#184 – Dick Bernard: April 1, Census Day 2010, "Coming to America"

/in , , /by

Today is Census Day. A week ago today I had the privilege of listening to the Second and Fourth Graders at South St. Paul’s Lincoln Center Elementary present their music programs to their fellow students and people like me. These kinds of events are always highlights for me. On stage were two of my grandkids, but the effect would have been the same if they were “just kids” up there front and center. One feels the enthusiasm and pride of the students; and sees the skill and respect of the adults involved in such productions.
In the morning session, the Fourth Graders did a wonderful program, “Let Music Surround You”, which closed with their rendition of Neil Diamond’s “America” (presented here by Neil Diamond himself). One of the fourth graders played the Statue of Liberty; fourth grader Teddy was one of those who carried in a banner. I choked up. After seven playful songs, the music teacher told us that the last number would be serious, and it was, in a wonderfully positive way.

I present this vignette on Census Day, 2010, since for almost the last year I’ve been completing my French-Canadian family history which goes back nearly 400 years in North America, and almost 160 years in the United States. Were it not for our immigrant forbears we would not be here.
A goodly part of the research base for ordinary family history is assorted census records. While my family came to the U.S. long before Ellis Island, and to North America long before there was a United States, the feelings and the dynamics were largely the same then, as they are now. “America” is a nation of immigrants, perhaps the most heterogeneous society ever existing on earth, still bringing together all of the rich variety of human beings.
I’ve sent in my census forum, and it was a simple, painless form to complete.
It was not always so simple, as I’ve found from attempting to decipher handwritten census documents generated from 1857 on in the United States, and earlier in Canada.
One can envision a census taker in 1857, walking from home to home, taking the census. The U.S. census taker could write (legibility often in question), and speak English. But frequently the people enumerated were not conversant with English (In my case, they spoke French, or German) and they were often illiterate. So the assorted census documents require a certain amount of interpretation a century or more later.
In eight censuses from 1857 to 1895, for instance, one of my great-great-grandmothers was recorded under four different first names (Ida, Adeline, Lydia, Hattie). The ages of the residents were recorded in each census, and it was obvious that a precise age was not a priority to the resident; it was more likely an approximate age.
In the days before Immigration, a question was asked in which country the children were born, and the adults, if born in another country, were asked if they were naturalized citizen. It was simply a question.
Censuses also recorded other important information about buildings and livestock and crops. One would guess that the only significant difference between then and now is the sophistication of record keeping, but census records have always been kept, and they are important.
Back at the concerts, the last number sung by the second graders, including granddaughter Kelly, was Joy to the World by Hoyt Axton. Thanks to the magic of YouTube, here’s a rendition of that song, actually sung by Hoyt Axton, (which was modified, slightly, to fit Second Grade and the theme of their program, “McElligot’s Pool, by Dr. Seuss”.
“Coming to America”, and “Joy to the World”, indeed. Happy Census Day!

#179 – Dick Bernard: A year blogging

/in /by

One year ago today, March 25, 2009, I clicked on “publish”, and blog entry #1 on this blog was officially posted.
What a year it has been. I have averaged a post every other day on diverse topics. I’m glad I started the project, and I don’t have any plans to discontinue it. There have been and are frustrations. But it has been very well worth the effort.
I know my blog has at least one serious reader: me. I know there are a few more who check in. The Twin Cities Daily Planet has quite often used some piece or other that I wrote for the blog on its internet newspaper. I feel privileged to occasionally “get ink” in the Planet! The Editor of the Planet visited at some point during the post-Haiti earthquake, and apparently liked what she saw, and stops in now and again.
The pluses of preparing and maintaining this blog have outweighed the minuses.
Writing about diverse topics to a completely unknown potential audience has given me both an opportunity to express an opinion, and a responsibility to think through what I put on screen. Unlike the anonymous on-line comments to newspaper columns which appear on-line, I am both a name and a face, and I need to keep that in mind as I write.
Unlike something like Facebook (about which I know little, but am part of); and Twitter (which I know almost nothing about), a blog gives me an opportunity to at least partially flesh out an opinion about some topic of interest. It has also given me an opportunity to practice writing, which is, in my opinion, really the only way one becomes a better writer.
I started the blog with no clear notion of what a blog really was. There are probably millions of blogs out there in the e-universe, so finding a niche is difficult. But blogs are an accepted form of communication these days, and the diversity of opinion expressed on blogs is a welcome relief from the newspaper and magazine and visual media pundits who get paid a lot for essentially repeating their same general message over and over. They have their place in the scheme of things. So do I, and people like me who have their own blogs.
I no longer accept comments, and there is a simple reason for this: I was overwhelmed with spam. There are nuisance manipulators and pirates on the internet, and I finally gave up on deleting spam, and just closed the blog to comments. If anyone wants to write me, my e-address is on the About page of the blog. I’ll enter comments if anyone wishes. DICKunderscoreBERNARDatMSNdotCOM is where I can be reached. I’ll enter the comments as an update to the blog if you wish.
When I initiated the blog 365 days ago, my hope was that there would be frequent outside contributors. This has not happened. Ten or so writers have put their own opinions up, but this is not nearly as many as I would like to see. I’d like to see more people expressing their opinions here. This would make this site a much richer place, than simply looking at what I have to say.
So, I renew my invitation to writers who want to have access to a potentially larger audience. Do a blog post, and then publicize it to whomever you wish. Just submit it to me.

