Letter #52 to Friends and Familiares: the Number-1 Reason I am a Republican

There are those issues which arise during life that might better, or at least more conveniently, be avoided in public discourse. Every few generations, one such issue breaks into the public conscience relentlessly precisely because it is a matter of conscience. There is one issue that involves a moral absolute that lands me in the Red sea.

Before I upset the few people who might actually be reading this essay, permit me to return to the last discussion. While sounding lucid, that essay overlooked the key conflict that is not resolved easily. Often values drawn from implied absolutes can and do clash. They raise nasty social questions and conflicts on how to establish a hierarchy of, or (even more complicated) exceptions to, these absolutes.

The clashing values of what a human being is versus a right to property killed nearly a million of our countrymen a century and a half ago. The Civil War did not engulf our country for reasons of tariffs or economics. These regionalist policies created a tinder-box to which people like William Lloyd Garrison, Henry Ward Beecher and his sister as well as Henry David Thoreau and John Brown took a lit match.

The right-to-life versus the right of choice strikes me as another irresoluble dilemma. Simply put, I am pro-life. The basic arguments in favor of Roe versus Wade do not stand upon deeper scrutiny of the underlying premisses: the right to privacy and the notion of viability. One arguably no longer applies and the other is, well, an intellectual hoax to justify the taking of a life.

The right to privacy almost certainly existed implicitly (i.e., as an unspecified right to flow through to the States and the people); but Roe versus Wade made the right explicit. A friend of mine pointed out that the information age effectively negated that right of privacy some fifteen years ago. Americans have repudiated that right through continuing use of the social media, notwithstanding their porous privacy.

Viability was always an intellectual fiction. Truth is: a baby outside of a mother’s womb for up to nine months is no more viable left to its own devices than he or she would be inside his or her mother be he or she a zygote, embryo or foetus. The only two exceptions would be the result of rape or incest since the malevolent means nullified the higher end of parenthood. The Hyde amendment stands.

Now here is where my cowardice kicks in: there remains a gender divide on this issue. While many men are pro-choice, the passionate people on this side, at least in my experience, have been women. While arguably the women who are pro-life may be more passionately so than men who are pro-choice, the great majority of people arguing publicly for the absolutism of the pro-life position are often men.

Said bluntly by friends of mine (who are women): the zygote, embryo or foetus is a part of the woman’s body and could wreck her life if she were to surrender a deeply personal decision to others. This is where John C. Calhoun comes prancing back to life. While Vice President Calhoun articulated the right of concurrent majorities to defend slavery, it may apply well with unclear terms of a social contract.

While I continue to be pro-life, the only proper way to nullify Roe versus Wade as a national standard would be with a concurrent referendum in which 60% or more of the women participating consented to the change of the law. Other support measures to provide adequate care to the pregnant poor with the calculation that such overt support could obviate the need.

In the next essay, I will explain briefly the other issues that have landed me in the G.O.P. as well as pick out my preferred candidate. In sum, those issues will include the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; gay marriage; detainees; leaking classified information; the rescue of the banking system; the class-war rhetoric; as well as, the Occupy Wall Street movement.

Letter #51: Aint no alien, nor Pygmalion...just a tag-along Republican

The difference between pretentious pedantry and brilliant political theory is about twenty points on an I.Q. test. To you, I leave the task of assigning me to one side of the intellectual divide; I fear I know already. Nevertheless, a sincere political philosophy really has to be founded on genuine ideas and assumptions about the nature of God (if any), man, society and government.

Many years ago, I read an arm-load of books in a now mercifully forgotten quest to devise the political theory by which I measure myself, my fellows and our society. The end product, I remember, had seven levels of aggregation. Then I read The Inferno and its seven levels of Hell. Well, my political theory went up in smoke. Better off forgotten…until now, that is.

The upper two levels are all I remember and I will have to make do with those. Basically, my thinking comes out of the classic social contract theory of John Locke – big surprise for a Yank (NOT) – as well as bits and pieces from the thinking of Ludwig Wittgenstein (don’t ask), Baron Montesquieu, John C. Calhoun, John Stuart Mill, and Plato (don’t tell). The assumptions underlying my thinking are straight-forward.

