Long-term there’s reason for optimism: We're wired for morality

Any animal whatever, endowed with well-marked social instincts, the parental and filial affections being here included, would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience, as soon as its intellectual powers had become as well developed, or nearly as well developed, as in man. ~ Charles Darwin

     I was delighted to read some new research this morning produced by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.  Apparently, according to the research, our cells react positively to well-being produced through actions that are motivated by a noble purpose while well-being generated as a consequence of mere self-gratification has a negative effect - though well-being derived from either activity is better for us than little to no well-being at all.  It seems “feeling connected to a larger community through a service project” is associated with a decrease in a type of negative stress induced gene expression.    

    The view that we’re wired for morality is nothing new, though certainly much of the evidence for it is.  Long before anyone had heard of genetics, Adam Smith and Charles Darwin were articulating why social animals would necessarily be more moral than not.  However, at least if the evening news is any indication, there is a great deal of effort being put into making us forget it.  It seems every day around 6:00 p.m. there is a ‘public service’ announcement intended to instil gratitude for our fight or flight response rather than remind us that our ancestors were highly social creatures who only made it this far because they had learned to cooperate to a significant degree.

    The primatologist Frans de Waal has documented a sense of fairness in various primates, even if it is a bit less sophisticated than our own.  Using examples of cooperation and fairness in our closest relatives he argues persuasively morality has a solid foundation in biology. In the book Primates and Philosophers he states, “A human being growing up in isolation would never arrive at moral reasoning.  Such a [person] would lack the experience to be sensitive to others’ interests, hence lack the ability to look at the world from any perspective other than his or her own.  I thus agree with Darwin and Smith that social interaction must be at the root of moral reasoning.” (p. 174, emphasis added)

      Martin Luther King also shared this conviction stating that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”  He was right, though there is little indication among progressives these days that they think so. Why do we seem so committed to doom and gloom?  While it is true the challenges we face are larger in both scale and scope than any in recent human history, giving up all hope is neither constructive nor justified given both our biological and cultural evolution thus far.  We shouldn’t be Pollyannas or ignore the problems we face and the injustices we commit, but we might as well if in fact we believe there is no reason for hope. 

    One can simply no longer imagine the evolution of social creatures in any universe other than a moral one, and we’re highly social creatures.  Moral truth exists not because it was handed down to us from on high, but because it emerges from below.  The Golden Rule works because there is no other mechanism that will enable social groups to function long-term.  It would be more accurate to refer to it as the Golden Law.  From both an evolutionary and sociological perspective it is as indispensable as gravity is to physics. Once a group has formed at any level, even if it only consists of two or three, the process of cooperation has begun and the arc starts to bend in the right direction; the circle has expanded beyond the individual to include another.  Add a third or fourth to that group and it’s expanded a little bit more, and so on. Life itself is impossible in a cosmos devoid of cooperation, and intelligent life capable of empathy is impossible without a very high degree of it.  Even if we do often fail to consciously grasp it or sometimes cooperate in factions against others to achieve less than ideal ends from the perspective of the whole, we shouldn’t be surprised that our cells consistently recognize the inherent value of cooperation.  I for one think that’s encouraging.  

Note: For additional information regarding this research please also visit The Atlantic (August 1, 2013)

George Zimmerman & Trayvon Martin: The faces of inequality

"Inequality promotes strategies that are more self-interested, less affiliative, often highly antisocial, more stressful, and likely to give rise to higher levels of violence, poorer community relations, and worse health.  In contrast, the less unequal societies tend to be much more affiliative, less violent, more supportive and inclusive, and marked by better health.  It looks almost as if human nature could be developed to produce nearly any mix - from people bordering on antisocial personalities with limited powers of empathy and little sense of responsibility for the common good to the opposite."  ~ Richard G. Wilkinson, The Impact of Inequality

“These assholes, they always get away.” ~ George Zimmerman

    Neither George Zimmerman nor Trayvon Martin came from backgrounds of money and power.  They had far more in common with each other than either of them did with the wealthy elite.  Yet the "assholes" that "always get away" in George Zimmerman's mind were not Wall Street bankers or corrupt Washington politicians, at least not consciously.  He clearly meant young men who looked like Trayvon Martin and he wasn't going to take it any more. 

      Now, with the verdict behind us, our collective frustration and rage has expanded from Zimmerman to the jury, "inept" prosecutors, and the inadequacies of the the criminal justice system: inadequacies too numerous to go into here.  Most of the focus is on America's continuing racial problems.  Inequality, the oxygen feeding all these flames, remains invisible and odorless.  In the media, both social and mainstream, it is at best alluded to only vaguely.

      Like all the other primates, we're social animals.  Richard Wilkinson, the author quoted above to kick this blog post off, argues that "An important aspect of the interpretation of status and class put forward here (The Impact of Inequality) is that to understand class we need to think more about our evolution from monkeys than our ideological debt to Marx." (p. 192, emphasis added)  Status matters not because we're innately greedy and power hungry bastards, but because we're social animals.  Substitute words like respect and worth for status and you'll see just how important it is to each of us personally. Even the most egalitarian of systems include titles, distinctive clothing, or other markers to communicate the level of respect certain individuals are due in their eyes.  However, in a highly hierarchical society where the gaps are extreme those at the bottom of the heap endure far more frequent reminders of their inferior status. They experience far less capacity to get either what they need or what they want, and as virtually all political parties are fond of making very clear - if to somewhat varying degrees - they shouldn't feel entitled to.

     Blood samples taken from both people and other social animals show much higher levels of the stress hormone cortisol in the systems of those at the bottom of the hierarchy than in those at the top. The more extreme the gap between the bottom and the top, the higher the cortisol levels.  This in turn leads to significantly lower life-expectancies. These lower life expectancies remain even after adjusting for increased levels of violence between those experiencing low social status and higher rates of many unhealthy coping behaviours such as drugs.  In other words, a rich smoker will live longer on average than a poor non-smoker in a highly unequal society. This isn't true where the gap between the rich and poor is relatively narrow.  So much for personal responsibility, at least in societies that don't value equality. In the developed world at least, highly unequal cultures have, in effect, created vast populations that are enduring post traumatic stress disorder. For those exposed to high cortisol levels from the moment they were conceived there is nothing "post" about it: it's just cradle to grave traumatic stress disorder.

     The science behind all this is about as solid as the science behind climate change.  However, you would never know it given the relative inattention it receives.  Denial at this point would almost be an improvement since it would at least kick off a discussion about what it is that's being denied. Ignoring the true social costs of inequality is one of the few bipartisan activities taking place in Washington these days.  Indeed, wealth redistribution is in many respects a dirtier phrase for Democrats than it is for Republicans given the utter terror they have of experiencing blow black if they utter it.  In the US in particular no one is willing to risk being labelled a socialist in spite of the increasingly obvious cumulative failings of the current system.  As the current battle over Food Stamps and the increase in student loan interest rates makes clear, the difference between Democrats and Republicans is that the former is more willing to defend the crumbs falling from the elite's table while the latter enjoys railing against the poor for feeling they are entitled to that much.  Even assuming a renewal of the Food Stamp program and the restoration of the former status quo when it comes to student loan interest rates, the US will continue to see inequality steadily move toward banana republic proportions unless something far more significant is done.  From a status standpoint most welfare programs as currently constituted in the US and much of the developed world only reinforce the sense of inferiority that evolutionary psychology makes clear is generating lethal rifts within our culture, and so were never really solutions to begin with.

    In a highly unequal society like the US, we should no longer be shocked when a man like George Zimmerman shoots a black boy wearing a hoodie as he tries to make his way home from the local convenience store.  It's far easier to elevate your status, if only a little, by joining the local neighborhood watch and taking on the local "assholes" than it is to find a respectable job, let alone elevate yourself to the stratospheric levels currently enjoyed by the elite at the top of the social totem pole. The sad truth is neither George Zimmerman nor Trayvon Martin, had he lived, would likely have ever been able to imagine such lofty heights.  Racism should be criticized, but the ugly fact is it will remain an easy way to elevate perceived personal status unless inequality is addressed.  Racism, homophobia, mysogyny, and spousal/child abuse are incentivized as means of enhancing a sense of control and importance in an a highly unequal cultural milieu.  So, by the way, is overconsumption. Until we begin the process of closing the gap there will only be more George Zimmerman's in our future.







 







     

    

 

Life isn’t fair. Now what are you going to do about it?

“Do you truly believe that life is fair, Senor de la Vega?
-No, maestro, but I plan to do everything in my power to make it so.”
― Isabel Allende, Zorro 

   If there is one thing every living creature craves, it must surely be certainty.  This craving takes many forms: the surety of the next meal, a safe and reasonably comfortable place to lay our heads at night, a paycheque.  These are all proximate forms of the desire for certainty, however.  Certainty of survival, if only in the short-term, is what ultimately lies behind it all.
     We go to great lengths to hide our uncertainty from others just as others endeavour to conceal their anxiety from us.  What is keeping up with the Joneses but an effort to appear at least as wealthy and confident in life as the guy next door?  We put up with far more shit from our employer than we otherwise would, endure emotional and sometimes even physical abuse because we fear the the unknowns associated with the alternative, and gamble away billions in Vegas or on the local lottery every year eagerly seeking the jackpot that will deliver us from our current (real or imagined) financial distress. 
     The more we fail to recognize our own insecurity the more uncertain we feel, and the more we seek to hide it from others the more craving for it we generate within our communities.  There’s just no escaping it, and believe me I've tried.  All the truly illuminating philosophies tell us the only way to cope with it is to accept it.  No matter how much money, land, or food you acquire uncertainty will still be lurking right around the corner.  A thief may be plotting to take it all away from us, though these days the market is more likely to be the culprit.  Perhaps the food you have cached will go bad before you have a chance to eat it, or will be snatched by another animal that is feeling at least as uncomfortable with the prospects of going hungry.  Whatever you do, circumstances beyond your control are always at play in the shadows threatening to make a mess of your best laid plans. In an effort to compensate we hoard, invest in alarm systems, buy guns, open a mutual funds and take out insurance policies, but after all is said and done at best all we've done is manage to improve the odds a little bit for a little while.
     All that said it would be wrong to argue that uncertainty is the great equalizer.  While it is definitely true we all must deal with it one way or another, it is not true we are all equally equipped to do so.  The reasons range from physical or mental disabilities to the circumstances we are born into.  If we haven’t read the studies ourselves, we’ve all at least heard references to the abundant research showing a child born into poverty is facing far longer odds than a child born in Beverly Hills or the Hamptons.  Even if we assume the myth of pulling oneself up by ones bootstraps contains some truth, certainly we can agree a poor child faces a future that involves far more pulling on already frayed bootstraps than one born into relative wealth.   The wealthy have shown time and again that they can gamble away a small fortune in the stock market or on risky business ventures and still come out largely unscathed.  How many times has Donald Trump gone through bankruptcy?  The same mistakes, when made by the poor on a much smaller scale, leave scars that are both more painful and more enduring.
        My mother was fond of saying “life isn’t fair.”  No, it isn’t, but human beings should strive to be to the greatest possible extent.  We’re aware of uncertainty and its consequences and therefore we should do something about it whenever we can. Empathy is recognition of the suffering that inevitably comes to every living thing as a consequence of enjoying the privilege of being alive, and justice is nothing if not a fair response to this condition.  “Life is not fair” is accurate as far as it goes, but it is ultimately a dodge.  Life isn’t fair, so what are we going to do about it?  If we don’t follow up with that question than life isn’t worth living.  Life demands more than mere resignation from a species that has been endowed with awareness. 

        If we create a society that produces millions of people living in desperation from paycheque to paycheque, or no paycheque at all, then we should expect a culture where millions will do desperate things to make ends meet.  I’ve been guilty of this myself from time-to-time as we’ve struggled along the path to a university degree.  Some times the Hail Mary passes that are thrown in an effort to make it are caught, and sometimes they aren’t.  If this sounds like an excuse for the mistakes people make, then ask yourself what your reaction is when acts born of desperation are successful.  We tend to praise risk takers, but only when they succeed.  Those who fail are typically labelled foolish.

     In the weeks and months ahead I’ll be researching a guaranteed annual income (GAI) program, hopefully as part of a small research scholarship I’ve applied for.  The goal is to have an article accepted for publication sometime next year articulating some of the implications of such a policy.  Once we've made it through my final year of school, I’ll be initiating an effort to lobby for this program in both Canada and the United States shortly after graduation.  Both countries have upcoming federal elections in 2015 and 2016 respectively, making this an ideal time to begin such an effort.  If you are interested in being involved in the initial stages of this campaign, please let me know.
     In the meantime, I’m providing a link here to a Go Fund Me page and asking all my friends and the readers of this blog to consider making a small contribution to help us as I complete my final year at university.  This page was launched a few months ago when we faced a similar financial crunch to the one we do now, and though the amount shown indicates very little response, many of you responded via mail with a cheque to help us out bringing us much closer to our goal than indicated.  If you would prefer to send a gift via mail, please contact me directly via Facebook and I’ll send along our address. Your support is critical because my final year involves a full load of 400 level courses plus the research project mentioned above. As a result I’ll have little time to work. Your support will be incredibly valuable both to us personally and to the eventual initiation of a grassroots GAI campaign. 
      More information will follow on this blog and via Facebook as it becomes available.  If you have any questions about GAI, please don’t hesitate to ask them.  Your questions will help guide research and assist me tremendously in anticipating concerns that may arise as the lobbying effort gets underway.  I’ll be seeking opportunities to present on this topic beginning sometime next year as well, so please keep that in mind if you or others within your community might be interested in becoming involved.  In the meantime, please widely share information posted here as it becomes available.  Thank you all for your support.
     
Craig's Go Fund Me page: http://www.gofundme.com/1lwf9c
 

       

Growth vs. Sustainability: It's time for the environmental movement to recognize they can't be reconciled

Source: http://southweb.org/lifewise/being-honest-about-consumption/

     As an international student my job options are even more limited than normal, and the options aren’t really that good for anyone at the moment.  However, even if my job this past year wasn’t my first choice, I have been fortunate to at least be doing some work for an environmental organization.  And though door-to-door canvassing isn’t very profitable or exciting – indeed it’s often even downright depressing - it does provide a perspective often lacking in those higher up within the environmental movement food chain.  Every activist, no matter what their cause, should have to spend at least a week knocking on doors trying to make their pitch while also taking questions, and more than a little criticism, from the 5 to 10% typically willing to engage a complete stranger standing on their doorstep. 
      It’s easy to dismiss the criticism we receive at the door, but the truth is the environmental movement (myself included) has done a very poor job of articulating a message people can readily embrace.  We too often ignore or mock the concerns people have about jobs and economic growth with quips like ‘there won’t be any jobs if we don’t have a liveable planet’ or ‘you can’t eat money.’  True enough, but these types of replies don’t really get to the premise behind the challenge and frequently come loaded with implicit accusations of selfishness or negligence directed toward the person raising the issue.  If you want people to reject the current unsustainable model, you have to first provide them with a workable alternative, and at best the environmental movement only ever hints at one.  In the absence of such an alternative people are going to stick with the option that provides the best chance of bringing home a paycheque under the current circumstances, even if a small one.  As the old saying goes, better the devil you know than the devil you don’t. It’s typically necessary for the argument in favour of the new devil to be more compelling than the argument in favour of the status quo.  The only exceptions are times when things become so unbearable people are willing to throw the old devil overboard and take there chances with whatever might come next, but as history shows acting out of desperation often means ending up with something even worse.
       Of course, we can and do provide nice little sound bites at the door about alternative energy jobs, doing a little restoration work here and there, or ending raw log exports, etc., but these policies would, at best, only buy time, and increasingly I’m hearing even from people favourably disposed to environmental protection that they know it.  Green energy alone doesn’t fundamentally change our relationship to the economy one bit, though it might change our relationship to the local power utility. In a world powered by wind turbines and solar panels will people still be expected to get up and go to work in the morning for wages that too often are inadequate? Will they still be asked to consume more and more to support growth? If so, less economic security and more environmental destruction will still be the inevitable outcome.  Wind turbines and solar panels are part of the solution, but only if they are part of a paradigm shift that is focused on minimizing consumption instead of consuming even more as efficiently as possible.
      Environmentalism, with a few notable exceptions, is scared to death of taking on the premise of growth.  A steady state economy doesn’t sell, or so we’re told.  I honestly can’t think of anyone outside of a few economists that has really put any effort into it.  Everyone else, from the executive director of the Sierra Club to prime ministers and presidents, insist we can have both economic growth and environmental sustainability.  This is true no matter where they fall on the political spectrum. Indeed, this assumption has almost reached the level of an article of faith.  I imagine someday historians will label this the age of cognitive dissonance. Regardless, when we’re pitching green jobs all we’re really doing is advocating for a cleaner kind of consumption and intuitively the public knows it: we’re talking on the one hand about changing the technology the economy uses or how many resources we can afford to extract from the environment while on the other advocating for leaving the economic system itself largely intact. We make similar arguments when campaigning to set aside wilderness areas or create a new national park, often focusing largely on the tourism jobs such designations will create rather than the role intact ecosystems play in sustaining local economies on their own. The tons of carbon expelled getting the tourists to the park in the first place is hardly a consideration.  So far as the general public is concerned all mainstream environmentalism seems to be doing is pitching a kind of green capitalism – an oxymoron if ever there was one.  To an understandably increasingly cynical public environmentalism has thus become just one more face in a crowd of competing interest groups. What sets it apart from the rest isn't its advocacy of a new way of doing things, but how much of doing things the current way it is willing to tolerate.  If environmentalism wants to be taken seriously it must embrace economic security as a necessary means to achieving sustainability, and this will require abandoning growth and espousing a steady state economy.  

     Development under the growth model typically means a new mall or subdivision, with all the associated activities that go into creating and sustaining them.  However, as Herman Daly pointed out in Steady State Economics, development can mean something else entirely:  

“If we use ‘growth’ to mean quantitative change, and ‘development’ to refer to qualitative change, then we may say that a steady-state economy develops but does not grow, just as the planet earth, of which the human economy is a subsystem, develops but does not grow.” 

       Early on in his book Daly articulated the course such an economy would follow.  “Steady-state economics channels technical progress in the socially benign directions of small scale, decentralization, increased durability of products, and increased long-run efficiency in the use of scarce resources.”  A steady state economy would be locally focused instead of globally focused, it would plan durability, repair, and recycling into its products instead of obsolescence, and it focuses economic activity in the direction of improved efficiency with little to no regard for growth.  If, for some reason, we need to create jobs in a steady state economy, then we look for areas where we can improve efficiency and attempt to create them there rather than looking for additional opportunities to sell more stuff. 
    The implications of this approach should be obvious: a shorter workweek, some degree of guaranteed annual income so those who desire to volunteer or to focus on other activities rather than employment can without fear.  Who out there in the environmental movement is selling this as an alternative to our current consumption driven system?  To listen to the politicians and various environmental spokespeople you would think no one was.  However, one notable recent exception was British Columbia’s Green Party. In the province’s last election it endorsed some level of guaranteed annual income, an essential step on the path to a steady-state economy.  In addition, the concept is slowly but surely appearing with increasing regularity in some media, though often indirectly via debates regarding abandoning the GDP in favour of new measures of economic activity that take into account wellbeing, voluntarism, and other valued human activities the GDP doesn’t consider. Now is the time for the environmental movement to get completely on board and stop sending conflicting signals when it comes to environmental protection and growth.  Your credibility depends upon it.