#178 – Dick Bernard: America, the civilized?

/in , , /by

Today, in the wake of the Health Care Reform legislation, came reports of rocks through windows, telephoned death threats. The most vicious seemed directed towards Cong. Bart Stupak of Michigan. And we call ourselves a civilized society?
Unfortunately, out of this encouraged incitement of the anger in the body politic may well come some deranged individual(s) somewhere who will do very serious damage, like Tim McVeigh in Oklahoma City in 1995. It is only a matter of time when domestic terror strikes. All we don’t know is where or when or specifically who will be perpetrator(s) and victim(s). Most likely it will be one of we Americans….
For the rest of us, we’re well advised to learn as much as we can about what we’re for, or against; and to dialogue with others about it. For many, this won’t be easy, but it’s essential.
I don’t pretend to be very smart on politics, but I do listen, and I have observed political behavior over the years.
To begin, it is generally presumed, that perhaps a quarter of the electorate is a fairly reliable ‘base’, whether left or right. These folks are the believers, not much inclined to change their mind, reliable. Neither is a monolith – they range from radical to fairly moderate, but their mind is basically made up. The quiet center – most of the population – is more “in play”. (Me? I’d call myself basically moderate left.)
A good example of misleading opinion: in recent days, polling showed that over half of the American people had issues with the bill which was passed and signed on Health Care Reform. It was not emphasized, generally, that this so-called majority was split into two totally diametrically opposed camps: those who thought Reform went too far, and those who thought it didn’t go far enough. By no means were these groups allies, but they were clumped together nonetheless, and used by some to create an illusion that Americans were against Health Care Reform.
Even by this flawed poll, a majority of Americans think that the Health Care Reform bill is a positive step in the right direction. That’ll be my spin, and I think it is more honest than claiming the American people don’t want Health Care Reform as enacted.
For the people who are looking for simple answers; those who make their judgements based on belief, or on the pronouncements of somebody they trust, or on a narrow interpretation of a specific single issue, there is little mileage in attempting to change their mind. About all that one can do, if the opportunity arises, is to offer to help explain another side of the issue.
Two good sources for assessing accuracy of pronouncements of the Health Care Reform bill (which is a very complicated piece of legislation) are politifact.com and factcheck.org. There are others as well. A simple google or similar search can be very helpful.
A useful primer on whether or not the bill is constitutional appeared in this article by a career, now retired, political correspondent for a major newspaper.
Not a good source of data is someone who has a vested interest in the debate: a congressman, a trade group, someone who can afford the expensive advertising. Their responses will be polished and smooth, but they are carefully crafted to advance only their point of view. There are more reliable sources than the partisans. It is certain that the bill is neither perfect, nor is it horrible.
Several years ago I did a very rough sketch of how I viewed the American body politic. Here is the illustration.

American Political Spectrum: A Personal View

Right or wrong, this general illustration more or less helps direct my own thinking of the “body politic”.
The schematic is very simple: the vertical axis represents intensity of feeling (bias) of people in a segment of the population; the horizontal axis divides 100% of the population into general groups.
In my view, the people with the most intense feelings, left and right, tend to dominate the public media conversation. Their interest is in out-shouting the other point of view.
In between are people of all sorts of varying levels of interest, engagement and bias. Many, if not most, are not much into arguing politics.
There is not much gained by trying to convince (or revile) the far left or the far right. It is the massive middle where progress can and will be made….
I think the Health Care Reform bill passed on Sunday was a great step forward for all of us in America.
Away we go.

