What will you do before they come for you?

The past several days have been exhausting. Starting with shock, I've gone through many different emotions since learning the election results early Wednesday morning.  I don't even like politics, but there are certain issues in which I do firmly believe.  Human rights is one of them.

The way it should have been

Am I upset? Yes. Hillary Clinton represented (and represents) a lot of the people who make America great -- those who are: women, LGBTQ, Jewish, immigrants, Hispanic, Mexican, Black, Muslim, etc.  I think the country would have only continued to make progress if she had been elected President.  Was she the perfect candidate?  No.  Is there such a thing?  Also no.  There is always going to be something about the presidential candidates that isn't ideal.  They will be too this or too that.  But, Hillary was a damn good option and she brought us that much closer to shattering that glass ceiling, whenever it may be.  She should not have been elected solely because of her being a woman; she should have been elected because she was the most qualified and because she represented so much of the progress that we, the people, have made and continued to work toward, for so many years.

Repercussions have already begun.  I know an 8-year-old girl from a country in South America who is currently living in the United States without papers. The girl is a sweet, hardworking, and motivated individual who contributes a great deal to the environment around her. Since the election results came in, she and her family have already made arrangements to move to Europe, where they have citizenship.  They are leaving out of fear of what might happen when He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named assumes the presidency in January.

Thing is, I believe it is fear that got him elected in the first place.  His voters were mostly people who were (/are) scared, ignorant, and set in their antiquated beliefs that go against everything that the USA truly stands for.  The reason why all of the polls were "wrong"?  Because these people were scared to acknowledge their true beliefs amidst a backdrop of tolerance and acceptance.  Unfortunately, those people don't just go away.  That means it is up to the rest of us to make them see the light.

I do find some solace in knowing that HRC won the popular vote, that love DID trump hate when it came time to vote for one versus the other.  But, because of the electoral college, the wrong leader was elected.  And now, despite being in the minority, the haters are acting out, as if they think it has become acceptable behavior, given that their leader was elected to the presidency.  If he is supposed to be the leader of all the people, though, that does not mean that we have to or should simply follow blindly; rather than conform to his outdated, intolerant, and unacceptable view of the world, we force him to represent us, the people, appropriately.  I will not sit back and allow myself to be brainwashed into thinking that his ideals are acceptable ones.

Is it unfortunate that he has now become the President?  Absolutely.  But let's look at some silver linings:
1) More people voted for love and against hate.
2) Among the newest members of Congress are more women representing diverse backgrounds.
3) The United States has a solid system of checks and balances, for better or for worse.
4) In four years, another group of kids will be able to vote.  Let's make sure that they learn the right lessons so that they, too, will always choose love.

Though I am (obviously) not at all happy about the result of the presidential election, I will accept it.  Hate only breeds more hate, and that is no way to live.  When we think about the next four years, it can seem daunting, so let's zoom in instead.  Let's go one day at a time.  If we all do as much good as we can on a daily basis, then we will end up doing great.  Martin Luther King, Jr. said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice."  If this is true (and I do believe that it is), then we cannot simply sit idly by.  On the contrary.  We need to stand up for what we know to be right and show our neighbors that we are with them.  Martin Niemöller, a Protestant pastor who spoke out against Adolf Hitler, said,

Martin Niemöller

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

So, I will be there to speak for those who cannot and to stand alongside those who can.  And I invite all of you to join me.

"Be the change you wish to see in the world." ~Gandhi

"Knock, knock." "Who's there?" "What's There."

 A few make-you-think kind of passages from The Tao of Pooh, by Benjamin Hoff:

"'A fish can't whistle and neither can I.' Coming from a wise mind, such a statement would mean, 'I have certain limitations, and I know what they are.' Such a mind would act accordingly. There's nothing wrong with not being able to whistle, especially if you're a fish. But there can be lots of things wrong with blindly trying to do what you aren't designed for. Fish don't live in trees, and birds don't spend too much time underwater if they can help it. Unfortunately, some people -- who always seem to think they're smarter than fish and birds, somehow -- aren't so wise, and end up causing big trouble for themselves and others.

That doesn't mean that we need to stop changing and improving. It just means that we need to recognize What's There. If you face the fact that you have weak muscles, say, then you can do the right things and eventually become strong. But if you ignore What's There and try to lift someone's car out of a ditch, what sort of condition will you be in after a while? And even if you have more muscle than anyone alive, you still can't push over a freight train. The wise know their limitations; the foolish do not" (p.43).

---

"Sooner or later, we are bound to discover some things about ourselves that we don't like. But once we see they're there, we can decide what we want to do with them. Do we want to get rid of them completely, change them into other things, or use them in beneficial ways? The last two approaches are often especially Useful, since they avoid head-on conflict, and therefore minimize struggle. Also, they allow those transformed characteristics to be added to the list of things we have that help us out.

