A Commentary on the Passing Scene by
Robert Paul Wolff
rwolff@afroam.umass.edu
Sunday, September 4, 2022
HEARTFELT THANKS
Thank you all for the very thoughtful and supportive
responses to my personal reflections on age and disability. Your evident warmth
and sympathy supports me and makes it easier for me to deal with my own
particular array of problems.
We last talked in 1970, when you were "Professor Wolff" to me. In recent years I have cruised by your blog, and been delighted to hear your voice in writing. The only thing missing is that damn pipe. I thank you for all those good times 52 years ago ... since then, you (and SidneyM and EN and CharlesP and ArtD and PaulK and RDC) have always been with me, a Columbia chorus singing in so many keys. Your voice keeps reaching many people whom you do not remember, and I'm sure many you have never met. We all love you ... so please keep talking into that mike, and we will all keep listening. Fight against that Dark, and keep rebuilding those biocircuits! - Nat (a tiny ripple in your wake)
For years, until it wore out, my son had a tee shirt depicting an ancient turtle walking (on 2 legs) with a cane and the words "The more you complain the longer God lets you live."
I join others in wishing you many more years of occasional complaints.
Thank you for that lovely comment, Nat. I was unable to tell from my records who you are, but my heart was warmed by what you said. That was a grand collection of people, was not it?
Nat’s comment reminded me of your pipe, which you would clean in front of the class upon first entering, when I took your course on Kant’s Ethics at Rutgers in 1969. It seems like only yesterday. “That is the class of lost content, I see it shining plain, The happy corridors where I went, and cannot stroll again.”
Actually, it was the Winter of 1968, because I remember that you were wearing a McCarthy button on your lapel, about which I made a snide remark, asking you if it referred to Joe McCarthy. You stared at me with a withering look and said, “They jest at scars that never felt a wound.” Ouch. Still, I did well, so it was not the winter of my discontent. (I could not resist.)
One of the folks on our road made it past 100 although with mobility issues. He was still writing columns for the local paper occasionally so cognitively OK till the end. I've found complaining lifts ones spirits.
A couple of days ago, The Washington Post ran an article on Deer Isle, Maine. I knew next to nothing about the place but I had heard about it years back on Ken Burns’s TV series, The Civil War. “Tiny Deer Isle, Maine,” as Burns called it, lost 21 of its young men in that stupid, evil war. Anyway, out of curiosity I looked up the Wikipedia entry on the place and found two things about it which reminded me of some of RPW’s comments in his website. He once said that during the Second World War he and other kids collected tin foil from gum wrappers and other items to promote the war effort. Burns’s series notes that as the island men went off to fight in the war, the women collected lint and other “strategic materials” to support the war effort. (Seems like the island women got off pretty easy here, but then they were likely to have been the principal recipients of the letters from the Secretary of War informing them that their men-folk had been killed or had died of disease.) Another point in the history of the place is that the island was the life-long home of Salome Sellers (née Sylvester; October 19, 1800 – January 9, 1909), an American centenarian and Mayflower descendant who was the last known, verified person born in the 18th century. She had her picture taken in 1906 and it’s on the internet. She made it till 108+.
If you're looking for an archetypal stupid war, try World War 1. By contrast, the Civil War was fought over something of importance. That it caused enormous suffering goes without saying, but it was "stupid" only in the sense that all wars might be called that.
A Second Constitutional Convention? Some Republicans Want to Force One
Representative Jodey Arrington, a conservative Texas Republican, believes it is well past time for something the nation has not experienced for more than two centuries: a debate over rewriting the Constitution.
“I think the states are due a convention,” said Mr. Arrington, who in July introduced legislation to direct the archivist of the United States to tally applications for a convention from state legislatures and compel Congress to schedule a gathering when enough states have petitioned for one. “It is time to rally the states and rein in Washington responsibly.”
To Russ Feingold, the former Democratic senator from Wisconsin and president of the American Constitution Society, a liberal [LOL] judicial group, that is a terrible idea. Mr. Feingold sees the prospect of a constitutional convention as an exceptionally dangerous threat from the right and suggests it is closer to reality than most people realize as Republicans push to retake control of Congress in November’s midterm elections.