• There are such things as moral absolutes implied across time and societies.
• Nobody ever gets these absolutes absolutely correct. That fact of human life does not absolve us from turning our backs on them.
• The ends do not justify the means; rather, the means sully or ennoble the ends.
• The truth is crushing in its simplicity.
• The just society is that which enables the greatest number of people to attain their properly ordained statures in the eyes of God.
• Man and Woman were created in God’s image and, therefore, concepts like qualitative utility do apply.
• The upper two levels of my erstwhile privately held theory represent the social compact – as the culture, conventions and traditions of a society – and a formal social contract.

Many elements make up the social compact, which is rather vague by necessity as it expresses values more than rules. The social contract is more likely to be an explicit subset of these norms and traditions. Those cultural elements that become explicitly stated in a contract do so because they codify as ‘sacred’ absolute ideals inferred over time and practice. In the U.S. context, our founders wisely made the contract largely secular.

Since any human adherence these absolutes has uniformly proven to fall far short of those ideals, we call these incomplete manifestations 'values'. These values, to be included in a written social contract, have to be accepted by all the contracting parties. Of course, contract terms often change with the times. In the case of the U.S. Constitution, such change is never meant to be casually accepted.

In fact, many of the values are self-evident; so much so that defining them is difficult and largely rely on ostensive definitions. It is analogous to Justice Potter Stewart’s remark that he could not define 'pornography' was but he surely knew it when he saw it. Liberty versus license is difficult to distinguish precisely. Yet we can discern liberty both in its presence and its absence.

To me, at least, the Declaration of Independence is the defining document of our social compact. But many others from diverse disciplines contribute to the social compacts antecedent, the social covenant which defines values and other elements of contemporary life into a living and widely followed culture. Examples might include the painting ‘American Gothic’ by Grant Wood, the poem ‘Road not Taken’ by Robert Frost or the music of Stephen Collins Foster.

Secularly sacred values of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness (assumed to contain the right to property), are manifest in that Declaration. That is not all. Other tenets, later included in the Constitution explicitly as the social contract, include a primacy of civilian power and a right to revolution to end oppression or corruption (usually found fornicating in the same bed of iniquity).

Beyond the necessity of surmounting high hurdles to change the social contract through amendments, the Constitution clearly allows for the existence of implied rights, not enumerated in the Constitution and subsequently articulated or inferred by the States and the people. The rub is how does one know what these rights are and whether they were known by, knowable to, the average citizen as not to be surrendered to the government through the Constitution?

The key point here, as a conservative, is that the contracting parties under the Constitution are the governed who surrender some portion of their rights (for example, the freedom to act without restraint; that is, with absolute license) to safeguard the value of liberty. This trade-off, taken seriously, is what is meant by people living and breathing the democratic spirit.

Without that fundamental engagement by the citizen, usually reinforced by the social compact as coloured by the social covenant, the contract basically becomes unenforceable and implodes. Without the guidance of the social contract, ‘show-me’ definitions become blurry as individuals once again redefine their singular governance. Gradually, more likely rapidly, the culture becomes indefinite and the compact itself collapses under the weight of popular interpretations spiralling into space in every which way.

One of two states is likely to ensue: mob rule or anarchy, almost inexorably to be followed by tyranny. Now there have been many, like Jean Jacques Rousseau, who believe that mob rule would be okay because, left to his natural (i.e., pre-social) state, man is basically decent. Others, for much the same reason, believe that anarchy would be an improvement. Karl Marx thought so.

In my heart, I would prefer to believe in Marx and Rousseau. Nonetheless, I live in the world and not in my heart. The heart may have its reasons that reason does not know. Yet, when I read the Black Book on Communism in 1998, I realized what happened in places where a sublime ideal of a future without laws ended up permitting mass murder of millions now. Of course, that future never quite showed up.

