgence, even a renaissance.  There are many factors that have played a role.  The rapid, dynamic and exciting growth of Virginia Commonwealth University is clearly a major factor along with strong, rapidly expanding technology driven employers like Capital One and CARMAX.  A broad attempt by the community to create an attractive environment for Millennials and Gen-Zers to live and work downtown.  The creation of rapid growth and gentrification zones in the city like, Tobacco Row, Scott’s Addition and Manchester.  Zones, created by forward thinking city leaders, that are attracting commercial, residential and dining/entertainment development.

A significant factor that has drawn national attention to Richmond is the food scene.   The quantity and quality of restaurant choices has been a major contributor to Richmond consistently being named a Top Destination for food travel.  Here are a few other recent bits of recognition for Richmond as a destination for many good reasons.

• Southern Living Magazine names Richmond one of the South’s Best Cities in 2017.
• Realtor.com lists Richmond as one of the top ten up-and-coming tech cities. in 2017.
• Richmond is ranked the 24th best place to live by U.S. News & World Report, February 2017.
• Richmond named to ‘Best Places to Live and Work as a Moviemaker, 2017’ by MovieMaker.
• Richmond ranked a Top 10 City for Global Trade in the United States by Global Trade Magazine, September 2016.
• Richmond named one of 20 best places in America to start a business by CNBC.com, August 2016.
• Richmond named among America’s 50 best running cities, by Runner’s World, August 2016.
• Richmond named a top city for creatives, by Thrillist, July 2016.
• Richmond named a “top destination” for food travel in 2016 by National Geographic.
• Richmond named the 28th best place to live in the U.S. by U.S. News & World Report. March 2016.
• Richmond earns #3 ranking of “Best Places to Travel in 2016” by Travel & Leisure, December 2015.

With many nationally recognized positive attributes, what is holding Richmond back from its full potential? For example, Richmond as a realistic contender for such honors as Amazon’s second headquarters city.  Many of the blemishes are the result of the same affliction that affects so many of the world’s great cities; bloated, inefficient government. The problems impact both government services functions and the school system’s ability to produce top performing student populations.  Both are high profile failures of decades of ineffective leadership.  But visitors don’t see the root causes, they see the manifestations; crumbling infrastructure (roads and bridges are a complete embarrassment) and inadequate public transit.

So why must this be the case; why can’t they get it right?  Two primary problems, inadequate revenues and inefficiency.

Revenues are inadequate primarily due to a shrinking tax base and low yields.  The city benefits in many ways by having state government and the rapidly expanding Virginia Commonwealth University within the city limits.  But property taxes are not one of the benefits.  This negatively impacts yields and requires the city to impose higher tax rates on the remaining taxable property.  It creates the perception the city imposes its lack of sound fiscal management on its property owners.  A tax rate nearly 40% high than surrounding communities; essentially a tangible cost of “city living”. 

Richmond city government is notorious for the perception of inefficient and ineffective city services. A recent example is a news report with local contractors complaining about delays and errors in acquiring permits.  This one among a litany of historically consistent grievances in a wide-ranging list from leaf collection service to crime.  But city leadership, all elected officials, must attempt to address the dichotomy of wishing to eliminate waste, so funds can be diverted to areas of great need, and the public perception of heartlessness in weeding out inefficiency; including eliminating positions that are also held by city voters.  Many of these potentially disenfranchised city workers would be significantly challenged to find new comparable work.  Attempts at gained efficiencies with deep personnel cuts can be carcinogenic to a politician’s future even though it may be the exact right thing to do for the greater good.

So, what will it take to break this cycle?  It takes courageous city leadership.  As painful as this prospect sounds, those who chose to live in the city must do it with the understanding that they must do the following.

• A willingness to pay higher tax rates in order to mitigate the state government/VCU impact and fund improved infrastructure and schools
• To elect city officials who will do what is necessary to wring out waste and bring greater efficiency to city government while balancing these efforts with the human impact
• A top priority must be to reverse the increasing trend of failure in the results produced by the city school system – for the future of the city nothing is more important
• Demand more from city departments to improve the effectiveness and efficiency in working with city procurement of goods and services while providing improved services to the public/businesses
• Support community planners to bring more residential and commercial development into the city

As astute a politician as there may be in this state, Mayor Levar Stoney has courageously proposed just such a plan.  May he find the level of success with his proposals necessary to put the city on a path of improving a devastatingly weak school system, equally poor infrastructure and the attractiveness of the city to outside interests of many varieties.

