James M. Redwine

Peace

Let’s Hear It For Misanthropy

by Leave a Comment

Peg and I have given up requesting a restaurant table to ourselves. Regardless of the genre of eatery, the maître d’hôtel or greeter or simply the seater demands that we be seated among people we do not know or choose to associate with. The restaurant may have twenty empty tables but we are commanded to sit cheek to jowl with groups of strangers who do not appreciate our presence either. Our options are to spend our precious time and money among people we do not know and will never see again or to leave and buy groceries for a meal at home.

And should we be so fortunate as to find a sparsely occupied area when we arrive, the very next party to enter the establishment will be seated right next to us even though there may be numerous empty tables across the room. Usually such interlopers will be loud, boisterous and saddled with toddlers who spend their time letting their parents or grandparents know how unhappy they are.

Having been a waiter myself in various establishments in various locales, I know it requires very little extra effort to serve parties a few extra yards apart. In fact, I always preferred a little extra space between my customers who appreciated the same.

Another phenomenon I have noticed when dining out is that servers demand that we pay personal attention to them when all we want to do is enjoy our chosen company, order our meals and ask for the check later. We cannot reasonably do anything about a bad meal except not come back, so why are we asked ad nauseum, “Is everything okay?” If it isn’t, will we be reseated by ourselves? And why do the waiters or waitresses demand eye-contact and verbal responses? How about just a little privacy? With even a hamburger costing $40.00, is a little peace and quiet out of the question?

Of course, the real problem is not being seated cheek to jowl in restaurants, but being constantly accosted by other humans who are in constant fear of being judged irrelevant and, therefore, ignored. Everyone wants their own space and time, but they resent it if the rest of us want the same thing. Most people would rather be horsewhipped than be deemed insignificant. It is preferable to be abused instead of dismissed.

Even when Peg and I visited the two-million-acre Yellowstone National Park in early May when hardly anyone else was anticipated to be there, as we were enjoying the grand solitude of awaiting the eruption of Old Faithful, a bus load of clamoring tourists arrived. They exited the tour bus like a hoard of yellow jackets with cameras. Then as Peg stood trying to watch Old Faithful erupting, a man, without saying a word, leaned his elbow upon her shoulder with his camera in hand to video the event. It is fortunate for him the national parks prohibit guns.

Gentle Reader, you might ask why those who prefer some space and privacy ever leave home? It is because modern society gives us no option. In a world with over 8 billion people crammed all over it, any respite from the cacophony of clanging culture is like a poultice of blessed ointment, a surcease of soothing balm from Gilead. But, one can only escape into Amazon for so much. Some things in our lives require forays where providers require our physical presence. Those halcyon days of family doctor house calls, home repairs, disaster recovery and neighbors fixing our fences without notice are gone with the arrival of the questionable benefits of electricity.

Where are the neighbors and friends who, much as ideal children are neither seen nor heard until and unless they are truly essential. Is it not bad enough that we must fight our way through crowded streets, jostling airport queues, sardine seating on multi-hour flights and put up with clowns who pay for seats at ballgames and concerts then never sit down even if they are in a front row?

And who are the sadists who design airplane seating with three seats and four armrests? If we are required to pay exorbitant ticket prices we should, at least, never have to share armrests with total strangers. One row of only two separate seats ought to be mandated by federal law. Plus, the overhead bins should have available space for the maximum two passengers per row carry-ons. Don’t the people who design airplanes ever fly themselves?

Assigning blame for those who demand we are subjected to unwanted socialization is difficult. It may have begun with grade school curricula that force six-year-olds to mingle even if bacteria are the only thing truly exchanged. Or, perhaps, our own parents are to blame for constantly placing us in social settings where the supposed benefits are sharing and familiarization even if what is shared is contact with unwashed comrades. Do adults have such little faith in children they fear their individuality?

Of course, what most of us would love to avoid is the insipid political philosophies of those with whom we disagree. I suggest it is time the TV pundits and gratuitous sociologists who keep harping on “togetherness” simply shut up and leave us alone. I for one would be happy to afford others their clearly illogical political positions if they would reciprocate.

In conclusion, Gentle Readers, whether you are customers or providers, let’s just strive to leave others alone and hope they do the same.

P.S. from Peg: “Geesh, what a grump? Which side of the bed did Jim get out on this morning?”

Lessons From Moms

by Leave a Comment

President Trump announced his main goals during his second inaugural address on January 20, 2025:

“We will measure our success not only by the battles we win but also by the wars that we end – and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into. My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and a unifier.”

President Trump also declared:

“After years and years of illegal and unconstitutional federal efforts to restrict free expression, I will sign an executive order to immediately stop all government censorship and bring back free speech to America.”

President Trump’s stated goals are the bedrock of our fragile democracy. It takes very little to get mired in endless wars, especially when voices calling for peace and reason are silenced. History is littered with great societies who charged headlong into their own destruction for the silliest of causes.