Blaise Pascal, conservative thinker from several centuries ago and misquoted in the previous paragraph, had a better idea of man than Marx or his progeny of Lenin, Mao, Pol Pot et al.: Man is neither angel nor brute. The terrible irony remains that as he acts the one, he becomes the other. Again, please excuse this far too long of a letter. Next note will be a dance in my Kulturkampf zone.

Letter #50: why I am no whiz kid but a conservative; part uno

Dear everyone,

Throughout my life some of the people I have admired have been liberals like the Reverend Martin Luther King, Senator Bobby Kennedy, Ambassador R. Sargent Shriver, Representative Morris Udall, President Carter and even President Johnson. Conservatives have also stood the test of time, particularly Senator Barry Goldwater, President Ford (though more moderate), Senator Robert Dole, Senator Charles Grassley and, more recently, President George W. Bush.

Before I explain the foundation of my Republicanism, there are a few admissions I should make in the interest of intellectual integrity.

1. For eighty percent of my waking life, I have been a Democrat. Perhaps conservatives like me are those who considered themselves liberal at one time but have shifted over a generation.
2. Only with great sadness did I let go of the Great Society of President Johnson. Yes, I grew to detest the national pain imposed by the foolish and immoral war in Viêt Nam and believed it de-railed the Great Society, in my mind a noble attempt by a world leader to re-assess its aims and try to attain a truly just society. Its failure remains heavy but fail the Great Society did, and badly.
3. I much prefer the company of liberals. True liberals, not preening progressives out for a P.R. snow-job to prop up a flagging self-absorption, see the possibility of things and often do ask why things are not better, though they should be.
4. Nevertheless, I admire true conservatives for their labouring under an intellectual burden of proof when that should lie with the liberals or other advocates for change. As a cousin-by-marriage aptly pointed out, “preening anythings” are thorough-going thorns in the flesh.
5. There are many Republicans whose company I really do not relish. These tasteless traditionalists, often newly privileged thanks to a society that used to be more open and mobile, exude the attitude of “I have mine and forget you” (with another ‘F’ word in place of ‘forget’). These people are not conservatives, simply craven in their self-centered avarice.
6. For my dark side, I am often a coward and almost always a hypocrite, at least to some degree. Sincerity is a hard-won virtue for those with an open mind, self-doubt and more than a half-century on the planet…and who lack the independent means to ignore that complicated necessity of a public persona.
7. For me, at least, I would rather be a hypocrite with principles often sullied than an amiable conniver without a conscience.
8. My politics has remained rather stable over the years but a few litmus-test social issues, combined with a view that I have a duty to join one of the two parties, places me as an odd-ball in G.O.P. Ironically, the feeling is roughly the same as being an odd-ball on the Democratic side.
9. Boiling down the reams of blistering rhetoric and bilious bloviation, the one ‘sort-of’ archetypal difference between liberals and conservatives is that Democrats most often think with their hearts while Republicans feel with their heads.
10. For me, I follow Dr King’s timeless dream and ever-timely counsel that people are best judged by the content of their characters, not the colors of their skin, the levels of their educations, the relative magnetism of their personalities.
11. While I often criticize the United States of America, I dearly love her, with all that I have in my hamstrung heart, middling mind, sullied soul, quavering character and limited years left in life. Obviously, I am far below the giants of our common past but that fact does not exempt me from caring for my country as they did.
12. Lastly, in any society, ‘Great’ or otherwise, based on mutual respect, the rule of law and natural rights endowed by “Our Creator” – in short, one that strives toward being a just society – the highest form of tolerance has to be mercy in which the greatest justice lies in forgiveness and democratic spirits persevere through compassion.

My next letter will describe briefly the theoretical construct of my personal politics and why it lies with the Republican Party along with a brief summary of the most basic litmus-test preferences I hold and why. Lastly will follow with a note on the one candidate I believe can credibly challenge President Obama, the latter being a better man than most with a high character and unquestioned integrity.