#174 – Dick Bernard: Revisiting a column on a teacher's career

/in , , /by

UPDATE Sat. March 20, 2010: At the end of this post I mention a long-ago note from a student to my Dad. Yesterday afternoon I located him. He lives in Oregon, and has severe MS. He’s probably about 65 now. His sister, who lives in California and gave me his address, thinks he’ll really appreciate hearing from me. So it goes.
A week ago, March 11, 2010, the Minneapolis Star Tribune published my op ed on my Dad’s teaching career. The column finally resulted in at least 50 comments, 37 of which are on the Star Tribune website, the rest to me, personally. [content of the column is included at the end of this post.]

I wrote the column “from the heart”, as I admitted in a comment to a blog which picked up and published the op ed. I began to question myself: “did I overstate my case”. After all, Dad’s leaving all of those jobs was never dramatic. There was no Donald Trumps “you’re fired”; no being run out of town on a rail. The separation was quiet, the contract simply not renewed with no indication it was coming. There were no reasons, there didn’t have to be. As my youngest brother commented during the days following the column, Dad never bad-mouthed anyone. We just moved on.
Dad did leave behind a summary he wrote of each teaching experience he and Mom had together. I pulled it out of the file, and read it. He never said he was fired, in any instance.
But as I pieced together the reality of the 26 years when one or another of we kids was alive and living at home, he indeed was “fired” at least three times, and probably two or three others as well. The others they left under their own power. Often those voluntary quits from the next towns were because those positions were very inadequate, for sundry reasons.
I can say with a lot of confidence that poor performance, morals, ethics were never an issue. In point of fact, Dad was more likely to have gotten in trouble because his standards were higher than for some specific power actor(s) who controlled whether he stayed in or left the community. Properly disciplining the wrong kid was a job security issue for my Dad.
In his last assignment, when my youngest brother graduated from high school, the high school baseball team won the State High School Baseball Championship. The baseball coach became the new Superintendent, replacing Dad. That’s how it went.
A week after the op ed, I am very, very comfortable that I did not overstate the case.
The words I used in the op ed that I choose to highlight now are Public Servant, and Due Process. Public School employees were and in many ways are still considered to be like a Hired Man or Housekeeper; to keep some stability in the relationships, the due process rights enshrined in teacher contracts need to be kept in force.
My parents were great teachers, and they deserved better than they got.
As it goes in the profession of teaching, there were small victories on occasion.
In Dad’s files I came across a high school graduation announcement including a male students photo and name. The card was dated for a specific year, so I knew in what town they had been living. “These Keepsakes are presented with My Deepest Appreciation and Gratitude for the Educational Opportunities that you have given me” said the printed text, and below was a handwritten note to “Mr. Bernard, I would like to express to you my deepest appreciation for the help you have given me the past two years. I know we have had our disagreements, but I guess everyone has them. Anyway, I can see now that everything was for my own good. Thank you. Sincerely, _____”
I didn’t know the student or the surname, so I asked my siblings who had lived in this particular town, if they knew this boy. One wrote back, noting, to be polite, that the kid was not a prize.
I noted back that teachers tend to keep these kinds of notes – they’re validation for the impossible task they try to perform under sometimes very difficult circumstances.
That student from almost 50 years ago will get his announcement back, if I can locate him. I wonder how he turned out. Stay tuned.
*
Addenda: In the Star Tribune comments noted above, I filed three of my own. Here they are:
Here’s a comment I made to “the cuckingstool” blog: it sort of sums it up for me. In addition I am including two comments I posted on the STrib website on the issue.
To Cuckingstood: I didn’t realize I’d become famous (or infamous) when I submitted this op ed earlier this week. I was writing from the heart. I was primarily reacting to the Newsweek cover story on getting rid of “bad teachers”, in conjunction with an earlier, accidental, discovery in December ’09 that there was some kind of organized covert attempted assault on teacher seniority in Minneapolis. I had read an earlier opinion in the STrib in December, along the lines of and probably closely related to the Samuels column, but can’t honestly say I’ve read the most recent Samuels et al post in its entirety.
Again, I wasn’t responding to Samuels.
Last I looked, there are nearly 40 comments on my STrib op ed, two of the final ones written by me. I make a couple of recommendations there, particularly about the need for true dialogue on the issues (which will be extremely difficult due to the obvious and quite certainly orchestrated attack mode against basic teacher protections like seniority and due process, and the unions which work to protect their members.) Nonetheless, true DIALOGUE amongst the warring parties is needed.
I have absolutely no beef against innovations like Teach for America, but there has to be a process in place to not have it end-around (and destroy) the basic rights of those already in the system.
*
Personal additions by myself to the submissions at the Minneapolis Star Tribune
After a day on-line
I wrote the commentary and have read all of the over 30 comments thus far, plus a dozen more received at home from persons who knew my parents and/or myself. Both Dad and Mom were professionals in every sense of the word and had high expectations for their children and their students. They were pretty typical of teachers in those small towns then, and now. At times Dad’s high expectations collided with some lower individual or community expectation, Power intervened, and lesser standards prevailed and Dad was gone. I can give examples. Being teacher or chief administrator in even a small district had its risks. Unions enhance public education and quality of society generally, but they represent a threat to some for assorted reasons, none truly related to quality. Are unions perfect? Or all school employees? By no means. They are human, like every other profession or institution. But they very significantly help rather than hinder the progress of society. Dad and Mom are long gone, but by no means forgotten. It would be my hope that this column leads to some true community dialogue on the topic at issue. I’m glad I had an opportunity to represent teachers. I hope I contributed a little. I think I did. Dick Bernard Woodbury