The most famous war of ancient western civilization was the Trojan War between Greece and Troy. It lasted ten years, cost countless lives and treasure and was started over one woman, Helen, whose face, according to the poet Homer, “Launched a 1,000 ships”.

World War I was often called the “war about nothing”, cost the earth millions of human lives, including over 100,000 Americans, and was started over the assassination of the Arch Duke of Austria-Hungary, Franz Ferdinand.

America’s Viet Nam War spanned over twenty years of conflict, but it was a questionable attack on a United States ship in the Tonkin Gulf in 1964 that was used to justify America’s involvement in the “endless war”.

The United States had no quarrel with Iraq but false intelligence alleging Iraq had “weapons of mass destruction” got us involved in the costly military slog that has continued since 1990. In this pointless and endless war America has expended and is still expending countless lives and treasure. What President Trump recognized in his inaugural address is that war can be slid into easily but may result in catastrophic consequences and never end.

Since his inauguration, President Trump has frequently compared the fighting between Israel and its neighbors to a school yard dustup between boys. As President Trump has frequently said, America has no reason to be involved. U.S.A. involvement might lead to another world war but it could lead to a permanent Middle East Peace if we put into practice the lessons of history or simply those from our mothers.

When I was in the first grade, for some never fathomed reason, another first grader and I developed a routine of fighting every day after school. As do most schoolboy contests, they amounted to little damage to either of us but did result in the destruction of numerous tee shirts. Well, our mothers banged our heads together and ended our “endless war”. He and I, of course, became good friends and still are today. Neither of us has a clue what we fought about back then.

I respectfully suggest to President Trump that he tell Israel and Iran they should neither one have nuclear or atomic weapons and neither should attack the other or their neighbors. Instead of arming one country to attack the other, America should use its enormous motherly power and wisdom to sit Israel and Iran down with the stern warning that no more tee shirts will be lost by anyone, including us.

Anti-WWIII

by Leave a Comment

To be anti-Nazi is to be neither anti-Teutonic nor anti-Germany any more than to be anti-Zionist is to be anti-Semitic or anti-Israel. The United States and our WWI allies, such as Great Britain, should have required Nazi Germany to abide by its 1919 Versailles Treaty obligations and perhaps there would not have been a WWII. While it is correct that the treaty ending WWI was needlessly vengeful towards Germany and woefully shortsighted by the victors, at least Hitler’s illegal re-occupation of the German Rhineland in 1936 should have alarmed us.

Instead, the world did nothing but dither while the Nazis invaded Poland (1939), Denmark, Norway, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg and France (1940), then Yugoslavia and Greece in 1941. The United States did finally react in 1941, but that was because Japan bombed Pearl Harbor and, as we declared war on Japan, Germany declared war on us.

But as the Nazis invaded its defenseless neighbors and even slaughtered its own citizens, the world’s democracies, mainly the U.S. and Britain, fiddled. Surely, we learned that the slippery slope from a self-described victim such as Germany to a genocidal invader such as the Nazis must not be appeased, or worse, enabled. Yet, the United States not only helped create Israel in 1948, we have since enabled the Zionists to bomb Gaza, the West Bank, Syria, Yemen, Lebanon and Iran.

Just as students did in the 1960’s and 1970’s when the United States bombed Viet Nam and Cambodia, today’s students at many colleges and universities are exercising their First Amendment rights to address their grievances to our government. Our government has responded by bombing Yemen, deporting scholars and further enabling the Zionists. The American people have a right, even a duty, to call anti-Zionism what it is and not be intimidated from calling out what it is not, anti-Judaism or anti-Semitism.

The Zionists want to prevent Iran or any other Middle Eastern country from being able to defend themselves as Israel already can, with nuclear weapons. As Hitler began his hegemony gradually, the Zionists are steadily invading and occupying Gaza, Yemen, Syria, the West Bank and Lebanon.

WWII may be what the world thought WWI was, the War to End All Wars. Unfortunately, about 50 million people died during WWII. If Israel, with our full knowledge and support, starts WWIII by bombing Iran, we will have once again failed to learn from history.

I suggest we own up to our myopic view of the Zionists, not the Jewish citizens of Israel, and that we not allow the shouted tropes of anti-Semitism to still our voices for fairness, understanding and peace. Hitler, unlike the Zionists, did not have nuclear weapons. If we want to prevent a true eve of destruction, as we discourage Iran from procuring nuclear weapons, we should dismantle Israel’s.