Above all, liberal or conservative, I would ask you to take a moment to step back and wonder where the world would be today had there been no America (warts and all) in it. And, please try to imagine an America without a Franklin, Washington, Irving, Lincoln, Dewey, Roosevelt, King, Ford or many others throughout her enviable history.

Letter 49: proof that January 1st is just another day

Well, here comes 2012. This is the day we reflect about the year past and think through the year ahead of us. Or this is a day devoted to recuperating from the ‘Absolut proof’ that 2011 ended with a ‘grito’ and not a whimper, with 2012 starting with a colossal bang, bang, bang and ice packs, etc. For me, I have a hangover of sorts from eating too much chocolate again and wondering if ever I will make a smooth transition in anything.

The big events for me today are to start preparing my return to Mexico and to see how the Steelers will fare in the ‘seeding’ of the play-offs. This is not a hard chore because the two or three nemeses of the Steelers – the Baltimore Ravens, the Green Bay Packers and the San Francisco 49ers – are all teams I have liked for many years and so, while bittersweet, I will likely find some happiness in a month during the Super Bore. My money is on the obvious: Green Bay.

Why? Two reasons, really. First, the team is amazing and, perhaps, one of the best squads of all-time. Vince Lombardi would be proud. Secondly, because the team lost its bid for a perfect season to Kansas City. That is disappointing for Packer fans, to be sure, but should lock Green Bay into yet another Super Bowl ring for two sub-reasons. First, the pressure is off for the perfect season and that pressure was likely to have been high enough to have become a distraction.

Now reality of that stress and the dream that fed it are both long gone to the Packers’ benefit. Second, and the flip-side of the first, is that the players are mad they lost the perfect season and they will take that out on any team less than fortunate to be in their path. The Pack has been back and this time they are taking no flak.

Of course, I am rooting for the Steelers and really love the team. A bit too old now and with less talent than many other teams, the Steelers are like that quietly popular girl in high school who wins unacknowledged respect for doing the most with what she has. These meandering thoughts indicate to me – and now to you – that I am as clueless as ever as to what is God’s plan or mission for me, if indeed I merit such attention.

When it is impossible for me to think my way out of, around or through such questions, it is always helpful to me to focus on those things for which I am grateful in life. First, my singular resolution for 2012: finding an apartment. This is one resolution I am likely to keep – precedent-setting -- for I have a week or two to do it.

1. This tour in the Peace Corps is proving to be the time of my life. My work is fulfilling and seeing the evident quality of many of the younger volunteers brings me the warmth, assurance and happiness that America still has what it takes to be America.
2. The holiday here has been restful and loving; boy that makes a difference. To top it off, I beat my niece in ‘Wii’ football…yeah! She was half-asleep; a cheap victory but it is mine…
3. My colleagues at the science center where I work in Queretaro really like me and have been supportive. Nice to be a part of something and not feel guilty for working hard, for a change.
4. Finally, I have run twice in the last week and have found a new determination to take my body back from sloth. But, I must remember, Newark was not rebuilt in a day.
5. Slowly, my old contacts are growing less cold and it is a pleasure to have stimulating company, which I hope will enable me to pursue my dream career: a development trouble-shooter in conflict zones.
6. My Spanish has progressed steadily, if not at lightning speed. That gratitude really owes itself to Sra. Lourdes Rodriguez of the Peace Corps and her colleagues who “learned” me Spanish so very well. While I am nowhere near fluent, I am able to manage quite smartly. Gratitude also extends to those five or six colleagues at the science center who speak English as well as I speak Spanish but steadfastly refused to let me see that for a whole year.
7. One of the sublime pleasures of life – and a sure-fire way to endure crud-work – is a continuous desire to learn. My parents gave me an important value in life, one that helped place my ethical and moral compass firmly of the inside of me: the thought popularized by President Lincoln that one can learn something from anyone else no matter the station-in-life of the latter.
8. Dunkin’ Donuts turbos, on demand the whole time, is pure and motorizing luxury.
9. Reading the challenging text of the Pedagogy of the Oppressed has been gratifying, not only in absorbing the world-view of a polymath but also because it shows that I can still read pretty hard-core epistemology – not an easy task at any age.
10. Our troops are out of Iraq. To those worried about Iran’s apparent hegemony, please keep in mind how much the Persians will have on their hands when they start telling Arabs what to do. President Obama is at the helm in a dark time for the country.

