A Season of Rebirth?

Most Christians believe that Christ died for our sins.  They are convinced that he was born and later crucified so that we humans would have an opportunity to mend our ways and get to heaven.  Christmas celebrates this pivotal moment in history.  The holiday is supposed to remind us of God’s love for His creations.

Pagans generally saw things a bit differently.  They viewed the winter solstice as the time when the sun reversed course and in this sense was reborn.  The days would now grow longer so as to nourish the crops upon which their survival depended.  For them, this was a period of joy because it reassured them that life would continue.

What about us?  We too have been going through an extended episode of darkness.  Politically and socially we have endured a long season of disharmony and gloom.  The once proud American Dream of prosperity and opportunity has devolved into a nightmare of distrust and recriminations.

So disheartening has this interlude become that many wonder if the shadows will ever lift.  Will egregious partisans stop trying to destroy one another?  Will ordinary citizens treat each other with civility?  Can Americans once more look to the future with hope and anticipation?

It would be nice to say that this Christmas will be a turning point.  I wish I could report that people have tired of their sourness and hostility.  There will, to be sure, be bursts of love and kindness during the coming days, but they will be transitory.  Sadly, the bitterness will return.

Many conservatives hope president Trump’s policies will revive the economy.  They expect his tax cuts to put money in their pockets and smiles on their faces.  Ronald Reagan, once his programs took hold, declared that it was “morning in America.”  Can we look forward to a similar sunrise?

I don’t think so.  Although the economy may turn upward—even sharply upward—this will not be enough.  We have entered an era of despair that good news may not be able to penetrate.  Our collective spirits have become so troubled that we might not recognize hope were we to stumble upon it.

 Let me start with the liberals.  Their dreams have been charbroiled.  “Hope and change,” once was an optimistic mantra, has been reduced to ashes.  Despite proud invocations of social justice and compassion, Democrats know that when they were in charge, they did not supply what was promised.

Their worst fear is therefore that Donald Trump might succeed where they failed.  As a result, they are crossing their fingers and praying that things go dreadfully wrong.  Indeed, if they can help these catastrophes come to pass by being obstructionists, they are happy to oblige.

Of course, they will not rejoice if disaster occurs.  It will, after all, be disaster.  Hence, given that success would prove them wrong, they are in a no win situation.  Whatever happens, their visions of a utopian society are unlikely to be resuscitated.  If so, they must mourn their passing.

Yet conservatives are in scarcely better shape.  Their dreams too are in a state of disrepair.  Donald Trump’s victory did not represent a triumph for their traditional aspirations.  Trump is more of a populist and pragmatist.  He was never a mainstream Republican and continues to be a deviant.

What’s more, laissez-faire economics can no more be revived than socialist fantasies.  A relatively free marketplace has provided untold riches, while a democratic government has kept despotism at bay.  Nonetheless, precisely because these flourished, they no longer provide images of something spectacular.

When conservatives assure voters they will have more in their pockets, their constituents are pleased, not ecstatic.  When traditionalists promise to preserve the constitution, their partisans do not jump for joy.  These achievements are too mundane to generate excitement.

To put this another way, contemporary conservatism is not inspirational.  It does not furnish a vision that brings folks to their feet.  People want new and improved—not good enough.  They want their lives to soar to a higher plane.

Yet that is not happening.  The clouds are not parting to reveal a heaven on earth.  Genuine improvements are possible, but aren’t perceived as sufficient.  In this regard, there will be no season of rebirth.  It will be the same old same old—perhaps even more contentious.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University

Sentimentalizing Christmas

Not long ago, my wife told me that she wished I would not write a specifically Christmas column this year.  She explained that she finds these exercises cloyingly sentimental.  Filled with expressions of love and invocations of family togetherness, they often depart from the realities of our demanding lives.

Mind you, my wife and I celebrate the holiday.  We have a Christmas tree and string lights in front of our house.  We also send out Christmas cards and exchange presents.  Because I am Jewish, we light the Hanukah menorah as well.  And oh, yes, there are all those parties to attend.

Nonetheless, she and I know that our lives will not be changed by such celebrations.  We have lived too many years, and experienced too many holidays to expect them to bring unmitigated joy.  Furthermore, we have learned that transitory expressions of love do not repair difficult relationships.

And so when endless streams of mawkish Christmas movies preempt our favorite television programs, we grow restive.  Or when nothing but Christmas music fills the airwaves, we tire of the jolliness and pretend religiosity.  We especially hate those mushy commercials.

But then, a week ago, we attended a concert sponsored by Kennesaw State University’s School of Music.  A program called “In the Spirit: A Celebration of the Holidays” shed new light on old traditions.  Preformed by the Atlanta Pops Orchestra and featuring John Driskell Hopkins of the Zac Brown Band, it was a revelation.