Like virtually anything else in this modern world of ours, especially in the world of politics, the topic is complicated.  Even in the most beautifully designed political structure ever experienced by man, the relatively simple notion of one citizen one vote, the citizen can become a pawn in a highly charged U.S. political chess game.  The game is fair representation.  Since all of us cannot be present to cast a vote in every venue where official political action takes place, we engage surrogates or, as we often call them, representatives.  The U.S. Constitution calls out how that system of representation will be structured.  Without getting into the particulars, the intent is fair representation.

So, as a citizen, how can you be certain that your “representative” is voting as if it were you casting the vote?  Well, simply, you cannot.  Unless of course you live in a representative’s respective district where that representative is elected by a majority of like-minded voters in your district.  And for many, many years you could, as a citizen with the means to do so, reside in a district that reflected your values.  Those values would be guideposts by which your elected representative should cast her vote on your behalf. There have been, and continue to be, social engineering attempts made to bring families into communities or districts, using affordable housing, in order to primarily provide better educational opportunities.  From a voting strength perspective the effect was and is a bit dilutive for those citizens already struggling to be heard.

Gerrymandering, by whatever body was empowered to redraw districts as a result of new census data, used methods like “cracking” or “packing” among others to retain power for the incumbents.  The empowered bodies efforts have been largely successful for decades because the political voice of those it potentially harmed was not strong enough to effect change.

“Cracking” involves spreading voters of a particular type among many districts in order to deny them a sufficiently large voting bloc in any particular district. Political parties in charge of redrawing district lines may create more “Cracked” districts as a means of retaining, and possibly even expanding, their legislative power. By “Cracking” districts, a political party would be able to maintain, or gain, legislative control by ensuring that the opposing party’s voters are not the majority in specific districts.¹

Conversely, “Packing” is to concentrate as many voters of one type into a single electoral district to reduce their influence in other districts.¹   This is equally effective in maintaining a measure of control on how the electorate is represented.

These tactics are typically combined in some form, creating a few “forfeit” seats for packed voters of one type in order to secure more seats and greater representation for voters of another type. This results in candidates of one party (the one responsible for the gerrymandering) winning by small majorities in most of the districts, and another party winning by a large majority in only a few of the districts.¹

So how, in this world of wide-eyed, instantaneous journalism, are these practices allowed to continue knowing full well it may rob the system of the fairness it calls out as its mightiest principal?  Regardless of mainstream media’s apparently lack of zeal on the topic, the reality is it appears to be coming to an end. Although it is with great certainty that “Redistricting Commissions” are full of political appointees with their own clear-eyed view of what is fair, the process of selection, at least in some states, appears to carry the torch of fairness as far as it can go with flawed human beings involved. The result will be, it seems, increased fairness.

“Fairness to whom?”, you might ask.  Simply, power to those who have not had the power to gerrymander themselves back into office.  Stacking the deck in their personal favor or their party’s favor.  But more generally, its purpose is positively affect the political impact of those in the minority and those without the financial resources to win elections in today’s political environment. Ostensibly taking the power from the legislature and putting it in the hands of “independent” commissioners.

This new approach, combined with the relentless force of demographic change, will certainly hasten the path to larger liberal voting blocs across a broader array of districts.  Great power will still be in the hands of a relatively few state and national leaders. Those leaders will emerge from the current stock of Millennials (as they already are on today’s political stage) and, later in the 2020s, Generation Z; both whose numbers are larger and more diverse than previous generations.

If this trend toward more independent redistricting continues there’ll be no Gerry in Gerrymandering.  In fact, the term may go by the wayside of history as a forgotten problem in a forgotten time.  Something that was done in the past. Until some other scheme to rig the system in one party’s favor or another is stumbled upon.

¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering