UNNATURAL CAUSES

[dmuja]

 

PBS is running this series called UNNATURAL CAUSES <--link

 

 

..The series sheds light on mounting evidence of how lack of access to power and resources can get under the skin and disrupt human biology as surely as germs and viruses....we have among the worst disease outcomes of any industrialized nation - and the greatest health inequities. It's not just the poor who are sick. Even the middle classes die, on average, almost three years sooner than the rich...

 

 

I saw an episode today and its very good.

 

It combines and expresses -in a very clear way- most of my own thoughts and views on just exactly 'how' American society should not be simply viewed as "the land of opportunity" but might also be described as a harsh, immoral, or even a severely unjust system. As far as I can tell, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, aristocracy, classism, all are on the rise in the US. The corporate media is the propaganda tool and 'mass distraction' is the weapon of choice -for the time being. Globalization may in fact be inevitable but this series shows that there is a better, more humane way of doing it than what we presently have in the US.

 

So check it out, especially if you still buy that 'pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" or "greatest nation on the face of the earth" type (hype) stuff. PS - In case youz wondering, I don't hate America, I just think it could and should be better.

[Dechristo]

It makes perfect sense to me that "tapioca" and "utopia" can be used in a rhyme.

[wayne]

its about to get alot harsher

[TREETOAD]

There is nothing like the truth to bring out a barrage of insults from the right wing wackos on this site.

[ashw_justin]

Everything is relative--in any society, there will never be absolute equality. It is not even theoretically possible. Therefore, no matter how advanced society becomes, and no matter much time and money we spend trying to institute equality, there will always be differences in living standards, among many other things. Irreducible distributions are an inescapable property of the physical world.

 

The best we can do is to make sure that the tails don't get too ugly. Take for example, the idea of a 'poverty line,' and trying to aid those below it. Also take for example the progressive tax.

 

These are things that we should be proud of not only because they exist, but because (at least in principle) the citizens support these kinds of remedies, not because they are forced to, but because they believe it is best for their society.

 

So really instead of accusatorily and illogically waving the flag of 'equality is an easily-attained reality that is simply denied to the poor by the rich,' it seems that the advocates of equalization (which is at least asymptotically possible) should be more carefully appealing to the idealogical/voluntary interest of the privileged in supporting the underprivileged. Alienating the very people who can help (or not help) the most is a stupid and spiteful idea.*

 

But perhaps the barely-concealed hostility in your post is absent from the series (which I haven't watched). I'm sure at least part of it must positively promote more of the same kinds of humanitarian things that we engage in in order to call ours a civil society?

 

(*Chopping their heads off and trying to take over their fortunes would be more effective--but it would be broadly unjust to try that if you didn't have the support of nearly the entire country.)

[ivan]

how much land does a man need?

 

 

[Dechristo]

If one wing is favored predominantly over another, the path will be circular, fated inexorably to witness nothing but familiar views.

[olyclimber]

http://www.livingxl.com/store/en_US/catalog/browse_sku.jsp?clear=true&catID=cat40198&prodId=X1102&id=cat40198

[Dechristo]

I desire both tapioca and utopia. But in this world, I am allowed to sample (and share with all) pudding of earthly ingredients only.

[Dechristo]

http://www.livingxl.com/store/en_US/catalog/browse_sku.jsp?clear=true&catID=cat40198&prodId=X1102&id=cat40198

 

[dmuja]

Everything is relative--in any society, there will never be absolute equality. It is not even theoretically possible. Therefore, no matter how advanced society becomes, and no matter much time and money we spend trying to institute equality, there will always be differences in living standards, among many other things. Irreducible distributions are an inescapable property of the physical world.

 

The best we can do is to make sure that the tails don't get too ugly. Take for example, the idea of a 'poverty line,' and trying to aid those below it. Also take for example the progressive tax.

 

These are things that we should be proud of not only because they exist, but because (at least in principle) the citizens support these kinds of remedies, not because they are forced to, but because they believe it is best for their society.

 

So really instead of accusatorily and illogically waving the flag of 'equality is an easily-attained reality that is simply denied to the poor by the rich,' it seems that the advocates of equalization (which is at least asymptotically possible) should be more carefully appealing to the idealogical/voluntary interest of the privileged in supporting the underprivileged. Alienating the very people who can help (or not help) the most is a stupid and spiteful idea.*

 

But perhaps the barely-concealed hostility in your post is absent from the series (which I haven't watched). I'm sure at least part of it must positively promote more of the same kinds of humanitarian things that we engage in in order to call ours a civil society?

 

(*Chopping their heads off and trying to take over their fortunes would be more effective--but it would be broadly unjust to try that if you didn't have the support of the nearly the entire country.)