To put the matter succinctly, it was rollicking good fun.  The orchestra was in wonderful form.  Its musicians were actually smiling.  They performed with a verve and good humor that was infectious.  Yes, the music was familiar, but it was delivered with such glee that I could not keep from grinning.

As for Hopkins, his Santa-like rotundity suited the occasion.  From where I sat, his playfulness reflected a genuinely good nature.  What is more, the man can sing.  There was a gusto to his manner that brought his selections to life.

I loved hearing “Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer” sung as if it meant something.  I reveled in “Grandma Got Run over by a Reindeer” and, along with Grandpa (and cousin Mel), found I believed.  I especially adored the delightful nastiness of “You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch.”

These tunes brought back happy memories.  They invigorated the dormant child in me and I relished their silliness.  This represented a cheerful Christmas.  Although there was also religious music, its beauty enhanced the giddiness and energy of the other offerings.

We in the Atlanta area are lucky to have such high quality diversions at our disposal.  When I lived in New York City, I assumed that it was the capital of first-rate entertainment.  Well, maybe that’s true—but Georgia more than holds its own.

Moreover I can have as good a time here—perhaps a better one.  Because I can let my hair down, I do not need to feign make-believe sophistication.  Quality, as it happens, is not just a matter of technique or talent.  It is also a product of emotion and commitment.

So let me get back to the business of celebrating Christmas.  It doesn’t have to be artificial.  It need not be sanctimonious.  Although shopping in our increasingly materialistic society nowadays begins weeks before Thanksgiving, we do not have to let a compulsive drive to be “loving” get us down.

Contrived smiles can be nauseating; nonetheless there can also be moments of unaffected exultation.  Young children experience it when they unwrap their gifts from Santa.  Their astonishment at an unearned reward converts the world into a place where anything is possible.

For adults, that kind of happiness is less available.  We have endured too many frustrations and seen too many illusions shattered to expect to have all our dreams fulfilled.  In our urbanity, we wait for the other shoe to drop; for that next problem to arise.

Yet despite it all, there can be moments of pure pleasure.  My wife and I experienced one listening to the Atlanta Pops.  It was real and spontaneous.  Then again, their arrival depends on us being open to them.  And so, here’s hoping you too retain a capacity for wonder and delight.

 Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University

Watergate Revisited

Amazing as it may seem, the Watergate scandal is almost a half century behind us.  Nonetheless, its reverberations continue to haunt us.  As a flexion point in our political history, it remains a model of how democracy can be perverted.

Richard Nixon was clearly caught with his hand in the cookie jar.  Incontrovertible evidence of wrongdoing ultimately forced him out of the presidency.  For liberals, this was a victory of epic proportions.  They were thus able to portray themselves as champions of our constitutional heritage.

Initially it had been thought that Nixon ordered the Watergate break-in to spy on his political foes.  But when it came out that he hadn’t, the focus shifted to the “cover-up.”  Proof that he had attempted protect his underlings from criminal prosecution was eventually forthcoming.  This was enough to seal his fate.

The Woodward and Bernstein revelations were able to convert “tricky Dick” into a modern Benedict Arnold.  Democrats could now crow about how they had been right in branding him a “crook.”  Soon thereafter, they would indulge in a decade of curtain calls for defending our liberties.

So ingrained was this reputation for securing justice that once Donald Trump was elected president, the machinery needed to expel him from office was taken out of storage.  This political clown was obviously worse than his devious predecessor and hence deserved to be impeached.

But a funny thing happened on the way to a repeat performance.  The Russian collusion scandal that was supposed to expose Trump’s attack on our democratic traditions did not roll out as scheduled.  Neither did the stand-by accusation of interfering with a criminal investigation.

Instead the tables got reversed.  Just as Hillary Clinton’s electoral victory turned out not to be inevitable, so the anti-Trump findings of the Mueller team got delayed.  Now it is the special prosecutors who are suspected of misconduct.  They are, as of this moment, distrusted for their partisan agenda.

Some observers do not yet appreciate where this about-face may lead.  They are, for instance, unaware that the Watergate outrages took a year to unfold.  Nor are they cognizant of the comparative scope of the two affairs.  They therefore assume that the former must have been worse than the current imbroglio.

In fact, they are wrong.  The contemporary liberal shenanigans are more serious.  Their extent, and the danger they pose to our democratic habits, are more alarming.  Nixon and company only sought an electoral advantage.  The present-day villains hope to undermine our republican traditions.

First, the Nixonian transgressions were circumscribed.  There was a single break-in, the purposes of which were limited.  As for the cover-up, it was a strictly White House affair.  Even the alleged attempts to use the IRS to punish political opponents came to naught.  The bureaucrats would not cooperate.

