Dean excused himself after he helped Margo wrestle her luggage into the house. He stowed her things in the guest bedroom and went into Tara’s bedroom. The moment his head hit the jasmine-scented pillowcase, he was asleep.
Thank you for stopping by tonight. Over the last couple days we have been discussing the paradigm shift when it comes to war. Make no mistake, this is not solely an American issue, although some of the responses have tailored portions of tonight’s discussion as American.
Talk Tuesday
Background
The pertinent posts (which will all open in other tabs) are:
I am only going to pull a few points out for background:
The treatment of veterans has gone from venerated to abhorred to something in between.
The generation of the protesters of wars in the 1950-1960s are the same generation who is currently legislating war efforts around the globe.
The economical ethic of the world has changed from The Silent Generation to The Baby Busters. All generations have embraced the economic benefit of war to some degree.
Comments
Some of the comments which lead us here include:
From Val: I think it was shortly after that I chained myself to the first fence in protest of the Vietnam War, I have been protesting every war since then. We had it wrong back then, blaming the young men who served rather than the old men who sent them to hell. I think we understand better now at least who and what is behind the curtain. Certainly it doesn’t change the fundamental suction, but perhaps it changes our response, our humanity, our compassion and our empathy for those who give and lose so much.
9-11-2001
From Ted: Will we ever be out of the war business? History tells us no. When we weaken our military we get attacked… Our leaders need to think long and hard before sending our brave men and women into battle. Once they make the decision to commit troops they need to give them the objective and get out of the way… The other thing that should not happen is politicians using a conflict for personal gain. How many members of congress voted to go into Iraq and Afghanistan after 9-11, only later to use the conflict for some political gain. The senators and congressman that did these things should be ashamed and there constituents should remove them from office.
From Angie: I think the elders saw the value of war. It was consequence after drawing a line in the sand and having others cross it. It wasn’t something anyone wanted, but they understood why it sometimes needed to happen.
From John: I do think change and the rat race were fueled by the illusion of wealth rather than actual wealth. Perhaps the acceptance of war was part of that illusion, an unwillingness to look behind the curtain, a willingness to be led, a forgetting to ask why.
From Andro: I guess that greed is one of the main factors and unfortunately the greedy are getting even greedier, perhaps one day the smaller voices will be heard and some common sense will prevail but when?
From Bear: Unfortunately, war is a big business and the people who run our country, and have run our country in the past, got a share of the pie, whether it was oil, gold or property. To pin it down, we let our government start confrontations in the name of freedom/oil. If we do not win the conflict, then we are told we will run out of oil… Then we might have to stay home with the kids.
From Prenin: Trouble is that we have been taught that we are the good guys and ‘they’ are the bad guys, while ‘they’ are willing to die to defeat ‘us’ who are seen as the Great Satan, or the supreme bad guys.
Gathered around the news.
From Rachael: The prior generation was raised on the ideals of WWII -when our country was in real physical danger and so many family members in Europe were fighting for their lives every day. Come the late 1950′s and the 1960′s Washington couldn’t get their heads around the fact that Vietnam was something utterly different. A power struggle. And it was all beamed live and in color to our television each night.
Let’s Talk
We have identified some of the attitudes which keep us as a warring people. What do you think? Please answer all three questions. Feel free to join any comment thread. Talk to each other!
If the universal goal was one which would benefit all humanity, what would it take for all nations to band together? (Example: Clean water supply worldwide)
Would the adoption of a world economy solve the issue of greed and national conflict?
What have you done personally to change the prevailing attitude of war? (Consider actions involving your children, colleagues, friends and family.)
(c) Ann Marie Dwyer 2012 Reblogging of this or any other post on Momma’s Money Matters is expressly forbidden. Copyright and Privacy Policy available in The Office.
Forgive my tardiness, but a body needs to sleep. And then, adjust to the new time zone, rain, new flipping coffee pot with an attitude, breakfast… Then, process the information provided. Then, reread comments posted on other posts. Then, compare them. Then, scratch head.
If you were not tuned into yesterday’s noon post, you may need to flip back there to see what we are discussing. It will only one part of today’s Talk Tuesday. You see, this discussion did not begin in yesterday’s post. In fact, it began with a poem. (For all you artists who think poetry is for wimps and serves no purpose…tune into this.)
Now, the posts will give you a bit to chew, but the comments are where the potatoes, salad and meade are. We are on our way to the dessert.
Break it Down
I asked four questions yesterday, but felt like there was some confusion as to what I was asking. The questions were:
Think about the change in values from the Depression Era parents to the Baby Boomers.
With the condensed (and necessarily politically incomplete) version of the history above, what attitude change caused the reversal of the acceptance of war?
Is economic priority shift the sole cause for the change in attitude toward war?
How does this translate to the war attitudes with which Baby Boomers have raised their children?
To which generation do you belong and what is the pervasive war attitude of the generation:
Jones (1954-1964)
X (Baby Busters, 1965-1981)
Y (Millenials, 1982-1993)
Z (Internet Generation, 1994-present)
One, two, three, four...
Let me break it down into more manageable bites (without giving away my answers):
Taking into account the shift in the global attitude toward wealth, credit and family finance (fortunes, disposable income, personal spending); the prevalence of war in the current time (last fifty years in Middle East, Africa, South America, Asia); and current engagement of (or lack thereof) diplomacy as a viable method to preclude armed hostility…which paradigm shift is most responsible for the current acceptance of war? (This question does not assume the answer is one of the ones listed in the post or the question nor that such answer is not a combination of factors.)
This one is pretty clear. Yes or No suffices…for now.
More than one comment points to the monetary angle being pivotal in the declaration and maintenance of war. How does the attitude toward money change the attitude toward war, if it does?
Your generation feels a specific way about war, with obvious exceptions, possibly you. If you do not know what your contemporaries feel, just give your personal attitude. If you do not know which generation is yours, use the years above and this addendum:
Lost Generation (1883-1900)
Greatest Generation (The GI Generation 1901-1924)
Silent Generation (Depression Era 1925-1945)
I thought you said...
Wait a cotton-picking minute!
Before you jump to answering, think about what you read in Philanthropy is not just for old rich people. Some of the comments there contradict some of the attitudes shown thus far. I am left wondering which one is the most pervasive. If you flip-flopped from the Philanthropy post to the World post, let me know why.
Destination?
John is correct. This is leading somewhere. I will tie together four posts in the focus of Talk Tuesday (which barring a flood or a satellite falling through the sky will be on time @ 2000 EDT, GMT -5). I hope you will be back to see where this discussion leads.
Please, please, please, please….
This post, like the other two, are not not not NOTNOT about the causes of wars. This is not a political forum. The focus of this is very narrow: Why, when and how did our attitude on war change?
(c) Ann Marie Dwyer 2012 Reblogging of this or any other post on Momma’s Money Matters is expressly forbidden. Copyright and Privacy Policy available in The Office.
Do you believe everything you hear? Everyone I have ever asked that question has answered, “No.” But were they telling me the truth?
Urban Wives
You know, if you just...
Urban legends are the information age’s answer to the old wives’ tale of the baby boomer generation. They are the same thing, in a word: myths.
Over the ages, challenging myths has always been a thankless and unwelcome pursuit. Once convinced of something, many people are not willing to put forth the effort to look into another point of view. It is too easy just to take the word of someone that they know. After all, no one would lie to you, right?
As long as we are willing to take the word of someone we trust as truth, myths and superstitions will live on. The next time someone debunks a myth, take a minute to find out if they are right.
Here are a few to get you started:
Raising your arms over your head while pregnant will not cause the umbilical cord to wrap around the baby’s neck.
There is no such thing as a tidal wave. Google tsunami.
A black cat crossing your path is not a warning of bad luck.
The lion is not the king of the jungle. He lives in the savanna, not the jungle.
Circling the wagons in the Old West was to keep livestock inside, not the Indians out.
Dogs sweat through their feet, not by panting.
Mostly Zinc.
Pennies minted after 1982 are made of 97.5% zinc, only 2.5% copper.
The sky is black. Light refracted through moisture and dust in the atmosphere make it appear blue.
On a clear night, the most stars you could possibly see without a telescope is around 4,000, not millions.
No one is double-jointed, but many are more flexible than others.
Turning a child upside down will not flip his liver, or any other internal organ.
Seeing a raven is not a sign of impending death.
Sitting too close to the television will not make you go blind, but it might make your eyes tired.
Stepping on a rusty nail will not give you tetanus. Tetanus infection is caused by a bacteria, not rust.
Stress does not cause baldness, but it might make your hair fall out.
Spilling salt does not bring bad luck.
WD-40 is not a lubricant (read the label), it is a degreaser.
Cigarettes do not cause cancer, but they do promote or exacerbate cancer.
Waves are not caused by lunar gravitational pull, but tides are.
Crickets chirp by rubbing their wings together, not their legs.
Acne is not a reaction to chocolate, carbonated drinks or potato chips, but is caused by bacteria in the pores.
Cats in the cradle do not steal the baby’s breath, but they may suffocate one trying to get spilt milk off of the baby.
Lightning comes from the ground, not the sky.
Mosquitoes pierce skin with a proboscis. They have no teeth and do not bite.
Remember, as society begins to accept a belief as fact, it becomes a colloquialism. Read definitions carefully, as words can be misleading. Just because you have always heard it, does not mean it is true. After all, Copernicus had always heard the world was flat.
~~~~~~~~~~
What are some old wives’ tales you know for a fact are false? Can you think of more than three? Did you believe any of the ones debunked here?
(c) Ann Marie Dwyer 2012 Reblogging of this or any other post on Momma’s Money Matters is expressly forbidden. Copyright and Privacy Policy available in The Office.