Covey vs. Obama on Basic Humanity

I've been listening to audio books while walking Kiko. I'm partway through The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change (Unabridged) by Stephen R. Covey.

In chapter 3, Covey recalls Victor Frankl, a psychologist who was sent to the Nazi death camps. Except for his sister, Dr. Frankl lost his entire family. But he realized an important truth:

In the midst of the most degrading circumstances imaginable, Frankl used the human endowment of self-awareness to discover a fundamental principle about the nature of man.

Between stimulus and response, man has the freedom to choose. Again, between stimulus--or what happens to us--or has ever happened to us--and our response, lies our power and freedom to choose. And in those choices lie our growth and our happiness.

Covey goes on:

Within that space between stimulus and response are four endowments that make us uniquely human. In addition to self awareness...we have imagination: the ability to create in our own minds beyond our present reality. We also have conscience, the deep inner awareness of right and wrong. Of the principles that govern our behavior, are a sense of whether our thoughts and actions are in harmony with them: that's our integrity. And finally and fourth, we have independent will: the ability to act based on our self-awareness, free of all other influences.

But then Covey digresses. He makes the point that humans uniquely possess self-awareness, which sets us apart from the rest of the animals:

Even the most intelligent animals have none of these endowments. It's not a matter of degree, it's a matter of kind. To use a computer metaphor, they are programmed by instinct and training. Animals can be trained to be responsible--but they can't take responsibility for that training! In other words, they can't direct it; they can't change the programming. They're not even aware of it. That's why they can't reinvent their lives the way people can.

But because of our unique human endowments, we can write new programs for ourselves totally apart from our instincts and/or training. This is why an animal's capacity is somewhat limited and man's is unlimited. But if we live like animals, out of our own instincts, and conditioning, and conditions, and out of our collective memory, we too will be limited.

It's the software! Our very humanity depends on our ability to rewrite our own software.

So when Barack Obama says that Jeremiah Wright was "bound to mature into his present angry anti-American, anti-Israel, anti-white mentality", Obama is denying Wright's humanity. He excuses Wright's behavior by relieving Wright of his responsibility--but simultaneously relieves Wright of that which differentiates Wright from base animals.

The basis of racism is to deny human status to its targets. That's why blacks were discriminated against: whites didn't believe blacks to be completely human. Many whites believed that blacks needed guidance and protection, just as a good horse or dog thrives best under human guidance and protection. In this view, slavery and Jim Crow legal and social constraints were for the benefit of blacks--literally for their own good.

Martin Luther King convinced the majority of whites that blacks are human, which was a necessary precondition to eliminate the legal and social constraints under which blacks suffered. He appealed to white peoples' conscience and integrity, asking them to rewrite their internal programming. That's why I believe in Dr. King's life work.

Obama's denial of the humanity of a black preacher goes against the core of Dr. King's message. He should be ashamed of himself.

Redefining Nationhood

In City Journal, Andrew Klavan writes:

Our Founding redefined nationhood along social-contract lines that Europeans can still only theorize about. Our love of nation at its best was ethical, not ethnic. Our patriotism was loyalty not to race, or even to tradition, but to ideals of individual liberty and republican self-governance.

Most of his article is about how Hollywood's view of war has shifted. War is always brutal and inhuman, and that hasn't changed. But unlike the films made in the 1940s, Hollywood since Vietnam has chosen to portray America as unworthy of fighting for.

When you fight for America you're fighting for certain elements of software. It's the software that matters.

Kiko's Fight Part 4: Lessons Learned

A week ago I posted the narrative of an altercation that my dog and I got mixed up in. Two other dogs met up with us and a fight ensued. Thursday's post described our injuries, treatment and healing process. Sunday's post included a picture of Kiko enjoying some snow and three others of his healing wounds. Later on Sunday I posted my analysis of what happened. Today's post, 10 days after the event, articulates the lessons I've learned from the incident and aftermath.

I'm blessed with friends and family who took the time to listen, read, consider what happened and share their counsel with me. Thank you all very much. From you I've learned four things:

First, I did two things right. I was walking Kiko, which is good for his health and mine. And I had him under control on a leash, so he wasn't a threat to other dogs or people. We will continue to walk together, connected by a leash.

Second, I underestimated the potential threat of the approaching loose dogs. I paid more attention to how Kiko was behaving than their breeds, sex, and body language. I only understood they were willing and able to injure Kiko after the fight started. Fortunately they weren't targeting me; this time I got lucky. Wagging tails all around is good; stiffening and baring of teeth is bad!