“We are very concerned that the Congress, if it becomes Republican, will call a convention,” said Mr. Feingold, the co-author of a new book warning of the risks of a convention called “The Constitution in Jeopardy.”
“This could gut our Constitution,” Mr. Feingold said in an interview. “There needs to be real concern and attention about what they might do. We are putting out the alert.”
Leave it to a liberal to stand in the way of progress. To think I used to admire this guy Feingold.
Should the Constitution be rewritten by conservatives and meet the approval of Rick Santorum? Hell no!
Does the Constitution need to be rewritten? 1,000 times, Yes! It needs to be gutted.
The one we have now is a disaster.
But, as with Chile, it's going to take titanic manifestations of social unrest to get the process of birthing a new constitution going. It's not going to come from the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. And also as with Chile, I would not expect the initial drafts to make it past the finishing line. The propaganda to try to create and even more capitalistic, pro-corporate constitution would be relentless.
All wars require at least two parties, an aggressor and resistance to the aggression. Where there is aggression without resistance, there is no war. Whether the war deserves to be characterized as “stupid” depends on the aggressor’s rationale for the aggression. Since, generally, the aggressor’s rationale is unacceptable, the war is “stupid” because the aggressor has acted stupidly, without an acceptable or satisfactory rationale for the aggression. The Civil War began with the Confederacy’s attack on Fort Sumter, in reaction to the election of President Lincoln, based, in large part, to his avowed opposition to the expansion of slavery. The North’s resistance to that aggression was not stupid. The Civil War’s stupidity derives from the Confederacy’s secession and attack on Fort Sumter, in order to preserve its “peculiar institution,” not from the Union’s resistance to the Confederacy’s stupidity.
We last talked in 1970, when you were "Professor Wolff" to me. In recent years I have cruised by your blog, and been delighted to hear your voice in writing. The only thing missing is that damn pipe. I thank you for all those good times 52 years ago ... since then, you (and SidneyM and EN and CharlesP and ArtD and PaulK and RDC) have always been with me, a Columbia chorus singing in so many keys. Your voice keeps reaching many people whom you do not remember, and I'm sure many you have never met. We all love you ... so please keep talking into that mike, and we will all keep listening. Fight against that Dark, and keep rebuilding those biocircuits! - Nat (a tiny ripple in your wake)
ReplyDeleteFor years, until it wore out, my son had a tee shirt depicting an ancient turtle walking (on 2 legs) with a cane and the words "The more you complain the longer God lets you live."
ReplyDeleteI join others in wishing you many more years of occasional complaints.
Thank you for that lovely comment, Nat. I was unable to tell from my records who you are, but my heart was warmed by what you said. That was a grand collection of people, was not it?
ReplyDeleteNat’s comment reminded me of your pipe, which you would clean in front of the class upon first entering, when I took your course on Kant’s Ethics at Rutgers in 1969. It seems like only yesterday. “That is the class of lost content, I see it shining plain, The happy corridors where I went, and cannot stroll again.”
ReplyDeleteCorrection:
ReplyDeleteActually, it was the Winter of 1968, because I remember that you were wearing a McCarthy button on your lapel, about which I made a snide remark, asking you if it referred to Joe McCarthy. You stared at me with a withering look and said, “They jest at scars that never felt a wound.” Ouch. Still, I did well, so it was not the winter of my discontent. (I could not resist.)
Marc, my records show you got a 1 (in Rutgers' weird grading system) with a 1+ on the last paper, so I guess my remark did not cut too deeply.
ReplyDeleteYes, I was not traumatized by the remark and have gone on to bigger and greater things, including offering controversial comments on your blog.
ReplyDeleteOne of the folks on our road made it past 100 although with mobility issues. He was still writing columns for the local paper occasionally so cognitively OK till the end. I've found complaining lifts ones spirits.