 

 

ashw_justin

 

Saying "everything is relative--in any society..etc.." might merely be an excuse and an argument for doing nothing in the face of a challenge - and I freely admit to my "barely concealed hostility" when injustice is staring me -or those less fortunate than me- in the face. I think hostility or 'rage' even helps get things done at times.

 

Putting aside the bs elitist spin on statistics that our resident rightwingnutz will offer, here are some on topic things to be 'not so proud of' (maybe even a little bit pissed about) in regards to American society:

 

~ One word, "KATRENA". Remember thousands of POOR BLACK people, standing there on bridges and roof tops with no food or water, standing there while the water was rising around them and the news helicopters glared down on them? Remember how no one in the federal government really did a fucking thing for them for like 3 days? I do.

 

~ US life expectancy ranks 42 among industrialized countries

 

~ US workers have less vacation and work more hours than most

 

~ US workers mostly start from scratch when they lose their job

 

~ US adults have one of the highest obesity rates in the world

 

~ Many cancers are more likely to occur because of obesity

 

~ Cardio vascular disease is rampant in America and related to obesity

 

~ Obesity is related to stress hormone release and cheap starchy food

 

~ The poor and working poor get obese, get sick and die at higher rates largely because of being poor (They have higher stress levels, they have lower self esteem, they consider the future less, they eat cheap, fast easy crappy food because they are tired, have higher stress levels, have lower self esteem, consider the future less, and it's mostly what they can afford both in time and money)

 

~ Washington states regressive tax system - regressive taxation in general (sales taxes hit the lower classes hardest and that is immoral - we need an income tax and higher taxes on the wealthiest class of individuals)

 

Im aware though, that there are people who will read this, or visit the website and links or watch the series and become upset, maybe become offended and retain their denial of reality, so be it. Some of the worst assholes Ive ever encountered were those that are in the best position to effectively do something about the injustices were talking about. Do I think an "appeal" to them to "support the underprivileged" would -or has ever been- truly effective? Hell no! Whether good or bad, people generally act mostly when they feel provoked and or uncomfortable. This is because people generally convince themselves that THEIR experience is THE common experience, "I did it myself, so can you..." blub blub..

 

Im not for chopping heads just yet, but we should really take advantage of a good educational opportunity when we meet one - and while we still can.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bug]

Vote.

[ashw_justin]

I agree that the main effect that this kind of journalism can have is to raise awareness that there are people in need, so that those with more than enough for themselves may realize that they can/should help.

 

Seems like adding an icing of blame to that (often unfairly) can only hurt, as this replaces what would be a feeling of charity with a feeling of defensiveness.

 

Clearly there are explicit injustices, and sometimes these are even perpetrated consciously. These are the axe-worty. But then they only account for a smaller part of what is referred to by inequality.

 

What I was saying is that there is a certain inevitable amount of inequality in any society. This may be perceived as a source of injustice even though it is 'natural.' But whatever this form of inequality is called, I think it is better to recognize it as more of a collective societal condition than to blame it on the privileged class. Once battle lines are drawn, the 'sides' will just become more polarized and myopic (and the widespread distrust and disunity makes it easier for the minority of true bad guys to hide).

 

I'm also worried about the negative effects of popularizing the idea of the oppressed, victimized, and hopeless lower class of America. Doesn't this notion of defeat and helplessness seem a little self-reinforcing? Now there are some true victims, we can be sure.* But it's sort of a tragic idea that someone who is already starting from a relative disadvantage has to deal with a continual message from the rest of society that they don't stand a chance, while on the other end, the same message reinforces the idea within the privileged class that the lower class can not change, even if assisted.

 

Here is the problem I see with thinking in terms of equality in the sense that seems to be proposed by the series: should all but a single person in the country feel like shit, and should we all think that we live a shitty life, just because we are not the single richest person in the country? No, we decide what the lowest acceptable living standard is, and we try to bring everyone up to it who is under it. That seems like a much more realistic goal than trying to make everyone live perfectly equally.

 

Certainly a good place to start would be to start bringing what we consider to be an acceptable standard of living up to at least that which is now found in other countries.

 

(*This series seems to be doing it's best to point them out, but one should be careful about forming generalizations from case studies.)

[STP]

Jack LaLanne's recipe for happiness & sanity: eat more fresh food, get more physical activity, and burst out in song in public from time to time

 

NEboAJf9UVc

[Fairweather]

It sounds like you're bitter that no one else will come and clean that algae off of your trailer.

[dmuja]

Not bitter Fdub, but you're welcome to come over and put in an honest days work if you want. Maybe a new experience would be good for you.

[Off_White]

Dude, middle management doesn't do production.