Security guards and police officers are trained on the use of force continuum. The goal is to use the minimum force necessary to achieve compliance. I should have faced the oncoming loose dogs, asserting my dominance towards them (rather than Kiko). When they kept approaching I could have blocked them with my body, keeping them away from Kiko. I could have used vocal commands to discourage their approach. Throwable rocks are always at hand in the desert. Several people suggested chemical options (water pistol filled with ammonia, pepper spray with UV dye, citrus spray). Further up the force continuum are options like a solid walking stick, an edged weapon, or a legally-permitted concealed firearm.

Third, I should not have been trying to put Kiko in a "down-stay" position. He was already at a disadvantage merely by being on a leash. When strange people are approaching it may be appropriate to have Kiko in a "sit-stay" position, but strange dogs need to see Kiko standing up. Depending on the situation it might even be appropriate to unclip his leash as the other dogs approach, so it's not such an easy "dominance win" for the other dogs.

Again, I should have looked carefully at how the other dogs were approaching. Because I was so focused on Kiko's compliance I don't remember if the other dogs' tails were wagging or if they were showing signs of aggression. I should also evaluate Kiko's body language; he is very well socialized with other dogs so if he starts showing fear there's probably a good reason for it.

Fourth, when the fight started I should have kept my hands clear. Many dog fights end quickly once dominance is established, perhaps with minor injuries but nothing serious or disfiguring. Rather than fighting bare-handed I should choose other options along the force continuum. If I'm not a target I can throw drinking water and escalate to chemical irritants. If I perceive myself a target of an unrestrained pack and I believe my life (or Kiko's life) is in danger, then I might have to use lethal force.

That's the series. Right now Kiko is snoozing comfortably on his pillow by the fireplace. He's still wearing his "cone of shame", but hopefully we can take that off after his next vet appointment on Friday.

Kiko's Fight Part 3: Analysis

On Thursday I posted the narrative of an altercation that my dog and I got mixed up in. Two other dogs met up with us and a fight ensued. Yesterday's post described our injuries, treatment and healing process. Today's post is my analysis of what happened.

Given Kiko’s relatively light wounds sustained on his neck, it appears that the Staffordshire terrier was merely holding Kiko down and not attempting to injure or kill him. However, the more serious wounds on his thigh are consistent with a more aggressive attack by the black Labrador mix.

Also given that Kiko was the only dog to bite me, it appears that the other two dogs did not see me as a threat or combatant. The white Staffordshire terrier accepted without protest my pinning him to the ground with my leg. Their post-altercation action of moving away is also consistent with this hypothesis.

Kiko’s excited frame of mind during the initial approach may have contributed to the altercation. By the time the white Staffordshire mounted him, he was already in a state of high excitement.

My reaction to the Staffordshire’s dominant behavior may also have contributed to the altercation. I shouted at the Staffordshire and tried to push him off of Kiko, which added energy to the situation. Simultaneously I was trying to return Kiko to his “down stay” position. The Staffordshire may have interpreted my energy and actions as a rebuke against Kiko’s excited state of mind, leading to the Staffordshire’s escalation of grabbing Kiko’s neck.

Another possibility is that the Staffordshire's bite was mitigated by the leather collar that Kiko was wearing, so the Staffordshire might have been trying to hurt him more than the injuries would otherwise seem to indicate.

Tomorrow's post will go over some lessons I've learned from the experience.

Kiko's Fight Part 2a: Pictures

First the good news. Kiko and I visited Johnston Ridge Observatory near Mount St. Helens yesterday. (That's why I didn't put up my lessons-learned post yet.)

As you can see in this picture, he really enjoyed getting out of the car and running around in the snow!



As of Thursday (four days after the altercation), his neck is healing well:



But on Thursday his thigh wound was still draining a bit. That was the day we visited the vet for a follow-up, and she prescribed an additional course of antibiotics:



Today that wound is looking much better:

Kiko's Fight Part 2: Injuries and Treatment

Yesterday I posted the narrative of a dog fight I had to break up. My dog Kiko and I were walking when two other dogs arrived and the situation devolved badly. Today's post describes the injuries that we sustained, the treatment we received, and how the healing process is coming along.

I sustained puncture and laceration wounds to my left forearm, left index and middle fingers, and my right thumb. On an outpatient basis, Kadlec Medical Center cleaned my wounds, applied dressings, administered oral antibiotics and a tetanus injection, and gave me a prescription for antibiotics and pain medication. They instructed me to report back to the Kadlec Medical Center on Tuesday afternoon, 13 May 2008 if my wounds are not healing well or appear inflamed. I was released at 16:23 PDT.