*
Probably my final comment, at the Star Tribune website:
To: “Thanks for the article and comment, Dick” (and others as well)
At the end of my second comment (above, “After a day on-line”) I say I “hope that this column leads to some true community dialogue on the topic at issue.” This will be difficult, as “dialogue” does not presume a conclusion before or even following the conversation, but perhaps some understanding might flow from the conversation. Dialogue is not some comment like, “get rid of seniority”, or “fire bad teachers”. My understanding, after a lifetime (literally) in and around public education is that, for example, pay scales were unilateral creations of school boards to deal with a problem: they were initially attempts to differentiate and reward people in their employ who had more training and experience, probably more responsibilities, and thus of greater value to the system. Teacher Unions were late into the process of developing salary schedules. As one octogenarian friend wrote to me, yesterday, when he began teaching in southern Ohio, teachers were regularly let go because younger, less expensive teachers were available and saving money (not quality) entered in. I don’t think pay was a factor in my Dad’s case, at least during the years that he was called Superintendent, and I was alive. He and I talked often about his experiences. My plea is, to all parties, dialogue, to at least attempt to understand. For a moment, leave Power at the door (very, very hard to do, especially for those with the Power.) I appreciate the Star Tribune’s printing my column. Due to editorial limits on number of words, I could not write at as great a length as I would have liked. Dick Bernard, Woodbury MN
*
On dialogue, taken from a column I wrote on “Truth” December 25, 2008. accessible here.
I have long been taken with a quotation I saw in Joseph Jaworsky’s book, “Synchronicity, the Inner Path of Leadership” (1996). Preceding the chapter on “Dialogue: The Power of Collective Thinking”, Jaworsky included the following quote from David Bohms “On Dialogue”. It speaks to this business of talking with, rather than talking to or at others:
“From time to time, (the) tribe (gathered) in a circle.
They just talked and talked and talked, apparently to no purpose. They made no decisions. There was no leader. And everybody could participate.
There may have been wise men or wise women who were listened to a bit more – the older ones – but everybody could talk. The meeting went on, until it finally seemed to stop for no reason at all and the group dispersed. Yet after that, everybody seemed to know what to do, because they understood each other so well. Then they could get together in smaller groups and do something or decide things.”
*
Minneapolis Star Tribune March 11, 2011:
Dick Bernard: Don’t forget those good old days for educators
DICK BERNARD
It seems, from a flurry of commentaries and letters in recent months, that it is again open season on public school teachers, and particularly their unions.
The mantra is always the same: the union is protecting bad teachers and it’s against doing good things, like getting rid of supposedly lifetime no-cut contracts.
Hardly ever is there real evidence of these failings. To make the charge is sufficient evidence.
I plead guilty to having worked full time for 27 years as a teachers union representative (MEA/Education Minnesota). I am further guilty of having taught public school for nine years before that. Long retired, I now have seven grandkids in public schools and a daughter who’s a principal of a large middle school.
I guess I know a bit about the subject at hand.
There is another credential I possess as well. I grew up (born in 1940) in the good old days when teachers had virtually no rights. Both of my parents were career public school teachers from 1929 through 1971. (Mom stayed at home raising her preschool kids for 13 of those years.)
We lived in small towns in a neighboring state. During my growing-up years (I’m the eldest sibling), we moved to eight communities. In each, Dad was called superintendent, but actually was a teaching principal, the administrator who was accountable to the local school board. Later, younger siblings followed my parents to two more towns, until the youngest graduated from high school in 1966.
My parents were outstanding teachers and outstanding citizens of their communities. I know. One or the other was my teacher for my last five years of public school. All five of their kids achieved at least a bachelor’s degree and all have had long productive careers.
But we moved often, and very often that move was necessitated by Dad being fired, in one or another odd and sometimes innovative way.
These were the good old days of “at will” contracts. All it took was some disgruntled citizen who knew the right people to dispatch these outsiders at the annual contract renewal time. (In my files I have nearly every one of those single sheet “contracts” signed by my parents in their careers.)
Dad always took a philosophical view of the firings, but down deep, I think they hurt him deeply. Recently I came across an essay he wrote about the various ways he was fired during his long career. It was funny, in a very sad way.
Protections that are revolting to some — things like due process, seniority, continuing contract — came about because of abundant abuses in those good old days when the teacher was, literally, a “public servant.”
It’s much nicer to just label some generic teacher as “bad,” and then to blame the evil union for protecting his or her right to due process.
I’d suggest that those who wish to eliminate teacher rights and defang teacher unions had best be very careful lest they get what they pray for. They would not like the results.
Are there “bad teachers”? Of course. Just as there are bad parents, bad executives, bad politicians, bad journalists. We know them when we see them.
Or do we?
Those seeking to get rid of seniority and the like can find more constructive ways to help public education.
Sadly, I’m not holding my breath.
Dick Bernard, Woodbury, is a retired teacher and union representative.