Letter #48: The Peace Corps and Hymn #243

¿Is the Peace Corps a partisan political endeavor – a sacred cow of discredited liberalism?

¡You bet your sweet bipartisan sweet bippee it isn’t!

Since the Cold War, U.S. diplomacy has been evolving away from a largely bi-partisan consensus of preparing for a dreaded global confrontation with another superpower. Now we confront less dreadful, if daily, adversaries across the world attacking not only the United States but democracy itself.

‘Eyeball to eyeball’ great power rivalries are giving way to a nuanced, if partisan, diplomacy that ties together high-level government-to-government interactions, for example, in the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad with grass-roots counter-insurgency and economic development efforts just a few miles away.

In that context, I have favoured, and argued passionately within the U.S. government for the consolidation of development agencies, the foreign out-reach efforts of the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce and Treasury as well as the Peace Corps into the Department of State. Such an integration unites often diverging non-military activities and presents a unified civilian chain-of-command with enhanced bargaining power against the Department of Defense. Now, however, I have come to believe that the Peace Corps should remain independent.

¿Why?

When the Peace Corps started out in the heady “can-do” America at the peak of her economic dominance two generations ago, the policy premise was hardly new. President Franklin Roosevelt had anticipated this vision of the Peace Corps in the bi-partisan appeal – no, a call to transcend politics in favor of defending democratic principles worth fighting for – of his ‘Four Freedoms’ Speech of seventy years ago.

That speech boldly argued to a troubled land, still neutral in the face of the bloodshed wrought by “gangster régimes”, that a post-colonial world could only hope to foster democracy through a continuing and universal presence of the freedoms of speech as well as those from fear, religious persecution and poverty. The United States has little left of the fresh-faced, deeply moral innocence of the ‘greatest’ generation. Perhaps, with American power so vast and international, such a decadence of values was inevitable in a Cold War fraught with moral ambiguity.

With the new diplomacy of our day, however, institutions are aligning for a whole-of-government approach that will inevitably make diplomacy more partisan as these executive branch institutions function at the pleasure of the President. Whoever that President is, he has to answer to many partisan interests coalesced to place him in the White House. That is the democracy of competing factions foreseen by President Madison, though the version we see today is admittedly ugly.

One institution needs to remain apart and above the trench warfare and trench-mouth of the contemporary debate of U.S. foreign policy: the Peace Corps.

Today, more than in most other periods, America needs to remember why she exists, not for what interest or for whom in particular. There are people who still shudder at the thought of a world without an America in it, notwithstanding many of the vitriolic, if defensible, self-recriminations poisoning public disquisition these days.

Obviously, I am one of these exceptionalists. I still believe that people the world over would suffer even more today without America. Yes, we can do better. But, first things first: we must justify that exceptionalism. That means that each American is a statesman now and should strive to be, well, exceptional. 

One thing that lingered within me from my work in Afghanistan and Iraq was how often I was the only version of the Declaration of Independence, Emancipation Proclamation or Universal Declaration of Human Rights that these people had ever seen. That thought changed my attitude, not radically, but enough for me to smile through most hard days or stare down a majority of fear-based bureaucrats.

To do so, I had to lay aside self-centered anxieties to show host-country counterparts, whatever their stations in life, that they still mattered. It could be something as simple as taking ice cream out to unwashed, invariably skinny, Iraqi children sadly forced into selling porno-DVDs in the U.S. Embassy parking lot. These incremental, fulfilling efforts are the daily fare of most Peace Corps volunteers, albeit in less tragic places, or at least they can be.