Kiko sustained puncture and laceration wounds on the inside of his left thigh, and mild abrasions to the right side of his neck. Mid-Columbia Pet Emergency Services anesthetized him, evaluated his neck wounds as not needing treatment, and repaired his left inside thigh wounds. They released him to me at 18:23 PDT with antibiotic, probiotic, and analgesic medication.

My wounds were healing satisfactorily on Tuesday, so I did not return to Kadlec Medical Center.

Kiko's wounds were also healing satisfactorily until Wednesday evening, when he started licking and worrying at the sutures on the wound to his inner left thigh. By Thursday morning he was clearly in distress, so I put an Elizabethan Collar on him and took him to our regular veterinarian at Desert Veterinary Clinic.

The veterinarian noted that a small amount of infection had set in and prescribed an additional antibiotic. She explained that dog bite injuries involve immediately visible punctures and lacerations, but that tissue crushing also occurs. Often the sutures that treat the laceration are made into crushed tissue, which compromises the repair. She prescribed an additional antibiotic, and asked us to return in a week for further evaluation.

Update 18 May 2008: see this new post for pictures.

Tomorrow's post will consist of my analysis of the events, trying to put the pieces together into a more organic whole.

Kiko's Fight Part 1: Narrative

On Sunday I learned the literal meaning of "having a dog in the fight." While walking my dog on a leash, two other dogs approached and a fight developed. Everyone walked away, but my dog and I both received medical attention afterwards.

Finnish psychologist Antti Revonsuo argues that "the biological function of dreaming is to simulate threatening events, and to rehearse threat perception and threat avoidance." (See also a recent Psychology Today article.)

I've never served in the military, and haven't been involved in a physical fight in 20+ years. So as to head off nightmares about the dogfight, I decided to process the experience the best way I know how--writing about it, using the National Transportation Safety Board's Aircraft Accident Report format as a model. This article is my Narrative Statement: the events of Sunday afternoon as best I could recall them.

On Sunday, 11 May 2008 at 13:07 PDT I left my residence in West Richland, Washington. With me was my altered male dog Kiko, a black Labrador mix. Our intention was to walk to the summit of Candy Mountain. Kiko wore a red backpack containing water, a leather collar with metal tags, and a red cloth collar with his leash. I held the other end of his leash throughout the walk.

We approached Candy Mountain from the north, walking south on Candy Mountain Avenue. We turned left on Hershey Road and followed it around. Near the corner of Hershey Road and Starburst Court I noticed a [particular type of] vehicle parked partway up Candy Mountain. Near the [vehicle] I observed two people and two dogs.

As we continued up the trail towards the summit of Candy Mountain, Kiko was behaving excitedly--particularly so after noticing the two dogs above us on Candy Mountain. Specifically, he was pulling against his leash and collar. Given his excited state of mind I decided to take an indirect route up Candy Mountain rather than the most direct path.

We turned south at the end of the fence line, then followed it as it led south and curved west. This track intersected with another track that led northwest towards the summit of Candy Mountain. We started up that track towards the summit, not observing any dogs or people.

About a quarter of the way up the slope I observed two dogs ahead of us on the trail, walking down towards us. One dog was white and appeared to be a Staffordshire terrier. The other dog was black and appeared to be a Labrador mix.

Kiko also noticed the dogs and his excitement level appeared to increase; he again pulled against his leash. We stopped walking and I put Kiko in a “down-stay” position, which meant his hips, chest, and front legs were on the ground. I verbally commanded him to stay put, and may have stepped on his leash to further restrain him.

When the two other dogs arrived at our location Kiko stood up and faced the white dog. They sniffed each other excitedly. Then the white dog mounted Kiko from the side, putting his chest on Kiko’s shoulders.

I tried to push the white dog off Kiko’s shoulders, while again commanding Kiko to lie down and pushing him to the ground. Simultaneously, Kiko snapped at the white dog. The white dog grabbed Kiko on the right side of the neck and held on. Kiko started yelping and ended up on his back. As the white dog held on to Kiko’s neck, the black dog started biting Kiko on his back and left thigh.

As Kiko was on his back I tried to pull the white dog from Kiko’s neck. Kiko was screaming and snapping in apparent pain and panic. While I was trying to disengage the white dog from his neck, Kiko bit my left forearm, my left index and middle fingers, and my right thumb.

When the altercation ended, I had separated the three dogs. The white dog was subdued under my right thigh. I stood up and continued shouting at the white and black dogs. They made no more aggressive moves or noises. After a few minutes they moved away.