#170 – Dick Bernard: "Big Brother is [Manipulating] You"

/in , , /by

Yesterday I went through the aggravating exercise of converting our television to a new system required by our provider, a company not to be named, though it shares the first three letters of “company” as the first three letters of its name.
For some weeks we had been warned by an endless trailer on screen that if we didn’t get their conversion equipment – at no charge, of course – our TV reception would be interfered with until the equipment had been installed. So, I dutifully ordered the box and the remote, which took twice as long as promised to arrive, and set about to install it, always easier said than done.
The installation finally succeeded, after a Helpful Technician for the company, Com…., helped me through it (and before I noticed the toll-free number that would virtually automatically do the same thing.) During the lulls in installation, the Helpful Technician, in response to my question, said this new technology was to make it possible for Com…. to bring more programs to our home. “More band-width”, he described as the function of that new box plugged into our TV.
The aggravating task concluded, I spent some time practicing with the new remote, so that I could at least tell my spouse how it worked.
Scrolling through, I came across C-SPAN, truly one of the benefits of the early days of the cable revolution, and happened across a tape of a U.S. Senate Commerce Committee hearing where Senators were quizzing the CEO of Com…., the son of the founder of the company, about a proposed merger of this mega-provider with another mega-media company. The hearing was interesting enough to spend some time watching.
The Senator from Mississippi got his turn to quiz the executive, and proudly pointed out that Com…. got its start as a tiny cable company in Tupelo, Mississippi, in 1963. In the hearing room, out of camera sight behind his son, was the Founder of Com…., now a very old and very wealthy man, who was introduced and poked his head into camera view to be recognized. (For over 40 years, Com…. has headquartered in Philadelphia, PA, hardly small town deep south any more.)
“Tupelo” rang a bell for me. I had purposely been there one time in my life, in the summer of 1966. I had gone through Tupelo because it was the birthplace of Elvis Presley, the music icon who burst out of obscurity when I was in high school in the 1950s (“Heartbreak Hotel”, and on and on). I liked Elvis. It was probably not the best idea for me to go through Tupelo in 1966 with my grey Volkswagen with Minnesota license plates, since those were tense civil rights times in the deep south. But I came east to Tupelo via Oxford, Mississippi, and continued east to Muscle Shoals, Alabama, and arrived home safely.
Back at the hearing, the very-smooth testimony continued. Of course, there were only benefits to this proposed mega-merger. Someone else, from the Consumer Federation of America, pointed out from the same hearing table that the distinguished CEO had left out of his testimony one very important fact, and brought that to the deliberation.
I continued to experiment with the remote, and in the end came to the conclusion that the only reason for the modification was to facilitate Com….’s making much more money from consumers like ourselves, and taking business away from lesser providers, like the local movie theaters and purveyors of videos. Ditto for the proposed merger. Now our house can smell of freshly popped popcorn….
Such is how it is in the land of the free and the home of the brave in 2010.
Things have changed since Elvis left Tupelo in 1948, Com…. was born there in 1963, and I passed through in 1966. They haven’t all changed for the better.
Caveat Emptor. My spouse, who watches more TV than I, but increasingly finds it a wasteland as well, wonders how long it would take for the ‘free’ box to result in higher fees for Com…. service.
In the end, we will all lose, including the monopolists who have virtually an open road to riches.

