Government, whether national, parochial, or familial is instituted as a means of protection. Government is an ordering and structuring of society for the "common good'. Good government does not oppress, but gives a frame to live a "peaceful" life. Scriptures commend us to pray for government, so that our lives may be peaceful. But, what of reform or revolution, then?
Traditional "biblical" Christians are taught to submit, as 'this is the will of God in Christ Jesus, concerning you". This scripture is written with the assumption that "god controls" the events of life. This view is not affriming of what science knows to be true about time, the cosmos, and systems. Therefore, "biblical Christianity" does not exist, except in one's head. Personally, I find telling someone a "myth" to soothe their suffering, or soothe their conscience, is being dishonest.
But, theology has sought to bring about "hope" to give a reason in difficult situations or times. These theological "musings" are offensive, and can be horrendously oppressive.
The political realm is where "life happens". Politics drives policy, but ideas are what drive politics. The philosophical arguments about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is really where the battle should be waged.
Every human has life, but all do not have quality or liberty of life, much less the political freedom to pursue happiness. These are the practical issues that policy seeks to address on a global scale, but how? Liberty is not won except by exposing the costs of tyranny.
Alexander Solzhenitsyn, a political dissident for the U.S.S.R., in the March 15, 1976 article in U.S. News and World Report, said:
"Tyrants, bandits, puppets have come to power and pragmatice philosophy says: That
doesn't matter, we have to recognize them. And what is more, one should not consider
that the great principles of freedom finish at your own frontiers, that as long as you
have freedom, let the rest have pragmatism. No. Freedom is indivisible, and one has to
take a moral attitude toward it" (pg. 23).
The human heart is meant for freedom, and good government should allow freedom to the individual to pursue his own ends. Tyrannical governments have used many means to oppress; bad laws, no law, and God.
"All men are created equal with certain inalienable rights", "with liberty and justice for all", these are quotes that any American knows, and I hope, values. The principle is the value of the individual and the freedom that justice provides. No one should suffer under the hands of bad government, but most in this world, do. Americans do not live with fear of government interference in their private lives nor do we fear government paranoia, where government intrusively invades our physical space to demand an accounting.
Americans became a "people" because of the belief that none should be diminished or repressed. The cry of the Revolution was "no taxation without Representation". A Representative Republic "ideally" holds the leaders accountable to the people, not the people to the government. And the accountbility of the leader to the people they represent is the "vote".
In our free society, we are to give feedback to our representatives, as our voice is to be valued. If leaders are blind to the needs, values, suggestions of their people, then they have ceased to represent, and have become figure-heads or bandits of our treasury.
Free societies are only as free as the press. The press has great power in giving information to the people in our free society, but if the information is skewed, or suppressed, then the press is undermining our freedom, not just of the pertinent information, but our society as a whole. Again, let me quote Solzhenitsyn:
"The most important aspect of detente today is that there is not ideological detente. You
Western people simply can't grasp the power of Soviet propaganda."
Without free information, people are at the mercy of their rulers. I heard on a radio program yesterday, that some in our press are informed from the White House about news coverage. How one writes about the news can impact and influence public opinion. This adminstration obviously knows that without the press as a powerful weapon of reforming and revolutionizing our nation's values, "change" will not occur. Our society is to be an open and free one, but secret letters written by the President about national affairs, without accountability to Congress or the people, is acting without representing. The same independence of attitude was "applied" at Guantanamo Bay.
Government is a gift, but must be valued by responsible behavior. Leaders should be accountable, and the people fully informed. Otherwise, we are headed for the tyranny that Solzhenitsyn warned about. Americans must not allow that.
Showing posts with label the press. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the press. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
A Concern for America's Openness
There has been much talk about the closing of Guatanomo Bay. Last night I watched the press question the press secretary about where these people were to go and what they were to do. He really had no specific answers, which I wonder about.
Is it wise to release these people without investigating what to do with them? Does international law not protect us and them in giving them the right to trial? Is there to be a trial? I don't mean to cast a dark cloud over the closure, but I am questioning why there would not be some checks and balances....
Is it wise to release these people without investigating what to do with them? Does international law not protect us and them in giving them the right to trial? Is there to be a trial? I don't mean to cast a dark cloud over the closure, but I am questioning why there would not be some checks and balances....
Open Government and A New Era for America
There is something stirring within me, that I cannot quite put my finger on, except to say, that it resembles anticipation. Could it be HOPE?
This morning upon hearing that Obama wanted a more open government, by giving the Freedom of Information Act more power, unless there is real reason to with-hold information. This move is most important to the press in getting information and informing the public, which holds the government accountable! I couldn't be happier! This is great news!
While Obama, as well as Hillary, want to work toward more diplomatic ways to peace. This new commitment to transparency can help further that interest, by making information known to the world about our policies and our intentions.
We are a great nation, that has much responsibility towards others, as stewards. We should be about re-rhinking how our country should "work" and how our vision should be cast. I think that we are on a different and hopeful track. Don't you?
This morning upon hearing that Obama wanted a more open government, by giving the Freedom of Information Act more power, unless there is real reason to with-hold information. This move is most important to the press in getting information and informing the public, which holds the government accountable! I couldn't be happier! This is great news!