Beginning Again

 

     It’s been nearly two years since my last post to this blog.  Travels with Zeus began as a record of our journey across Canada in May of 2011, and ended with our return to Victoria in August after a summer in our old home of Salt Lake City.  Though we never made it as far as the Maritime Provinces before heading back to Utah, we did get to Kingston, Ontario, which was something of an accomplishment under the circumstances.
     Two years without posting anything has been too long.  For one thing, a lot has happened in the interim and it was foolish to allow brief posts on Facebook or short email messages to serve as a substitute for more in depth communication.  For another, writing is therapy, at least for me, and in retrospect ignoring this blog has been a form of personal neglect.  Just as a few minutes of meditation each morning is advisable, a little time writing, even if only for one’s own benefit, is a habit it is prudent to maintain.  As is so often the case with human beings, we are frequently prompted to return to the essentials that truly nourish our souls by our own foolishness, and this case is no exception.
     Among the many events that have occurred over the past 20 months or so is our dog Zeus’ death.  He died quickly after a sudden illness that we were never able to diagnose.  Since we aren’t yet in a position to get another dog, and because memories of him are still quite fresh, this blog will continue to carry his name, at least for the time being.  In addition, he was a faithful companion throughout our transition to Canada, and as such served a unique role during a particularly critical juncture in our lives.  As many of you who read my earlier posts will recall, Zeus sometimes was featured as a main character, often ‘discussing’ ideas with me and sharing his perspective on various matters.  I suppose having a dog named after an ancient god visit me from the grave might be a bit of a cliché, but I can’t guarantee it won’t happen in the future.  Regardless, unless a better title presents itself, Travels with Zeus will continue as the blog’s moniker.
    While I’ll be striving to post regularly, come autumn school will again make it difficult to keep up. At that time, if nothing else, hopefully Travels with Zeus will serve as a venue to share ideas and research that emerge as a result of that effort.  In addition, work on the novel continues slowly but surely.  Therefore, I also expect to begin posting excerpts soon that are considered in reasonable enough condition to receive a little public exposure. 
     People should take advantage of the opportunity to post comments or share ideas of their own here.  Nothing on Travels with Zeus is copyrighted and sharing with others is also encouraged, though credit is, of course, appreciated.   Anyone who has spent any time attempting to make an impact as a writer or artist knows coming up with original material, to say nothing of producing something of even average quality, is difficult under the best of circumstances.  At the risk of sounding egotistical, a little bit of acknowledgment is often all writers and artists receive for their efforts, and so credit where credit is due is the only condition for quoting, linking, or otherwise advertising the contents of Travels with Zeus.

     In closing, I will simply extend my gratitude to all of you who have helped Chris and I over the past few years during what has often been a very difficult, though no less rewarding, experience.  You know who you are.  Hopefully this post and those that will soon follow will provide some reassurance your investment, be it emotional or financial, has been worthwhile.  We never could have made it this far without you.  

    
 
Sincerely,

Craig Axford

It's beginning to feel a lot more like home

     Well, it took us more than a year but Victoria is starting to feel more like home.  Home is one of those multilayered words that can be true at any level or many levels simultaneously, and for us it is once again beginning to mean more than simply the place we sleep and a mailing address.  Though we've called Victoria home since day one, so much has happened these past two weeks a sense of becoming part of a community has finally started to settle in.

     There were a number of things getting in the way of deeply and truly feeling “at home” before.  So many forces were involved with our coming here – personal, cultural, political – and they were so mixed up with the stress of trying to make everything work it was difficult to find our bearings.  Fear of failure created a kind of fog that seemed to persist almost everywhere we went last year, making it hard to figure out how to begin integrating into the community.  For our first few months it felt as though we were in a dream. In spite of the fact we had brought our black lab Zeus and our cat Isis along, in many ways it was as though we had come here on vacation and decided to stay but could never quite shake the feeling we were still just tourists.  Having to return to the States over the summer only reinforced the notion that feeling had been justified all along. 
     It didn't help that we had isolated ourselves in the country during our first year here.  No doubt the fact we are now in the city where we are better able to meet people and become active in the community is a large part of what we are feeling today.  We've met more neighbours in two or three weeks here than we did all year in the country, isolated as we were on two acres atop a hill with forest hiding the local residents on two sides and distance separating us from them in every direction.  Even our landlord last year, who had lived there for more than five years, knew virtually none of his neighbours.  Becoming more active in Victoria's political and non-profit community and our greater ability to meet people in general is helping us stay more focused on our goal without leaving us much time to dwell on the fear of failure. 

     We’re still in transition, but it feels as though the beginning of the end of the transition has finally arrived.  There is still more uncertainty than we would prefer, but even that isn’t as stressful this time around.  Either we’re slowly getting better at dealing with it or becoming active in the community is making it easier to keep our minds off it.  Regardless, it sure feels good to be home.

On the 10th Anniversary of September 11, Zeus suggests a little forgetfulness can be a virtue

     "You humans do like to live in the past, don't you?" Zeus said out of the blue from his place on the futon next to me.  We were watching the evening news as one of the networks competed to be the first to show footage of the Twin Towers falling for the millionth time prior to midnight on September 11, 2011.

     "Well I guess."  I paused to think about that for a moment.  "But it's important we never forget."  Normally I would feel foolish replying with such a cliche, but since this was a conversation with a dog, I wasn't about to allow myself to become too bothered and immediately resumed mindlessly watching the news. They had begun playing footage of the collapse of the second tower now.

    "Never forget what exactly?" Zeus' tone indicated the fact he was a canine didn't inhibit his ability to be annoyed by glib responses to his questions.  "I mean remembering the dead is one thing, but it's not as though they're flashing the names of the victims on the screen or interviewing the families of the fallen here."  He gave a slight nod toward the television screen.  "It's just the same video of the buildings crashing to the ground over and over again and they've been running it since before I was born."

     I squirmed a bit in my seat.  I really didn't know how to answer him.  Though I was loath to admit it, the truth was the constant drumbeat of 9/11 video and references for the past ten years, together with all the war footage and commentary from the two conflicts that followed, had frankly left me numb.  I had long ago lost the ability to find any politician or reporter who gave a speech or did a story on the subject sincere.  It was like never being allowed to simply mourn and move on.  A person could almost come to resent the dead if all the guilt associated with doing so didn't keep getting in the way.

     "So tell me, does your species enjoy post traumatic stress disorder or something?"

     My god, he treats his questions the same way he does a rope.  Talk about someone who could do with learning to let go.  "I just don't think people want to ever see it happen again" I finally answered.

     "Seems to me it's more likely to happen again with you all constantly dwelling on it so much.  If you just put up a memorial or something and went on with your lives..." Zeus glanced back up at the television mid sentence.  "Oh good, they're replaying the scene at the Pentagon now."  He waved a paw mindlessly toward the screen.

     "One of our philosophers once said those who forget history are doomed to repeat it."  I replied.

   "Yea, well those that keep reliving it are doomed to repeat it a lot more often."  He raised his back leg and scratched an ear.  "Look, the terrorists couldn't forget American meddling in the Middle East, now America can't forget the terrorist's attacking them on 9/11 because the terrorist couldn't forget America's meddling, so America does some more meddling...Seems to me the answer here is someone doing some forgetting, or at least some forgiving."

     I opened my mouth to say something, but Zeus wasn't quite finished yet.  "Or more to the point, stop remembering only what the other guy did to you and start recalling a few of the things you've done to him."

      "Like what?" I asked.

     "Oh, I don't know - propping up dictators, overthrowing democratically elected governments in places like Iran.  That turned out well, didn't it?  You know, little things like that that really win over lots of hearts and minds."  He stuck his snout in the air.  He was obviously feeling he had once again demonstrated his species' superiority.  "Or you can just keep watching 9/11 reruns and spending trillions on wars until someone decides they've had enough and attacks you again providing you with a convenient justification for all those trillions you spent bombing the hell out of their country. Then you can do it all over again, except with a different attack to replay over and over for a decade or so.  If you can keep it going on long enough, maybe you'll at least be able to forget who started it."

     With that Zeus hopped down off the couch and headed down the hall, looking from side to side as he went.  "Anyone seen my bone?" He shouted.

      "Next time I want a pet I think I'm buying an ant farm" I mumbled to myself as I picked up the remote to begin channel surfing.  I'd heard somewhere they were rebroadcasting 'Apocalypse Now' this evening.