#168 – Dick Bernard: Martti Ahtisaari, Peace Prize winner and a teacher

/in , , /by

The posts for March 7&8 relate to this post. UPDATE March 15, 2010, Minneapolis Star Tribune editorial writer John Rash wrote a column about Mr. Ahtisaari.

Friday, March 5, I had the opportunity to observe a great teacher in action: 2008 Nobel Peace Prize winner Martti Ahtisaari speaking to school children; Martti Ahtisaari participating in a low-key and very casual lunch and conversation with ordinary people; Martti Ahtisaari talking about mediation of the worlds greatest problems to an audience of adults.
In each venue he appeared to be at ease, comfortable with his company, comfortable with himself.

Martti Ahtisaari speaks to children at Augsburg Nobel Peace Prize Festival March 5, 2010


Mr. Ahtisaari is a little older than I am, and certainly far more famous, and by all accounts far more accomplished as well.
But he tended to burst that celebrity bubble by his demeanor in person, and by his comments both to school children, and later to adults, at the Nobel Peace Prize and Forum.
Ahtisaari quietly asserted that the dynamics for settling even the most difficult problems resides most effectively with leaders in local communities. He mentioned at one point a wait of two years before the most effective mediator within a particular society was identified – a person who could help bring parties together to settle a long festering conflict.
Even from far away, you could sense that this man is a listener, one who wants to know to whom he is speaking, and listening even while speaking. In the evening we were in a dark auditorium, and he asked for lights so that he could at least see those to whom he was speaking.
I have participated in many mediations over the years, and came to feel that skill as a mediator is as much a gift as it is a specific set of professional tools and tactics. Someone like Mr. Ahtisaari has to be a very keen observer and a very active listener. When he asked for lights, he was saying much about his style, talking with, more than talking at, an audience.
Another essential skill for a mediator is the ability to be very, very patient.
After receiving the Peace Prize in 2008, he was invited to join The Elders, a prestigious group of leaders with a world reputation.
Among his role models were Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu of South Africa, both of whom are legendary in reconciliation with enemies who most would have found difficult to forgive.
I don’t recall anything dramatic in Ahtisaari’s talks (at any rate, the auditorium was too dark to take notes!). He was a down-to-earth man, seeming to be completely congruent with his roots in rural Finland.
Someone asked him to comment on his successor as Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack Obama. He said he was honored to precede President Obama. Someone else asked about Obama’s military engagement in Afghanistan. To this listener, Ahtisaari understood the quandary faced by the U.S. President.
We tend to set on a pedestal people of Martti Ahtisaari’s stature.
Mr. Ahtisaari in his quiet but persuasive way said to all of us, “you can do it, too, and you must….

Martii Ahtisaari with World Citizen founder Lynn Elling, March 5, 2010

#167 – Dick Bernard: Words Affirming Human Oneness

/in , /by

The posts for March 7 and 9 relate to this post.
I would invite you to read the Affirmation of Human Oneness, and then scroll through the translations into over 40 languages of that Affirmation. Later return to the site to read more about the history of the Affirmation, about its author Joseph Schwartzberg, and also about Lynn Elling, whose Declaration at the same site is the reason for the site.
Friday, March 5, 2010, was the first appearance on the internet of the now-42 translations of Professor Schwartzberg’s Affirmation of Human Oneness, a statement he had first crafted in 1976, and over the years has been slightly modified* (link noted in previous paragraph). Also on March 5, I displayed for the first time a notebook including all of the translations for a display at the Nobel Peace Prize Festival and Forum (see #166 for March 7).
The Affirmation remains a work in progress. Dr Schwartzberg notes that amongst all the languages and dialects of the world, “at least one of these languages [on this website] will be understood by well over 95% of the world’s literate population”
It was interesting to note the reactions of people of all ages to the translations. A number of visitors either came from or had grown up in a country with a language other than English.
If their specific language appeared in the book, their eyes lit up; if not, they were disappointed.
Language, whether written or only verbal, is a very important part of the identity of people. (Dr. Schwartzberg continues to seek proper translations into many other languages.)
I noted something else from the visitors as well. Some would look at a specific translation (each prepared by someone with recognized competence in the language), and suggest that an incorrect word* or interpretation had been used to represent a specific word in Professor Schwartzberg’s original. This is an inevitable problem when persons seek to interpret a language, including their own.
But even with these disagreements, it was still enjoyable to see persons eyes light up when they saw that the Affirmation had been presented in their language, and in its own unique script. That the words were there on a piece of paper conveyed a sense that their culture was valued.
The internet, which was barely taking off by the early 1990s, when Dr. Schwartzberg sought the translations, has become a major means of conveying knowledge and understanding, and now the Affirmation in many languages is on the ‘net, instantly accessible anywhere in the world.
Diverse persons can now dialogue about the words and their significance, and about how we all, regardless of language, can better relate to each other. This is a hopeful development, and I’m happy I could be part of it.

