News & Articles

I had a friend (now deceased) who regularly approached me when he needed bread, milk and such. $20 should do.

I never gave him the $20. Instead took him to the store to buy his food, always including a few potatoes and some roll-your-own papers.

A talented and interesting person, he was worthy of (and still has) my respect. But, giving him money was always a bad choice. His affirmation of turning-a-new-leaf was always sincere. That minute. But gone with the next sudden shift of mood. Gone.

You may have experienced such folk with talents that swing in the wind this-way, that, unpredictable but certain. They may be compared to another type, the perpetual virgin who can say with total sincerity they are virginal in terms of a particular activity with a certain person on a set date at a definite time for a certain period, etc.

Perpetual virgins are experienced and have good memories for detail to ensure virginal verisimilitude.

As humans, we learn to cope with our own frailties and those of others. I find it rather a waste of time to judge or find fault with what is because “what is” is what we have to deal with. A condition, forever-virginity, sincere-promises, total-certainty, etc. is the moment’s reality. Deal with it.

I once sold a cable winch to a neighbor who grew volubly hostile about the winch cable. There was none. Not when I bought it, not when I sold it. The drum was rusty. The cable clamp rusted. No sign of cable. When someone sincerely believes their version of events there’s nothing to do but go with that. Find witnesses, take me to court, do whatever is needed. Or, never speak to me again, which worked out fine.

Being tagged, even with a toothy smile, food fairy wasn’t exactly complimentary. It was meant as a way for the speaker to get back some dignity. I understand that. It wasn’t flattering to my friend that I’d not trust him with cash.

Being treated as untrustworthy, as a child had to hurt. I have no doubt. I did it anyway. There we reach moral and ethical problems and issues most of us will face at some time. Taint easy, but it’s there.

Making ethical choices isn’t simple as looking at a nickel and saying five cents.

Let’s say, for argument, we have a heroin addict. How do we treat or behave toward them? If we give them money we can be ninety percent sure the funds will go toward their addiction and a likely sooner death. Giving them food or shelter instead is kinder, but can also be seen as prolonging their misery. Better odds, surely, having a living addict than a dead one, but the choice of a correct thing is not absolute.

The main thing an individual can do is make whatever choice seems best to them and go with it. if time presents a better choice later, that choice can be taken instead. There is no absolute certainty.

Is it worth mention that a diverse or multi-pronged approach means people can do things in differing ways. If a person believes in diverse as I do, it means I require of myself the hold or pause feature where I consider (not necessarily accept) things I’m not sure of or feel I should say “no way.”

There’s a lot, from my observation, of monolithic diversity preached. Like the words “people’s democratic dictatorship” used to describe some political forms, one of those words carries much more political weight and presence than the others. Making a thing sound better doesn’t make it better, only more palatable or deceptive.

In big-picture political arenas, we run into word games with some frequency. Affordable is a recent example. Making affordability a crisis adds to the fun, doesn’t it? But does it mean anything useful?

How do you make a can of peas more affordable? Less contents? Smaller label? More unripe peas? Lighter cans? Don’t pay farmers as much? Don’t pay truckers as much?

How do we do any of that without control of the various areas where a cost is involved?

Possibly the best part of pea price affordability to engage in would be label inspecting or a can integrity, etc. all of which would add some cost to the product without making the pea taste any bit better. Nice word, affordability. But.

In the ever-enjoyable human game of second guessing I’ve often heard criticism about the way I handled something, say the treatment that got me tagged as food fairy. That’s fine. No problem.

I’ll not deny there are other ways of doing things and I have no monopoly. Another person may well handle the issue of feeding an unreliable friend differently than I would. Good. Is one way righter than another? Who knows? Unless encouraged (paid) to do otherwise, we do what makes sense to or is practical for us.

Speaking of pay, I recently talked with someone about the free press. They were of the opine that our press, libraries, news sources and outlets, etc. were free (in the sense of being unrestrained by profit or bribes).

Naïve? I say yes.

It’s rare to find a newsy or info piece not bought by a promoter of a cause. Consider, are you truly interested in or impacted by a ballroom uproar? You can guess my answer from where I sit. I swear to goodness, we’d be up in arms over importation of Siberian veal if there was special interest advancement or profit in it.

Allowing our private minds to be tugged and swayed by thousands of petty interests is likely a recipe for becoming a half-baked nut bar.

In the popular world of the here and now (largely a fantasy of what should or might or could be) we’re little more than prey manipulated to react or spend for the benefit of some cause or concern that cares little for people beyond lip service.

Of which, I once told a critic if they expected my Vaseline’d lips to kiss their plump opinion they should expect a long wait. I don’t reason with noise.