Our industries and industriousness make the United States a powerful nation. Only the American grace from within – that attitude of “¡heck yeah: these guys deserve a chance!” – creates that off-beat patriotism of giving back and humbly serving others that makes America great. The accumulation of thousands of little acts of charity – based not on ideology but on ideas people really have died and still die for – can hope to guide our Republic through the difficult days that lie ahead.

These ideas are simple – inalienable rights endowed by our Creator of life, liberty, property and the pursuit of happiness – and yet their transmission requires sincerity, fortitude and character. What still gives me heart is to hear or read about what many of my fellow, particularly younger, members are doing with the goodwill and the optimism they bring, in spite of many frustrations, to Mexicans in the laboratory or campo alike.

These younger ‘exceptional’ Americans implicitly understand that the United States, and democracy itself, can only hope to continue through the attraction of what we stand for and not through promotion of self-interest, no matter how enlightened. Otherwise, we suffer the heretofore inexorable fate of Shelley’s Ozymandias.

These youthful compatriots give some in a rising generation of Mexicans the courage and the compassion to take up the mantle of leadership for their society’s future. These very ordinary Americans enable me to recall, with sentimental pride, a childhood Episcopal hymn I sang, usually in a broken voice, at my grade-school’s weekly chapel services 40+ years ago:

“I sing a song of the saints of God, patient and brave and true,

Who toiled and fought and lived and died for the Lord they loved and knew.

And one was a doctor and one was a queen

and one was a shepherdess on the green:

They were all of them saints of God—

And, God helping, I mean to be one too.”

Letter #47: Thanksgiving comes to México

In México, the main meal of the day is called ‘la comida’ and is eaten over an hour’s time (perhaps ninety minutes) anytime between one and three o’clock in the afternoon. At El Centro de Ingeniería y Desarrollo Industrial (The Engineering and Industrial Development Center or ‘CIDESI’), where I serve as a Peace Corps volunteer, we usually eat this comida around 2:00 p.m. And so it went today.

Except this was not your normal comida but a traditional Thanksgiving Dinner. As the people came in and enjoyed the turkey, potatoes, stuffing, crackers, cheese, salads, pumpkin pies, etc. and as the amount of food available turned out to be sufficient, that peace-of-mind that only the fatigue of preparation can bestow finally calmed my shyness.

Instead of reciting the menu of dishes to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that today’s qualified as an adequate Thanksgiving dinner, felicitously conincidental with the far more formal family event hosted by the Purnells in Annapolis at 3 p.m. (E.S.T.), I prefer to focus on the men and women who made this day, this meal, this time one for me to remember gratefully and one I want to share with you all.

Alejandro Obregón, a senior budgetary analyst at CIDESI, cooked an eighteen pound turkey, while juggling year-end account reconciliations and a meeting yesterday (i.e., November 23rd) in Mexico City, meaning up at 5 a.m. and home at 10 p.m. Alex likes to cook and, though bedeviled for twelve hours with that steroid-stuffed bird, it showed this afternoon, deliciously. Alex proved his goodwill by cutting the turkey – and all of this the day before his fortieth birthday! That turkey went fast, let me assure you.

Alejandro Obregón (CIDESI) Daisie Hobson (Peace Corps, to the right)

Daisie Hobson, a fellow Peace Corps type serving at CIDESI, has quickly emerged as our star volunteer here with skills needed by the center to change its organizational culture from one of “knowledge is good” (thank you, Bluto) to “knowledge is change”, as in the mobilization of the inert intellectual capital. While Daisie’s virtues are many, her grace in explaining what the holiday meant – with a heartfelt tear in reminding each of us to consider something for which are grateful today – transformed the comida from a technical success to a triumph of goodwill. Besides, Daisie’s magic salad was to die for…honestly.

Sylvia Salas, part of the team that manages CIDESI’s campus in Querétaro, was a guest of honor for her recent and complete recovery from cancer. A lovely lady well loved across CIDESI, Sylvia displayed a grateful humility about her recent good news that moved me to honour her today, this day of thanks. Sylvia contributed a carrot cake, as good as I might find North of the border. Why am I convinced of its excellence? Because that cake was the last of four desserts laid out and the first to go. Each time turned around, that cake was smaller. When I was finally ready for my piece, only crumbs remained…rats.