During the altercation I dropped my end of Kiko’s leash. After taking hold again I looked for injuries. I initially assessed Kiko and my wounds as not life-threatening. Blood was slowly oozing from my injuries. Kiko was walking without a significant limp, and I did not observe him leaving a blood trail.

Kiko and I returned the way we came. After walking about 300 yards I dialed 911 on my mobile telephone and explained what had just happened. As we rounded the base of Candy Mountain I observed the white and black dogs entering the [vehicle] along with their people. From a distance I watched the [vehicle] descend the mountain until it was stopped by a West Richland Police officer at the corner of Candy Mountain Boulevard and Kennedy Road.

While on the telephone with the 911 operator I re-assessed my wounds and declined emergency medical attention.

After returning to my home I spoke briefly with the responding officer. I reiterated that I did not desire medical attention, but that my first priority was to have Kiko’s injuries assessed. I informed him that neither Kiko nor I had any evidence of significant bleeding, so I knew I did not require immediate medical attention. But given my ignorance of veterinary first aid I wanted to get Kiko to a professional as soon as possible. [The officer] left me his business card and asked me to contact him when I had finished attending to Kiko and myself. A few minutes later I left the house with Kiko to seek veterinary and medical attention.

After returning home I received a call from the Benton County Sheriff’s Department. I informed [the deputy] that I did not wish to press any charges against the owners of the white and black dogs. He gave me the name and telephone number of the owner.

A few minutes later I contacted [the owner]. At his request I told him how much the veterinary service charged me for Kiko’s treatment. He said he was writing me a check for the full amount immediately.

Tomorrow: Our injuries and medical treatments.

The American Creed

What does it take to be an American?

Having been born an American, I cannot go to China and become Chinese. I can't go to Germany and become German. I can't go to Japan and become Japanese. It just doesn't work that way.

But someone born in China can come to America and become an American. Someone born in Germany can come to America and become an American. Someone born in Japan can come to America and become an American.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed....

That's the American creed. If you're willing to accept those "self-evident" truths, as embodied in the United States Constitution, you're an American.

To be an American is to believe in America.

Crossing the Line

Over a century ago, one Samuel Clemens (a.k.a. Mark Twain) protested against a war. As a satirist he was without peer:

Mine eyes have seen the orgy of the launching of the Sword;
He is searching out the hoardings where the stranger's wealth is stored;
He hath loosed his fateful lightnings, and with woe and death has scored;
His lust is marching on.

I have seen him in the watch-fires of a hundred circling camps;
They have builded him an altar in the Eastern dews and damps;
I have read his doomful mission by the dim and flaring lamps—
His night is marching on.

I have read his bandit gospel writ in burnished rows of steel:
"As ye deal with my pretensions, so with you my wrath shall deal;
Let the faithless son of Freedom crush the patriot with his heel;
Lo, Greed is marching on!"

We have legalized the strumpet and are guarding her retreat;
Greed is seeking out commercial souls before his judgement seat;
O, be swift, ye clods, to answer him! be jubilant my feet!
Our god is marching on!

In a sordid slime harmonious Greed was born in yonder ditch,
With a longing in his bosom—and for others' goods an itch.
As Christ died to make men holy, let men die to make us rich—
Our god is marching on.

Initially Twain was a supporter of the war to liberate the Philippines from Spain, but saw that the war aims morphed from those high ideals to something much uglier:

I left these shores, at Vancouver, a red-hot imperialist. I wanted the American eagle to go screaming into the Pacific. It seemed tiresome and tame for it to content itself with the Rockies. Why not spread its wings over the Philippines, I asked myself? And I thought it would be a real good thing to do.

I said to myself, here are a people who have suffered for three centuries. We can make them as free as ourselves, give them a government and country of their own, put a miniature of the American constitution afloat in the Pacific, start a brand new republic to take its place among the free nations of the world. It seemed to me a great task to which we had addressed ourselves.

But I have thought some more, since then, and I have read carefully the treaty of Paris, and I have seen that we do not intend to free, but to subjugate the people of the Philippines. We have gone there to conquer, not to redeem.

We have also pledged the power of this country to maintain and protect the abominable system established in the Philippines by the Friars.

It should, it seems to me, be our pleasure and duty to make those people free, and let them deal with their own domestic questions in their own way. And so I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.