Some of the Title Lines of the Affirmation, in 21 world languages.


* – Part of this discrepancy flows from the fact that the Affirmation is still a work in progress, and on occasion over the years a word or phrase was changed after a translation had been made.
PS: There is a footnote to this story. When I developed the idea for www.amillioncopies.info in 2007, my specific intention was to make it as a tribute to Lynn Elling. But I also knew, at the time, of Dr. Schwartzberg’s Affirmation of Human Oneness, and it seemed an ideal companion to the Declaration of World Citizenship. So the two separate works have appeared side by side, with the permission of both men.
It was not until the evening of March 5, 2010, that I learned from Prof. Schwartzberg that Lynn Elling, back in the 1970s, had in large part helped to inspire him to read the book that inspired the Affirmation (See Dr. Schwartzberg’s Prefatory Statement.)

#161 – Janice Andersen: The Role of Forgiveness

/in , , /by

Janice, Director of Christian Life at my Church, Basilica of St. Mary, Minneapolis, is one of those many heroes and sheroes who inspire me when hope is gone. Her title belies her many roles in Peace and Justice at Basilica. She wrote the following column for our Church bulletin some months ago. I share it with her permission.
I read the book, The Sunflower: On the Possibilities and Limits of Forgiveness. This is a provocative book that shares the story of holocaust survivor Simon Wiesenthal. As a prisoner in a concentration camp, Mr. Wiesenthal is randomly chosen to hear the confession of a dying German SS soldier.
This soldier confessed to unspeakable atrocities, having killed defenseless Jewish men, women, and children. As the soldier lay dying in a hospital bed, he was looking for freedom from his guilt and forgiveness from a Jew so he confessed to Wiesenthal. As Wiesentahl shares his experience and response, he asks the reader what they would do in his place.
The book then presents a symposium of responses from theologians, holocaust survivors, and Nazi officials. Over and over one is asked: “What would you do in his place?”
What would I do? It is impossible to place myself in Wiesenthal’s position and pretend to know what I would do. However, I can get a glimpse into my experience of forgiveness when I consider the many ways in which I have been hurt, wronged, or oppressed in my life. How do I respond to them? Do I hold tightly to resentment? Do I seek to punish? Do I require atonement? How do I respond to the need for forgiveness in my life?
One of the responders in this book, Dennis Prager, suggests that there are specific differences between Jewish and Christian understanding of forgiveness – and a difference in their response to evil. The Jewish view of forgiveness requires a person who hurt another to ask forgiveness from his victim, and only the victim can forgive. Even God’s forgiveness is dependent on that person being forgiven by the victim. In this case, murder is an unforgivable sin. Prager contrasts this view with the Christian experience that is rooted in the belief that all people, even an “evil person,” are loved by God and thus are open to receive forgiveness. Distinctions are made between forgiving and forgetting: between forgiving – on an inner level, and reconciliation – on a public level. There is a call for repentance and a change of heart to prevent an experience of “cheap grace” or perpetual victimhood. Martin Marty speaks of the freedom found in forgiveness, transcending the injustice and experiencing creativity in one’s life. Mattieu Ricard suggests that forgiveness can provide an opportunity for inner transformation of both the victim and the perpetrator – changing the evil into good.
Today our society is full of division, inequity, oppression, injustice, and fear. The Sunflower opens up dialogue on an important dimension of our lives together. Personally and collectively, as communities and nations, we are being asked to consider how we respond to evil and to understand the role that forgiveness plays in our relationships. Let us consider how we reconcile with one another and how we can forgive in the face of continual hurt.

#159 – Dick Bernard: "We are the World"; the "Kin[g]dom of God is yours…." Luke 6:17, 20-26