Smoke

by Leave a Comment

 

           Photo by Peg Redwine
Photo by Peg Redwine

 

Pope Francis will be buried in a plain wooden coffin outside of Vatican City at the Basilica of St. Mary Major in Rome. Six other popes are buried there also, although none after the 17th Century. St. Mary Major Basilica is not within Vatican City. Vatican City is impressive by design. Michelangelo’s La Pieta is there as is the breathtaking Sistine Chapel. The Pontifical Swiss Guards, all of whom looked to be first round NBA draft picks, are stationed in and around St. Peter’s Basilica and appear to have been chosen by their opaque facial expressions. Even non-Catholics are awed by the pomp and circumstance of Vatican City. In short, it is the antithesis of a wooden coffin. However, its ostentatiousness brings Pope Francis’ humility into sharp contrast.

 

Photo by Peg Redwine
Photo by Peg Redwine

The first pope I remember was Pius XII (1939-1958) who was succeeded by John XXIII (1958-1963), Paul VI (1963-1978), John Paul I (1978), John Paul II, (1978-2005), Benedict XVI (2005-2013) then Francis (2013-2025). Naturally, Francis, the most current, stands out as the best-known and most accessible to us in 2025. The modern media age makes all world leaders more ubiquitous and familiar.

In Assisi. Photo by Peg Redwine

But it was not the media that created Pope Francis’ character of humility and grace. The record and memory of the original Francis of Assisi guided the ecumenical kindness and inclusiveness of Pope Francis. When one travels to the town of Assisi in the Papal State of Umbria, Italy, the tomb of St. Francis has the look and feel of acceptance and equality. Pope Francis chose his name carefully.

Pope Francis appeared to open his heart to all without reservation as to status, wealth, sexuality or frailty. As Francis often said, “Who am I to judge?”; the Vicar of Christ indeed. Pope Francis dedicated his leadership of over one billion Catholics as well as his concern for countless Muslims, Jews, pagans, non-believers and other Christians to the causes of peace and human suffering throughout the earth. When the smoke from the Vatican’s Sistine Chapel turns white, it will be good for us all, Catholics, atheists and sinners of all beliefs, if a third Francis can be found to lead the way forward.

St. Peter’s Basilica Ceiling. Photo by Peg Redwine

The Price of Peace

by Leave a Comment

Photo by Peg Redwine

Americans relate to the Ukrainians’ passion to control their own lives. Of course, self-determination is not just an American or Ukrainian desire. It is a universal need for all people. However, when it comes to a democratic form of government there is an interesting historical tradition shared by Americans and Ukrainians.

We Americans rightly point to our Constitution that took effect in 1789 as a shining example of how a country’s government can be held in check as individual liberties are protected. However, in 1710 Ukrainian Philip Orlyk wrote and published a proposed constitution that called for a government designed to have three competing branches, Executive, Legislative and Judicial. Our American constitution was drafted principally by James Madison and was based mainly on the theories of French legal philosophers Montesquieu and Voltaire and the English legal philosopher John Locke along with legal theories underlying The Enlightenment. All of these thinkers did their work after Orlyk had published his constitution based on a democratic system of self-government.

Orlyk’s constitution was never put into operation. But the strong democratic ideals of the Ukrainian people were a part of what the German legal philosopher Friedrich Carl von Savigny (1779-1861) would have described as the Ukrainian nation’s Volksgeist. Volksgeist is the inherent common spirit of a particular culture, in this case Ukraine.

When we are amazed that the Ukrainians are so vigorously and courageously opposing aggression from the third most powerful military on earth we can look to their spirit, their Volksgeist of democracy. This deep passion for self-determination when coupled with the natural advantages of fighting for their homeland have allowed the Ukrainians to stand up strongly against the great Russian bear. Will they win, yes, because they already have. Much of the world is on their side and is supporting them. Will Russia eventually gain physical control of Ukraine? Maybe, but emotional control over the hearts and minds of the Ukrainians, probably not.

How will this war reach what in mediation is called a quiescent state? There are many possibilities. In the long run the outcome is a subject of pure speculation. But in the short run a few things can be suggested. In all negotiations each side has their dream outcomes and each has what they eventually will accept. Russia probably hoped for total capitulation by Ukraine and Ukraine probably hopes for surrender by Russia. Neither outcome is likely.

Should total victory be beyond either country’s grasp, Ukraine may settle for sovereignty of all Ukrainian territory west of Russia including free access to the Dnieper River from the Black Sea plus sovereignty over the port of Odessa. Whereas Ukraine may want and may deserve reparations of billions of dollars from Russia, Russia cannot provide for itself much less re-build Ukraine. Ukraine will look to America and others such as Germany, France, Canada and Great Britain for economic aid.

Russia may be eager to get out of the quagmire it has blundered into if Ukraine concedes Crimea, already a fait accompli, and any port on the Black Sea or the Azov Sea excluding Odessa. Russia would have to sign a treaty that promises no future incursions into Ukraine and no interference with the Port of Odessa or use of the Dnieper River. Ukraine would have to sign a treaty that binds itself to not seek or accept NATO membership as long as Russia abides by the peace treaty. Of course, there are thousands of other possible significant concerns both countries may wish to have go their way. But peace requires sacrifice.