Sylvia Salas (CIDESI, to the left) Gerry Mayer (Peace Corps)

Gerry Mayer, who completes his two-year tour tomorrow (i.e., the 25th of November), was a gracious guest of honor as well. In singling Gerry out, I want to talk about what Gerry did for CIDESI. Like me, Gerry arrived at CIDESI with little to do. Unlike me, however, the reason was because his project fell through before his arrival. Most people would have whined, pined or resigned in a huff of self-pity. But Gerry Mayer did not do that. Instead, he set about to make his tour a success some other way, which he did by tutoring in technical and colloquial English. At his peak, Gerry hosted sixteen students. Today, he attended the comida with his best pupil whom he has been sure to mentor in her business quest. Beyond his dry wit, I will miss Gerry’s example of making the best out of an inauspicious beginning.

Magda Durán (CIDESI) Lupita Baltazar (CIDESI)

Finally, Magdalena Durán and Guadalupe Baltazar, all of CIDESI, made significant contributions. Magda and Lupita did most of the support work – together with some others from the Human Resources Department – to graduate this meal from a potential comida of errors to a time worth writing home about this evening. It was this mosaic quality of many diverse hands making the dinner special that made me feel grateful enough to recite an abridged version my father’s perennial Thanksgiving grace: “God, we thank you and ask for your blessing today. For our friends are family and family are friends.”

Norman Rockwell would have been proud.

Letter 46: Kafka, coffee and Querétaro

“There it goes. This is it. This time it’s war! Imagine its doing this at six forty-five in the morning. They’re getting bigger and stronger and if I don’t do something soon, I will lose the very friends that define the difference between growth and godlessness.” And so I spoke silently to myself. It tried a feint; but a retreat through outflanking, a brilliant move the first dozen times, would not work now: no way, no how. The guerilla tactic continued, almost instinctively.

Creating a disturbance to its left and darting right, I had it, easy. About to relish my personal chorus of victory, by reciting Lieutenant Commander Chekhov of the United Star Ship Enterprise – NCC-1701 – “Got him, Captain Keerk!” Until it stopped dead (soon though it would be itself) in front of me, folding its two top limbs - arms, I suppose - in front of it and focusing its many visions on me. This situation was a first, perhaps in history, certainly in my little piece of it.

No one would ever believe me. Even if I had tried to make this up, people would dismiss it with a smear of contempt saying, “Ned, you can’t make this sh*t up…” What occurred over the next few minutes that morning merits the re-telling even if people think I am a little – even a lot – ‘off’, “Yes, Ned, was a nice boy…and a fairly decent fellow…so sad, really.” But truth is truth, crushing and simple as it is.

“Hey, pal, what are looking at? Okay, okay: I admit I look ugly but you act ugly…” That got me angry, being mocked by some pip-squeak a fraction of my size. But such is the humiliating insult of an insolent insect. It represented at least the third cockroach in as many days to cut right across visual plane in broad lamplight. After a few misses, I had finally nailed the others: crushed like a bug.

What pleasure – what a feeling of victory; what a rush of power! After getting this one, I intended to clean the floor with a toxic concoction so strong, it would roust Rachel Carson out of her nap from here to eternity. But this day, it did not quite work out that way. That damn cockroach was not about to resign ITSELF to its properly ordained fate.

“Me? an IT? you say! Well look at you! You, with your aerosol sprays and that bottle with Spanish text you don’t understand but take comfort in the skull and bones on the label, you Yalie wannabe…fuhcrisake…”

“Hey!” I yelled, “Excuse me!!!”

“Excuse you for what, dinkweed?” replied this nasty little gnat turning sarcastic and imitating me while dancing an Irish jig on its two bottom legs, “Look at me: I’m so cool…I’m a Peace Corps volunteer…well [expletive deleted], you who so nobly laments man’s inhumanity to man. Why can’t hypocrites like you just leave it at that?”