ReplyDeleteA couple of days ago, The Washington Post ran an article on Deer Isle, Maine. I knew next to nothing about the place but I had heard about it years back on Ken Burns’s TV series, The Civil War. “Tiny Deer Isle, Maine,” as Burns called it, lost 21 of its young men in that stupid, evil war. Anyway, out of curiosity I looked up the Wikipedia entry on the place and found two things about it which reminded me of some of RPW’s comments in his website. He once said that during the Second World War he and other kids collected tin foil from gum wrappers and other items to promote the war effort. Burns’s series notes that as the island men went off to fight in the war, the women collected lint and other “strategic materials” to support the war effort. (Seems like the island women got off pretty easy here, but then they were likely to have been the principal recipients of the letters from the Secretary of War informing them that their men-folk had been killed or had died of disease.) Another point in the history of the place is that the island was the life-long home of Salome Sellers (née Sylvester; October 19, 1800 – January 9, 1909), an American centenarian and Mayflower descendant who was the last known, verified person born in the 18th century. She had her picture taken in 1906 and it’s on the internet. She made it till 108+.
ReplyDeleteAt last something about which I can wholeheartedly agree with aaall: " I've found complaining lifts ones spirits."
ReplyDelete"...that stupid, evil war."
ReplyDeleteJust for perspective, perhaps the "peace" that followed set the bar for stupid and evil.
If you're looking for an archetypal stupid war, try World War 1. By contrast, the Civil War was fought over something of importance. That it caused enormous suffering goes without saying, but it was "stupid" only in the sense that all wars might be called that.
ReplyDeleteHas everyone seen this article in the NYT?
ReplyDeleteA Second Constitutional Convention? Some Republicans Want to Force One
Representative Jodey Arrington, a conservative Texas Republican, believes it is well past time for something the nation has not experienced for more than two centuries: a debate over rewriting the Constitution.
“I think the states are due a convention,” said Mr. Arrington, who in July introduced legislation to direct the archivist of the United States to tally applications for a convention from state legislatures and compel Congress to schedule a gathering when enough states have petitioned for one. “It is time to rally the states and rein in Washington responsibly.”
To Russ Feingold, the former Democratic senator from Wisconsin and president of the American Constitution Society, a liberal [LOL] judicial group, that is a terrible idea. Mr. Feingold sees the prospect of a constitutional convention as an exceptionally dangerous threat from the right and suggests it is closer to reality than most people realize as Republicans push to retake control of Congress in November’s midterm elections.
“We are very concerned that the Congress, if it becomes Republican, will call a convention,” said Mr. Feingold, the co-author of a new book warning of the risks of a convention called “The Constitution in Jeopardy.”
“This could gut our Constitution,” Mr. Feingold said in an interview. “There needs to be real concern and attention about what they might do. We are putting out the alert.”
Leave it to a liberal to stand in the way of progress. To think I used to admire this guy Feingold.
Should the Constitution be rewritten by conservatives and meet the approval of Rick Santorum? Hell no!
Does the Constitution need to be rewritten? 1,000 times, Yes! It needs to be gutted.
The one we have now is a disaster.
But, as with Chile, it's going to take titanic manifestations of social unrest to get the process of birthing a new constitution going. It's not going to come from the likes of Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.
And also as with Chile, I would not expect the initial drafts to make it past the finishing line. The propaganda to try to create and even more capitalistic, pro-corporate constitution would be relentless.
Calling Jerry Fresia
All wars require at least two parties, an aggressor and resistance to the aggression. Where there is aggression without resistance, there is no war. Whether the war deserves to be characterized as “stupid” depends on the aggressor’s rationale for the aggression. Since, generally, the aggressor’s rationale is unacceptable, the war is “stupid” because the aggressor has acted stupidly, without an acceptable or satisfactory rationale for the aggression. The Civil War began with the Confederacy’s attack on Fort Sumter, in reaction to the election of President Lincoln, based, in large part, to his avowed opposition to the expansion of slavery. The North’s resistance to that aggression was not stupid. The Civil War’s stupidity derives from the Confederacy’s secession and attack on Fort Sumter, in order to preserve its “peculiar institution,” not from the Union’s resistance to the Confederacy’s stupidity.
ReplyDeleteI don't think "stupidity" is an especially useful category when it comes to the discussion of either war in general or particular wars.
ReplyDeleteLFC,
ReplyDeleteI don't necessarily disagree, but you used the term twice, once in quotation marks, once without, in your comment at 9:22 A.M.
You're right, I did. Was reacting to previous comments (F. Poebel and aaall).
ReplyDeleteBtw, Queen Elizabeth has died.
King Charles III. May he be more beloved than Charles I and Charles II.
ReplyDelete