We have a new contributor who will discuss sports: The Raven. If you like any sport other than women’s beach volleyball, you can discuss it here. The Raven doesn’t cover any sport that doesn’t involve grass, astro-turf, wooden floors or clay, so sandy beaches are outside of his knowledge base. Welcome, Danny “The Raven” to That Grinds My Gears.
I attended a seminar last night presented by a psychologist specializing in treating emotional trauma with an emphasis in PTSD. He said a few things I really, really liked and would like to share them here.
First, crisis issues precipitate any real change in behavior. An example might be a diagnosis of diabetes. You’ve known the health risks for years and failed to act. Only when confronted with the real-world diagnosis that your body has had enough of your current lifestyle do you decide to change. Now you eat healthier, exercise more and monitor your body’s functions.
Second, crisis issues force you to make decisions. You must choose a course of action. A line from one of my favorite Rush songs says, “If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.” Very well said. You can choose to ignore the crisis or you can choose to attempt to resolve or diminish the crisis issue. Regardless, the crisis forces you to make a decision.
Third, the decisions you make while in crisis define your character. This, perhaps, spoke more to me than anything else. If a crisis issue meets you head-on, do you choose to reach for a bottle and avoid the issue by drinking it away? Do you grab the remote and tune to a crime drama to avoid the issue? Do you grab a book and try to lose yourself in fantasy? How you react in crisis defines your character. You can’t hide from it. If you fall into despair and hopelessness when a crisis occurs, you need to reevaluate your self-image. Are you really as optimistic as you think you are? Does your self-worth and integrity suffer every time you have a life crisis?
Finally, all decisions you make have consequences you must own. Think about it: If you get angry at your spouse because they lost their job, you’re in crisis mode. Rather than embrace the situation and work towards resolution, you condemn your spouse and turn to friends and alcohol to avoid the crisis. One night you decide to drive home after having one drink too many and find yourself waking up in a hospital being charged with drunk driving and vehicular manslaughter. Whose fault is it? Did your spouse “make” you drink? Did your spouse “make” you drive drunk? No. Inasmuch as you must suffer the consequences of your actions, so too must you take responsibility for the decisions you make in or out of crisis. Listen to your self-talk, the voices in your head when you’re alone. Do you hear them accuse others of “making” you this way or do you hear the voice of reason acknowledging the decision(s) you made might not be the same you would choose if you could have a “do-over”?
I love history. As a history major in college, I specialized in Petrine Russia (Peter the Great’s reign, 1682-1725). I oftentimes found it amusing to compare Peter’s reforms to Lenin’s. Comparing a Russian tsar with a communist leader isn’t my intent here. I mention it only to illustrate that sometimes things happen in the past that should be remembered (but aren’t), that should serve as a harbinger. As some of my other studies are coming to an end, I thought I’d dust off some of my old history books and peruse history to see what the future might bring. Today’s study: The English Peasant’s Revolt of 1381.
As I read through the background, results and later consequences of this revolt, I could not help but think of Obamacare. How so? Let’s take a short trip, shall we?
The revolt started when tax collectors attempted to raise a poll tax from villagers in Essex. That didn’t go well. Troops were sent in along with more tax collectors. The troops were routed and six of the tax collectors were beheaded. News spread and the counties of Essex and Kent were in full revolt against the despised poll tax. In fact, the latest poll tax was the third in four years. The peasants were pissed.
Keep in mind that the period we’re talking about is less than 20 years after the Black Death had killed millions of people in Europe. Britain was not exempt from the plague. The loss of life meant the workers’ (serfs) labor was more valuable. They wanted more rights, including land ownership and participation in the governing process. They did not want a continuation of the status quo and the relationships between the serfs and the landowners and the serfs and the Church were fueling discontent.
An armed “army” of disgruntled peasants marched to London like Sherman marched to the sea. They attacked manors, churches and religious institutions. They freed prisoners, destroyed legal records and destroyed perceived icons of corruption. The went so far as to assault and enter the Tower of London wherein they executed the Archbishop of Canterbury. All-in-all, things weren’t good.
King Richard II (who was 14 or 15 at the time) agreed to meet with the leader of the rebellion (Walter “Wat” Tyler) and agreed to a number of the demands, such as the abolition of serfdom, division of church lands and implementation of fair rents. All seemed to have been resolved. Well, sort of.
The Wat Tyler was stabbed and killed and a large armed force loyal to the king surrounded the peasant army. Some of the leaders were executed but King Richard pardoned most of the peasants, reassuring them that he would abide by the agreement he had made with their leader. The peasants, now pacified, returned to their homes.
As you might have guessed, the king reneged on his promises. However, many of the landowners on the front lines of the rebellion received the message passed to them by the peasants: treat us fairly or suffer the consequences. The abolition of serfdom in Britain’s medieval period began at this time with the land owners, not the crown or the cross.
So it might just be me, but while reading through this early this morning, I saw an unwanted, unpopular tax (Obamacare) being added to an already tax-ridden working class. I also saw a microcosm of my view of labor unions. Required at one time to ensure worker’s rights and safety, their usefulness is specific and short lived. Management (the landowners, in this case) hold all the power. If they are not willing to make changes, no amount of bullying will sway them.
