News & Articles

In case you’re wondering. It’s true. People will yap at you for any reason under sun or moon and nothing more than they feel like it.

When, as is sometimes my situation as Harry Contrary, this happens I’ve learned the value of a gracious “Thank You” for even the most senseless objection.

Frankly, if a person thinks explaining or arguing is worth the effort, I politely say it’s not. Waste of time. Why? Because when an objection comes minus “What did you mean by,” or “I’m not clear on your point,” etc., you’re crediting empty complaint with more than its worth.

Anyway, I’m quite content letting some things sail quietly by. What “is” is of more interest to me than what might or supposedly should be.

I recently told an unvarnished tale of two bachelor shackers that (especially when told using voices and dramatic narration) speaks of real people and not some imagined community.

People cope, struggle, fail and get by as best they can. I happen to think their stories stand on their own without needing a prop or external bachelor morality or laments about the shacker community. The two old guys managed best they were able.

Was it practical convenience to pair up or love or maybe even some composite bigger than seen by us today? Having looked after one another for some years there was a bond. Good enough for me to respect without trying to pretty it up or judge either its merits or other qualities.

So, whether they were (sometimes) hopeless drunks or (sometimes) lonely-loveless doesn’t matter.
That out of the way, I’ll confide secretly in you that not infrequently I’ll get a zinger from someone far more knowing, wise or compassionate than I. Wouldn’t be hard to find plenty who are.

But when assaulted with assumed political affiliation, I have to smile because accusation and label are what the other person needs to put sense (such as it might be) in their (not my) world.
On average I’d say I’m traditional in view, based on having got to where I am in a plain-old way over which I had and want no control.

Plus, as a natural born contrary, I have to shy away from Left or Right, steer clear of Democrat or Republican as too confining, as to me is Independent meaning always having to react to the others. My politics aren’t political.

Hmmmm, what’s that mean? Means others can wage rhetorical and cultural and economic and political war over their stances (to me that’s all they are, stances or poses) because I tend to view things in terms of centralized or decentralized. You could call that local control. Could. But to me also says in a simple voice that northern Minnesota knows more how to deal with minus 40 and balsams and large tooth aspens and peat moss, etc., than a desert dweller would.

People managing what they know is a reasonable strategy. Not perfect. No. But neither is the globalist way of allocating from a distant committee room.

Decentralizing and local control/input aren’t as easily wrapped into either of the two reigning political groups. Some (not too many) social groups long favored loose confederation or local autonomy. But, their lack of a single, consolidated voice representing a “block” means they don’t get heard as much or draw attention of vote seekers.

In a two-party system an independent is in some ways voiceless. Plus if you ever had the opportunity (aka in this case as bad luck) you will know that some views get pushed, pushed and promoted until exhaustion wins and the view is accepted for the sake of peace and quiet if nothing else.
As was said of Stalin’s successor, ‘weak leaders are as dangerous as strong ones’. Different dangers, of course, but no less dangerous.

For us, living in a relatively safe and stable (high trust) society we can (as I often do) muse on things such as decentralization. But, and this matters, my happy reflections depend on a certain type of society where reason and reasonableness and compromise are respected. Put that, however, against a position where you’re placed as either for or against, friend or enemy, a believer or cursed. That’s where the old “pigeon chess” analogy comes in. I’ll remind you of it.

In pigeon chess you set the table, the pigeon flies in, scatters the pieces, defecates on the board and flies off proclaiming victory.

Those who don’t respect reason and order because they want something else. Those fellow travelers and neighbors and workmates, etc. are very difficult to work with.

In effect, those who don’t respect the rules or intend to follow them force one side to do all the lifting and work trying to forge compromise or progress where the opposing view has one and only notion in mind. It will be “our” (meaning their) way or none. An easier going pragmatic person does not draw (Demand) attention and consideration as does the (old familiar) squeaky wheel. So maybe, suggests a cynical squeaker, the real divide bother our social lives isn’t so much wealth as noise.

Being routinely confronted by and having then having to mollify the loudest means less noise concerns are overwhelmed. The noisy will often say they represent the silent ones, but do they?

I’d believe more if I heard from the quiet. I mean, cannon blasts do not seem to me a good representation of peace and quiet.

Anyway dear READER readers, I feel the need to let some calm into our lives by recognizing noise for what it is. Not a substitute for deliberation, or digestion, or potential compromise. I, for example, didn’t want and don’t like war with Iran.

On the other hand, I have to consider that it might be necessary to address the problem. A state or nation that wants to dominate its neighbors is a concern. Remember how Iran and Iraq warred for years – and years. A nation should not bully its neighbors for more than 50 years as is the case. So, don’t want to do it but maybe have to at least consider a better outcome than was there.