---Mark Twain Home, An Anti-Imperialist, New York Herald [New York, 10/15/1900]

Now comes Sol Stern, writing in the City Journal. He participated in a meeting with Viet Cong representatives in September 1967, led by Tom Hayden. After the meeting, Tom Hayden made a speech asking his fellow "Peace Movement" members to ally themselves with the enemy:

[I]t was clear that Hayden and some of his acolytes were trying to move our group toward a more “advanced” position than the one still maintained by the mainstream U.S. peace movement. Hayden wasn’t interested in ending the war so much as making an alliance with the other side. At one of the final plenary sessions, he gave a long speech summarizing the conference’s accomplishments and emphasizing our need to work together for the common objective: a Vietnam liberated and unified—by the Communists.

[...]

Sometime later, after the events of 1968, I would look back at Hayden’s Bratislava speech as a turning point not only in the short history of the New Left but also in the history of American radicalism. Protesting against America’s wars has an honorable tradition, running from Thoreau to Eugene V. Debs and Norman Thomas. But starting with Hayden and continuing in the turbulent outbursts of 1968, that tradition of legitimate democratic opposition morphed into outright collaboration with the enemy. It wasn’t just that Hayden was rooting for the other side—abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison had done the same during the Mexican War—but that he was proposing to sabotage the American war effort by all means necessary. Soon enough, as members of the once-idealistic New Left and SDS crossed the line from dissent to treason, it became clear that those means included deadly violence. Within 18 months, some of Hayden’s followers were bombing military installations and public buildings in solidarity with their Vietnamese allies.

As Mr. Stern says, it's perfectly natural to protest against a war your country is fighting. Western society is so deadly in warfare because it encourages internal dissent and criticism of how wars are prosecuted. Even leaders who successfully fight a war can be turned out by the electorate; see Winston Churchill for a perfect example.

But the anti-war Left during the late 1960s went way over the line. Unlike Mark Twain, they didn't just argue for an outcome more in line with American ideals of liberty and self-determination. Instead, they literally gave aid and comfort to the enemy. They were willing and eager to see America lose the war, and to sacrifice the freedoms and liberties of the Vietnamese people to do it.

Comrade J

I was on business travel last week. Between flights I stopped at a bookstore and picked up this book:


In the Epilogue, Sergei Tretyakov explains what motivated him to defect to the United States:

As a professional intelligence officer who specialized in North American matters, I was studying U.S. history all the time and I could probably lecture as a part-time university professor about it. Yet it was a totally different feeling and meaning for me when I was refreshing my memory reading the Declaration of Independence before taking the [United States] citizenship test. I found its words of special importance.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

I have tried to explain in this book the "causes" that made me separate myself from Russia. The Declaration continues:

...Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive...it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it.... It is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government....

My wants and my desires were not much different from those early colonists'. In the end, I came to believe I was not betraying Russia. I felt its leaders had betrayed Russia and me.

If I attempted to return to Russia, I would be immediately arrested, sentenced to death, and executed. But I really don't care what they think about me in Russia.... I am now an American, and I consider myself--not a traitor nor a spy, but a new patriot.

--Comrade J, pp. 331-332.

As a native-born American I had the great fortune to grow up in this great land. I stand in awe of people like Sergei Tretyakov and my friends who gave up everything to immigrate to America.

God Bless America; let freedom ring!

What More Does Jeremiah Wright Want?

Now comes Jeremiah Wright, speaking at the National Press Club. Fox News has the transcript.

Most of what he says I can agree with. Reconciliation is sorely needed in our country. But it's hard for me to read Wright's words and think that he's really trying to foster reconciliation:

What I said about and what I think about and what — again, until I can’t — until racism and slavery are confessed and asked for forgiveness — have we asked the Japanese to forgive us? We have never as a country, the policymakers — in fact, Clinton almost got in trouble because he almost apologized at Gorialan (ph). We have never apologized as a country.

Britain has apologized to Africans, but this country’s leaders have refused to apologize. So until that apology comes, I’m not going to keep stepping on your foot and asking you, “Does this hurt? Do you forgive me for stepping on your foot?” if I’m still stepping on your foot.

Understand that? Capiche?

Christian/Western civilization is unique: it holds that each individual has such intrinsic worth that it is worth fighting and dying to extirpate bondage and slavery. The British Navy was the most effective anti-slavery institution in history.

Closer to home, maybe the Reverend Wright should re-read Abraham Lincoln's Second Inaugural Address:

One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the southern part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war.

[....]

Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."

Not only did Lincoln apologize for slavery, the nation paid for it in blood. Over 360,000 Union soldiers died and 280,000 more were wounded in the American Civil War fighting to free the Negro slaves.

What more does Jeremiah Wright want as an apology?