Today the span of felonious activity is far greater.  Scoundrels were (and are) to be found among Obama’s advisors, lurking at the IRS, at the helm of the intelligence agencies, in many regulatory bureaus, running the State Department, overseeing the Department of Justice, and debasing the FBI.

This is not always a conscious conspiracy.  Like lone wolf terrorists, many of the players do not need outside instructions to replicate the Watergate guidebook.  They are so committed to a neo-Marxist ideology that they are prepared to sacrifice their careers for the cause.

Worse yet, the erstwhile guardians of our national integrity are orchestrating an immense cover-up.  Whereas once it was members of the media who ferreted out lies and corruption, today investigative reporting has been replaced by political grandstanding.  Much of the news really is fake.

As for the judges, FBI agents, and Justice Department lawyers who are supposed to identify and penalize illegal activities, they are often its authors.  They care not one whit about protecting the law if it conflicts with their ideological allegiances.  These folks are so sanctimonious they assume they are doing good.

But the icing on the cake is that millions of Americans do not realize their liberties are in jeopardy.  They have been so routinely bamboozled that they can longer distinguish truth from fiction.

But wait!  As revelations of left-wing treachery continue to accumulate, the threat to our freedom will be impossible to ignore.  When that happens, it might finally be possible to drain the Washington swamp.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University

On Helping Ourselves

Margaret Thatcher, the former British Prime Minister, once observed that the trouble with socialism is that eventually its administrators run out of money.  Since socialism depends on stealing from the rich to give to the poor, she had a point.  But there is something even more profoundly amiss with collectivist governments.

Life can be frightening.  Although have I remarked upon this many times, its truth is part of nearly everyone’s experience.  Things go wrong.  We get hurt.  Sometimes we see these threats coming, but do not have the power to stave them off.

No wonder we now and again crave protection.  We want someone bigger, stronger, and wiser to prevent serious damage.  In short, we hope to be saved.  What we cannot do for ourselves, we essentially want beneficent outsiders to do for us.

When we were young, this was, of course, our parents.  Loving mothers and fathers frequently interceded on our behalf.  They fed, clothed, and warded off the bullies.  As we get older, however, their limitations became evident.  They made mistakes and were occasionally revealed to be impotent.

As a result, millions of us turn to more reliable guardians.  For many, these are found in religion.  An omniscient and omnipotent deity is, in particular, asked to rescue us from disaster.  He will “save” us from the hazards we cannot manage.

In recent years, however, religion has been in decline.  With the rise in science and our unparalleled accumulation of wealth, fewer adults turn to prayer for solace.  They want more concrete protections than are available from spiritual sources.

And so many folks rely on the government for salvation.  It is clearly bigger, stronger, and richer than any individual.  Indeed, it resources are so immense that nothing seems beyond its powers.  Precisely because it can confiscate the treasures of the affluent, it has the wherewithal to come to our aid.

What is more, according to the collectivists, it has the motivation to serve our interests.  Because the American government is democratic, it is regarded as an extension of ourselves.  It will safeguard us—because how could we be opposed to self-help.

Nonetheless, this is pure fiction.  The government is not a disembodied substitute for us.  It is not a super-person with unlimited good will.  While those who represent it often do attend to our needs, they are neither perfect, nor invariably on our side.

Modern governments are bureaucracies.  They are comprised of millions of individuals arranged in hierarchies of “defined offices.”  In other words, they are people who have jobs that are constrained by rules and bosses.

Furthermore, these bureaucrats have interests of their own.  If our parents had limitations, they have many more.  Whereas our parents probably loved us, these officeholders do not.  How could they?  They don’t even know us.

As importantly, like all humans they sporadically give in to temptation.  They break the rules when they believe this might benefit them.  In sum, they become corrupt.

Isn’t this what we are experiencing?  Didn’t the defective launching of ObamaCare teach us how inept government functionaries can be?  Didn’t the lies told to protect the higher-ups demonstrate a pervasive selfishness?  Although we were told this was for our good, was it?

And what about those FBI agents who employed different standards depending on the political affiliation of those under investigation?  Didn’t their political ideologies override their alleged neutrality?

 The bottom line is this: how can people with foibles akin to our own save us?  No doubt they can help.  But will they always?  Over two millennia ago, Plato asked who would guard us from the guardians?  It cannot always be the guardians themselves.

The answer—and it is not one everyone will find satisfactory—is that we must save ourselves.  If we do not take responsibility for protecting our welfare, no other human agency can do this for us.  Moreover, if we do not diligently oversee those delegated to serve us, we are giving them a blank check to exploit us.

In the modern world, large governments are essential.   Some activities, such as national defense, can only be performed by the state.  Even so, bureaucracies cannot do everything.  As is still sometimes said—God helps those who help themselves.

 Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University