“Leave what at what?” asked I. Damn tough being toyed with by a bug.

“O jeez!” as it rolled all sixteen of its eyes. “You’re duller than I could ever have imagined. some are thicker than others. Why can’t you erectile dysfunctions with your projectiles without compunctions just confine your cruelty to yourselves and leave the rest of the hell alone…?”

By now, I was smoking peeved, “Listen, you filthy little bastard, I won’t stand for this in my living room…”

“Oh, yes, you will…”

“Oh, no I won’t,” said I, adding snittily, “And just tell me why you think I should?”

“Because you don’t own this dump. You rent. Or had you forgotten, Einstein?”

“Einstein! Einstein? Why you, you, you…” I was so unnerved by this bug I could not speak and just foamed at the mouth, my head buzzing like a bee-hive.

“Hah!” he said contemptuously wiggling his antenna in a manner calculated to annoy me. But he continued, “You go through life, smugly assuming that you are just a little better than others, just a little more sensitive, just a little less understood…fuhgetaboutit, fuhcrisake, you prig.”

“I do not have to tolerate this…” I countered.

The cockroach, with doom imminent, continued utterly undeterred, “You will prevail here today. Hope you feel good, killing a defenseless little insect…ooohhhh – you’re such a hard-guy! What with killing us who are a millionth of your size.”

Squinting hard, I glowered, to no effect, as it continued without hesitation, “And, guess what, jerk? I have to live off your scraps and Mister ‘I’m-so-cool-that-I’m-above-culture-shock’ only leaves bits of Kit-Kat bars and potato chips for me to eat! You know something? If your clod-hopper didn’t get me, your diet would…”

“That’s it!” I replied plaintively, trying to paraphrase Emerson to gain the upper hand, “There comes a time-“

But the bug cut me off, “yeah, yeah, where immolation is insecticide…Trust me, your pedantry precedes you, Julian…yeah, that’s right: Julian on the bus…”

Truly humiliated at being called as the one character I feared the most in all the ficition I have read, I said icily, “You germ-laden little louse! That is enough. You are one dead bug, bug…”

“Hey, I know you’re gonna kill me but do you have to insult me by referring to me as one of them?”

Again I was disconcerted, “One of whom?”

The bug quavered slightly – or was it a shrug? – and bawled, “A louse! That’s what! And, hey, look at you, squirm-weenie! You and your mammal-mania…why your actions display a colder blood than I’ve ever had…diddling with Emerson, fuhcrisakes, you philosophical flip-chart…”

At that point, I snapped stomped hard but missed. It looked truly frightened but quickly regained its composure and said, “That’s right. You can’t out-argue a bug. So just crush me…good for your karma…”

Shrugging my shoulders, I retorted, “Karma? How can you talk about karma? You have a life span of two weeks, tops…”

“Huh? More like five days with peaceniks like you around…” It sneered at me, “At least that bounced Czech had more empathy for me than you ever will...”

Being humbled by people is not fun. But to be belittled by a bug? So I reached for the can, resorting to aerosol for the first time in many years. It knew the end was near but it still refused to move. Its sarcasm and critical faculty had bought itself a month in human terms but my patience had dissipated after five minutes.

Nevertheless, it remained composed as I readied the can. Then I remembered reading somewhere that bug spray works like nerve gas. Damn! With compassion and frustration swirling uneasily inside my heart, I decided to make its end quick – a mercy shot with the stomp of my left foot. Enfolding the crushed corpse in single-ply toilet paper – I am roughing it, you know – I flushed it down the toilet.

Then I brushed my teeth, finished dressing, clipped on my Peace Corps pin and headed off to the science center where I serve the United States of America, helping our benighted neighbors to the South. As I locked the door, in a hurry because I was now running late, I remembered a long-forgotten fragment of that signature Kipling ditty learned in grade school:

“You’re a better than I, Gunga Din.” I looked around furtively, saw a neighbor and smiled faintly, “Buenos días, señor. ¿Cómo está usted, esta mañana?”