While Obama, as well as Hillary, want to work toward more diplomatic ways to peace. This new commitment to transparency can help further that interest, by making information known to the world about our policies and our intentions.
We are a great nation, that has much responsibility towards others, as stewards. We should be about re-rhinking how our country should "work" and how our vision should be cast. I think that we are on a different and hopeful track. Don't you?
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Moral Order, The Freedom of Speech and The Challenge to Change
Yesterday's post was about first and foremost, the freedom of speech given to the individual in our American culture. This is an important virtue in our culture because it gives people "a voice" and it is foundational to our free access to "news", as well as an implement of social change.
Just because our press is a free one, does not mean that our press is a moral one. The freedom of our press means that it is not governmentally controlled and because it is not controlled by the government, the government is accountable. The press, in this sense, is a balance of power, because it can reveal certain "news" that would not be beneficial for a politician's reelection. This is a good thing, as it can be an instrument of educating the people to maintain "freedom".
While the press can be useful and is useful, for the most part, for maintaining accountability in government, the press is fed by the "free market" mentality. "Sin" sells and what sells brings prosperity. And profit and prosperity is what ends up defining what stories are going to be pursued. "The market" drives journalists, publishers, reporters, and the news media, in general to be the first to "get the story". But, our society is not so much dedicated to informing themselves, as in entertaining themselves. This has cheapened the media and its purpose of keeping government accountable and the people informed.
Not only is the press benefitting on the "sins" of its leaders and poplace, but the media feeds the public with their own bias. Editorials do not belong in the headlines, but this, in my opinion, is what it has become. Everyone that cares enough to inform themselves, understands that there are liberal and conservative news coverage. And it becomes the public's responsibilty to flip the channels and/or buy two newpapers, if they want both sides to the story. Is there not a way to report a story without bias? I thought this was traditionally understood to be what the news media was about, giving unbiased news to inform the public. Now, I fear that the news media has another agenda, it own political agenda. Instead of educating the poplace, the media politicizes the news and campaigns for their candidate. We become a divided people that are ill-informed about the real issues, because we are focused on the politcalization of the media and the news, itself.
This is the downfall of a "free people", a disregard and a lack of appreciation of freedom. Freedom is not won without a costs and the costs are personal, as well as societal. The costs are our moral responsiblity. Our moral order demands that our freedom of speech be directed in ways that are edifying to our poplace and not just entertaining. The challenge to change might be a sacrificial one, as far as prosperity, but it just might make a difference to our society. Besides, writers are known to be creative and they can use their creativity to write note-worthy stories in an entertaining way to woo us off of pablum, so that we can be an informed and educated people. Without this change, our lost opportunity will be the furtherance of our moral demise. And our moral demise will inevitably limit our freedom in the future. There is nothing like a lack of informatin to enslave. But, our enslavement will be one chosen by default, unless the press changes and takes their responsibility seriously.
Just because our press is a free one, does not mean that our press is a moral one. The freedom of our press means that it is not governmentally controlled and because it is not controlled by the government, the government is accountable. The press, in this sense, is a balance of power, because it can reveal certain "news" that would not be beneficial for a politician's reelection. This is a good thing, as it can be an instrument of educating the people to maintain "freedom".
While the press can be useful and is useful, for the most part, for maintaining accountability in government, the press is fed by the "free market" mentality. "Sin" sells and what sells brings prosperity. And profit and prosperity is what ends up defining what stories are going to be pursued. "The market" drives journalists, publishers, reporters, and the news media, in general to be the first to "get the story". But, our society is not so much dedicated to informing themselves, as in entertaining themselves. This has cheapened the media and its purpose of keeping government accountable and the people informed.
Not only is the press benefitting on the "sins" of its leaders and poplace, but the media feeds the public with their own bias. Editorials do not belong in the headlines, but this, in my opinion, is what it has become. Everyone that cares enough to inform themselves, understands that there are liberal and conservative news coverage. And it becomes the public's responsibilty to flip the channels and/or buy two newpapers, if they want both sides to the story. Is there not a way to report a story without bias? I thought this was traditionally understood to be what the news media was about, giving unbiased news to inform the public. Now, I fear that the news media has another agenda, it own political agenda. Instead of educating the poplace, the media politicizes the news and campaigns for their candidate. We become a divided people that are ill-informed about the real issues, because we are focused on the politcalization of the media and the news, itself.
This is the downfall of a "free people", a disregard and a lack of appreciation of freedom. Freedom is not won without a costs and the costs are personal, as well as societal. The costs are our moral responsiblity. Our moral order demands that our freedom of speech be directed in ways that are edifying to our poplace and not just entertaining. The challenge to change might be a sacrificial one, as far as prosperity, but it just might make a difference to our society. Besides, writers are known to be creative and they can use their creativity to write note-worthy stories in an entertaining way to woo us off of pablum, so that we can be an informed and educated people. Without this change, our lost opportunity will be the furtherance of our moral demise. And our moral demise will inevitably limit our freedom in the future. There is nothing like a lack of informatin to enslave. But, our enslavement will be one chosen by default, unless the press changes and takes their responsibility seriously.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