/in , /by

It’s Valentine’s Day 2010.
Overnight came the new release of the 25th anniversary version of Michael Jackson and Lionel Ritchie’s We are the World. This years rendition, recorded after the earthquake, is dedicated to the people of Haiti (Ayiti). It is powerful. Do watch it.
Back home, today’s Sunday paper had not a single word about Haiti – at least none that I could see. It is now 32 days since the earthquake, and as I anticipated, Haiti has officially been disappeared from the radar screen for most Americans, even though the task of survival will remain job one for Haitians, and the matter of long-term recovery is far in the future.
It is how it is. With the exception of 9-11-01, which is still flogged into our conscious memory at most every opportunity to keep us fearful about the enemy, the ordinary life span of a life altering event is, roughly, a month. And a month has now passed since the earthquake.
It has been decreed that it is time to move on, or so it seems. Except for Haiti, where moving on will take lots and lots and lots of years, and continuing outside support.
This morning at Catholic Mass, the Gospel for the day was the scripture text noted in the title of this post. This text is Luke’s version of the Beatitudes (“Blessed are the meek”, etc.)
The Priest this morning, retired, a frequent visitor to our Parish, highly respected, invariably says “kindom” when the text says “kingdom”, and his error is very intentional. As he explained the story a year or two ago, on the Feast of the Three Kings: when he was pastor of an inner city parish that had, and still has, very active ministries to the downtrodden, particularly the homeless, his assistant once typed something for him, and misspelled the word “kingdom”, leaving out the “g”, resulting in “kindom” on his piece of paper. He noted the mistake, but he liked the alternate word, and has used it instead of Kingdom ever since. So, in the Lord’s prayer, an every Sunday part of Catholic Mass, while we read and most of us say the “official” version, “thy Kingdom come”, our Priest is saying “thy kindom come”.
And so, today, we heard about the kindom of God….
Lent begins on Wednesday for those so inclined. Father suggested a good opening exercise would be to read the 6th chapter of Luke in its entirety.
As he was talking, I thought of the front page of my reflections when I came back from Haiti in 2003. You can view it for yourself here.
So far, the data shows that the average American has contributed about $2 per man, woman and child to relief efforts for Haiti. Our government has supplied a bit over a dollar more per person thus far. While this is a vast outpouring of generosity for us, the vast majority of that money will simply recycle right back into the American economy through sale of goods and services, and salaries for people like the military or aid workers. Yes, we’re helping Haiti; we’re also helping ourselves, far more.
Now the time for the serious heavy lifting in Haiti begins. Maybe Lent is a good time to contemplate the meaning of another part of that Gospel of Luke read this morning: “But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolations. Woe to you who are filled now, for you will be hungry….” Whatever our personal circumstances, if we live in America, we’re rich.
Keep seeing Haiti, and all the other places which have less of the riches of the world than we. It’s the least we can do.

#157 – Dick Bernard: Haiti et al, a little arithmetic lesson in caring and sharing

/in , , , /by

Thursday of this week we showed a few photos from what, in retrospect, were better times for Haiti kids at SOPUDEP School in Petion-ville in December, 2003. Our audience was about 100 2nd graders at an elementary school in a nearby twin cities suburb. Kids relate to kids everywhere, and this audience of young persons paid close attention to the photos of their peers far away, and they enjoyed participating in a small lesson in Kreyol words I was able to teach them.
SOPUDEP school is no longer useable; many of its students were casualties of the earthquake. It has temporarily died, but will rise again with the help of places like that elementary school in the twin cities which is considering helping SOPUDEP recover with part of their relief efforts. It helps to be able to make a personal connection with a person or a place.
The day we were at the school this past week, they were collecting quarters from whoever wished to participate. It was a small amount, but a very intriguing idea.
The school was devoting a week, I gathered, to participate in some way in relief efforts, and was involved in various efforts to better understand Haiti.
Someone(s) had come up with a neat idea: on Monday, the collection began by collecting pennies; on Tuesday, nickels; Wednesday, dimes; Thursday, our day, quarters; and Friday, dollars. If you do the math, that’s $1.41 – a small sum, granted, but coins put together accumulate to real money quickly.
The teacher noted that the trip to the bank with the coins involved a bit of heavy lifting, so to speak.
The fundraising strategy has stuck with me, and this morning at coffee I did a little paper and pencil arithmetic.
IF a person did the same routine as the kids were doing at the school, and repeated the routine every five days over the course of a year, that $1.41 would grow to over $100 by years end.
Of course, one need not stop at a dollar. How about going to six days, and adding a $5 bill; or seven days, adding a 10; or eight, $20? And doing it repetitively, week after week? A seven day cycle would come out to about $850 a year; an eight day cycle, almost $1500…all this for
one cent +
five cents +
ten cents +
twenty-five cents +
$1 +
$5 +
$10 +
$20.
Let’s say that a single percent of Americans – only 3,000,000 people, 1% of a total of 300,000,000 – adopted the elementary schools five day plan, and followed through every day for an entire year. That would come out to over $300,000,000 dollars – all for $1.41 every five days. That’s serious money that could do a whole lot of good in a place like Haiti where a dollar a day is hard to come by, even for adults.
Give it some thought. And action.

Children at SOPUDEP School, Haiti, December 9, 2003