Elie Wiesel, Victor Frankl and Positive Attitude

Two major voices came out of the Holocaust: Victor Frankl and Elie Wiesel. Frankl's message was self-empowerment; Wiesel's message was despair. Yet Wiesel became more influential than Frankl.

How can this be, some may say. Isn't positive attitude everything? Don't you have to be positive in order to be successful, and aren't negative people losers? Well there is nothing loserish about Elie Wiesel. He became a crusader for human rights, and his influence extend far beyond the Jewish community.

In fact there have been many people who were negative who achieved significant things. Nixon was negative. Charles Dickens was negative. Lou Reed was negative. Russians tend to have a negative outlook, but for several decades Russia credibly rivaled America for leadership of the world. Clearly what we know about positive attitude being prerequisite for success is untrue.

Positive thinking causes more problems than it solves. You think positive, you fail to anticipate problems, you do foolish things. Negative thinking is not the solution either. The negative thinker would believe that our problems are too much for us to solve, which is untrue. The solution is real thinking, where we analyze the conditions and put into place rightful solutions to our problems.

Indeed quite often the positive thinker would become a bully, attacking people who do not have positive attitude without figuring out why they don't have a positive attitude. I'll give you a hint. It consists of two words: Global warming. We have problems up the wazoo, and in some cases a negative attitude is justified. What is not justified is inaction in the face of these problems – something that we regrettably see both from people professing a positive attitude, who want to deny these problems, and from people possessing a negative attitude, who think that these problems are too much for us to solve.

So I say do away with both positive thinking and negative thinking and try real thinking. And pursuant real thinking, real action to solve the problems of the world.

Christian Environmentalism

There is a conflict between many people who call themselves Christians and environmentalists, and there shouldn't be. If you are a true Christian you will be an environmentalist as well. The reason is that God did not create all the beauty around us so that it can be blindly plundered, and blindly plundering nature will not earn you any favors with God.

I had a biology teacher named Fred Atwood. Mr. Atwood was a devout Christian, and he held an unusual stance of social conservatism and environmentalism at the same time. He was celibate, and he kept making jokes about having an alien girlfriend named Molly Jolly Golly. Once in class I asked if Molly Jolly Golly had big tits, and Mr. Atwood kicked me out of the class.

But the issues here are no laughing matter. We are in the midst of the quicked extinction in history. We have heat waves and hurricanes. We have melting glaciers. We have rainforest being burned to make ranches that turn into wasteland in two years. Environmental issues are the greatest challenge of our times.

If you are a Christian, consider it from God's perspective. He has created all this beauty, and it is being destroyed. Would you be happy with this state of affairs if you were God?

There was an ad that said, “Would Jesus drive an SUV?” I walk the walk as much as I talk the talk. I take public transportation, and my electricity bill is $30 a month. And as a Christian I appeal to Christians to consider what they are doing to God's creation. Destroying rich, beautiful environments for short-term gain is permanent solution to a temporary problem. What is destroyed is better than what is created, and the result is an impoverished world.

This is especially the case with ranching in the Amazon. But it is also the case in less obvious situations. We have carbon dioxide that does not get absorbed by trees going into the oceans and making them acidic and killing all the fish. We have glaciers melting and flooding coastal areas. We have tundra melting to release methane into the air. In all these cases we see permanent destruction.

Would God be happy about that? Not from what we know of God. Now God is not against us eating meat or raising cattle, but He would be against ranching in the Amazon and other destructive practices. So if you are a Christian, you have an obligation to also be an environmentalist. That does not mean moving away from technology. It means using technology that is less destructive.

The question to ask before taking any action is, What would this be in the eyes of God? Am I doing what's pleasing to God or am I not doing what's not pleasing to God? In this matter the answer is clear. It does not please God for His creation to be blindly destroyed. It pleases God for people to provide for their needs in a way that is less destructive to nature.

The Abuse Game

I am writing here about a game that I have seen played by many people in a number of situations.

The partner – typically the man, although sometimes this is done by women – decides that the other partner is a bad person. This justifies him in treating her like dirt. Why is this a game?

Quite simply because, if the partner really was a bad person, then one couldn't wait to leave her. But not only do people in such situations not leave, but they do what they can to keep the partner from leaving.

That is because, whatever they think about the partner's character, they are getting things out of the relationships. They get companionship. They get sex. They get children. They get a clean house. They get another source of income or in some cases the only source of income. Their belief that the partner is bad justifies them in not only failing to reward the partner for what they are getting from her, but to treat her like dirt even as he does what he can to keep the partner from leaving.

What we are getting here, really, is theft. One gets many things out of the relationship without rewarding the partner for what he gets from her. And thieves have no business using moral arguments.

I want more people to see through this kind of behavior. Once again, if the partner really was bad, then one could not wait to leave her. That they instead choose to stay in the relationship is because thye are getting things out of the relationship. And if you get things out of the relationship, you better reward the partner for what you are getting from her. Anything else is a game and a theft.

If you are at the receiving end of this kind of behavior: See through it. If the partner starts using moral arguments, turn it around on them and show them that what they are doing is a game and a theft. For as long as they are getting things out of the relationship they are obligated to behave rightfully; and if they truly think that you are a bad person, invite them to leave.

Jews And The Killing Of Jesus

A common criticism of the Jews is that they killed Jesus. It is time that this be responded to meaningfully.

First, Jesus asked God to forgive the people who executed him. This means that the rest of us have to do the same thing, or else be disrespectful to the will of Jesus. If Jesus wants God to forgive his executioners, then he also wants you to do the same thing; and failing to do so is disrespectful of Jesus.

Secondly, the Jews, in executing Jesus, were only following their religious law. The first commandment is “thou shalt have no gods beside me.” Jesus, in claiming to be God, committed the worst sin in the books. That is why they insisted on crucifying Jesus while letting off a murderer.

Finally, the white people want to be absolved of their crimes of slavery and colonialism. They can start by absolving the Jews of a much earlier – and much lesser – crime of killing Jesus.

Am I a Jew? Yes I am. And I want to bring sanity to this matter. The people who want to be absolved of the sins of their ancestors need to extend the same grace to others. And that means that the people whose ancestors perpetrated real crimes of slavery and colonialism need to forgive the Jews for killing Jesus.

Once that is done, it will be possible to resolve our differences in a civilized manner. And then people – both Jewish and gentile – will be able to work together to create a livable world.