Ah, but the king. He was a young king. Perhaps out of cowardice or wanting to be popular with his people, he initially agreed to the demands of the people. He met with their leader and made a binding agreement. When things turned ugly and it looked like he might have a civil war on his front yard, he again reasserted his agreement and commitment to honor the will of the people who had called for an end to the oppressive taxes (amongst other things). But he lied. He was deceitful from the beginning. It all sounds so familiar today, no?
If you attend a Christian church, you know these people. They’re the ones that make the loud, guttural, “mmmm” when the speaker says something to which they agree. They won’t shout out a Hallelujah or an Amen, but they will sound like Peter Boyle’s voice characterization of the monster in Young Frankenstein. I call them Holy Cows. If you close your eyes, it sounds like a herd of cattle on the plain.
So I’m driving home from work today listening to Air One, my newest-favorite radio station. One of the DJs was talking about something and the other one was “mmmm-ing” through the whole thing. Only on Christian radio. You don’t hear the Holy Cows on the hard rock or alternative rock stations to which I used to listen, just Christian radio.
At what point did that become acceptable? It drives me freaking crazy. Mmmm. Not “uh huh” or “um hmm” but “mmmm”. If you agree with the statement, say so! Say, “I agree” or “Amen” or “Hallelujah” or something, but please, for goodness sake, stop mimicking the cows in the field. God gave us dominion over the beasts of the field. Stop trying to be one. Mmmm.
That’s my rant for the day.
People oftentimes say things in the heat of the moment because of anger. Although I may not agree with this as a valid excuse I do understand it happens. But there is a significant difference between what is said in the heat of the moment and what you swear to in a written document submitted to a court.
Think about the things you say about others every day. I don’t mean the platitudes about how nice they are or how special they are, I mean what you REALLY say about others. Today your best friend might be an asshole and tomorrow they might be the light that brightens your path. Those words come and go depending on your mood. Everyone has moods. But to swear to something before a court that you know to be blatantly untrue? That takes a special kind of person; someone who must practice lies and deception so much that they have bought into their own hype. They think the false world they’ve created is, in fact, reality. Their memory of specific events or actions is incorruptible and unquestionable.
Today, as I do every day, I spent some time in self-reflection and meditation. It keeps me calm, focused, and at peace with those whom I might have encouraged confrontation previously. As I was sitting quietly reflecting on my day, a thought came to my mind: Righteousness gives life, Condemnation is death. I took that thought and asked how I could apply it to my life today. Here’s I came up with:
If you can sit for a full hour, 60 full minutes, without any distractions whatsoever, listen to what your mind is telling you. First off, if you can’t be still for an hour perhaps you have avoidance issues. You might be afraid of the truths screaming at you from your conscience. Perhaps by being constantly distracted you keep the demons at bay. Reading, listening to the radio, watching television; these all keep you from spending time with your own conscience. Perhaps you self-medicate with drugs or alcohol. Add in a social smoking habit and you set yourself up to be fully occupied and distracted from having to listen to any truth that might be trying to convict you.
When I talk about Righteousness, I don’t mean a holier-than-thou self-righteousness attitude. I simply mean being honest with yourself, with a character that exudes integrity. When you can speak with righteousness (integrity) about someone or something, you have credibility.
Condemnation, to me, is speaking ill of someone or looking for the worst in a person, situation or event. Berating, belittling, speaking ill of someone you do not know or situations you do not understand are all condemning in nature. Doing so, to me, clearly shows a lack of integrity. You might speak so poorly of another person that they sincerely ask for your forgiveness for some transgression they never recall but which must have happened because of your continued haranguing. Although you claim to forgive them and say you’ve “moved on”, in fact nothing they ever do will put them right in your eyes again. Ever. This, then, is another reason you can’t bear to be alone for an hour without distraction: you will be convicted and condemned by your own words.
One thing I have always tried to maintain is my integrity. Anyone, my wife, my kids, my friends; anyone who wants to know where I am just has to ask. I will not say I am going to work late only to duck out early to catch the ball game at the local bar. I am where I say I’m going to be. I don’t believe it’s healthy to deceive your family or your friends. It would be totally out of character for me to rack up a few thousand dollars of credit card bills and hide it from my spouse. I could not, for example, claim and over-state the cost of my child’s textbooks so I could increase the amount of my tax refund. I have a fundamental issue with lies and deception like this, especially when it comes to my family.
I had the opportunity this week to read a document wherein someone swore in a court document that someone had hidden a small fortune from their family. The same sworn document stated a few other blatant and obvious distortions to actual events it was sad to read. Why? Because I know the author of the document believes with all their heart the “facts” they presented were true. It’s not worth my time to try and correct the person’s memory. In time, sooner or later, their own conscience will convict them in their heart. They know, or at least they should know, that what they claim is true is so out of character for the other person it would be hard for anyone who knows them to believe the claimant.
So, I’ve said all of this to get to my challenge: I challenge each of you to sit for one full hour, distraction-free, by yourself, and just clear your mind. Don’t think about the work you have to do or the time you’re “wasting” by doing this exercise. Try it. Be purposeful and do it with intent.
What is your heart telling you about yourself? What lies or acts of deception have you committed for which you remain accountable and guilty? From whom should you seek forgiveness to correct your actions?
If you can be still and listen to your heart, you might learn a lot about yourself. Try it.