In a similar manner, instead of struggling to erase what are referred to as negative emotions, we can learn to use them in positive ways. We could describe the principle like this: while pounding on the piano keys may produce noise, removing them doesn't exactly further the creation of music" (pp. 58-59).

---

Hirohito, 1982. [pc: © Bettmann/Corbis]

"One of our favorite examples of the value of Nothing is an incident in the life of the Japanese emperor Hirohito. Now, being emperor in one of the most frantically Confucianist countries in the world is not necessarily all that relaxing. From early morning until late at night, practically every minute of the emperor's time is filled in with meetings, audiences, tours, inspections, and who-knows-what. And through a day so tightly scheduled that it would make a stone wall seem open by comparison, the emperor must glide, like a great ship sailing in a steady breeze.

Laozi, founder of Taoism [pc: Wikipedia]

In the middle of a particularly busy day, the emperor was driven to a meeting hall for an appointment of some kind. But when he arrived, there was no one there. The emperor walked in to the middle of the great hall, stood silently for a moment, then bowed to the empty space. He turned to his assistants, a large smile on his face. 'We must schedule more appointments like this,' he told them. 'I haven't enjoyed myself so much in a long time.'

In the forty-eighth chapter of the Tao Te Ching, Lao-tse wrote, 'To attain knowledge, add things every day. To attain wisdom, remove things every day'" (pp. 148-149).

How about stirring more acceptance into the melting pot?

There are many tragedies in the history of the world that should never be repeated. Their having occurred even once was once too many. I wasn't alive during the Holocaust, so there was nothing I could have done about it. (Even if I had been alive, I'm not sure how much I could have done about it.) But, when I read The Lost: A Search for Six of Six Million, there was a passage whose words described uncannily what today's immigrants must face in order to come to the United States. And this time I can do something, even if that something equates only to spreading awareness.

So as not to paraphrase first-hand accounts "about the conditions inside the freight cars to the Operation Reinhard camps, during the late summer of 1942" (p. 236), author Daniel Mendelsohn opted instead to let the words of a survivor, Abraham Krzepicki, do the telling of his journey from Warsaw to Treblinka, an extermination camp in Poland.

"Over 100 people were packed into our car....It is impossible to describe the tragic situation in our airless, closed freight car. It was one big toilet. Everyone tried to push his way to a small air aperture. Everyone was lying on the floor. I also lay down. I found a crack in the floorboards into which I pushed my nose in order to get a little air. The stink in the car was unbearable. People were defecating in all four corners of the car....The situation inside the car was becoming worse. Water. We begged the railroad workers. We would pay them well. Some paid 500 and 1000 zlotys [Polish money] for a small cup of water....I paid 500 zlotys (more than half the money I had) for a cup of water -- about half a liter. As I began to drink, a woman, whose child had fainted, attacked me. I drank; I couldn't take the cup from my lips. The woman bit deep into my hand -- with all her strength she wanted to force me to leave her a little water. I paid no attention to the pain. I would have undergone any pain on earth for a little more water. But I did leave a few drops at the bottom of the cup, and I watched the child drink. The situation in the car was deteriorating. It was only seven in the morning, but the sun was already heating the car. The men removed their shirts and lay half naked. Some of the women, too, took off their dresses and lay in their undergarments. People lay on the floor, gasping and shuddering as if feverish, their heads lolling, laboring to get some air into their lungs. Some were in complete despair and no longer moved."

With a little bit more research, I found that that account actually continued for a few more sentences.

"We reached Treblinka.…Many were inert on the freight-car floor, some probably dead. We had been traveling for about twenty hours. If the trip had taken another half day, the number of dead would have been much higher. We would all have died of heat and asphyxiation. I later learned that there were transports to Treblinka from which only corpses were removed."

I hesitate to even write this blog, as I do not feel justified in attaching myself -- even only in writing -- to situations I have not lived first-hand. However, many of those people who did, are not here to share their stories; so, while I do not claim to have the same knowledge they did (because I definitely do not), I do feel that I can at least use the information I do have to acknowledge those parallel circumstances between the Holocaust (1939-1945) and immigration (ongoing) when it comes to transport.

It is impossible to say with any certainty how many immigrants have crossed into the United States illegally, as current estimates range from 7 million to 20+ million. But, one likelihood is that the way they crossed the border was through circumstances akin to those detailed by Abraham Krzepicki above.

One misconception that I believe many people in the U.S. have about "illegal immigrants" (and I put that in quotes because no person can be illegal)  is that that decision was one that the person wanted to make. The reality is that it is a decision that the person had to make. Perhaps their family was threatened by gangs, by poverty, by lack of opportunity. Immigration tears families apart and even creates new problems; people wouldn't put themselves through the risk and the agony of the journey to maybe get to the U.S. if they didn't have to.  Then, when they get to the U.S., they often experience sub-par working conditions, not being paid adequately or treated humanely, which minimize their ability to send money back to their families. The cycle is simply being perpetuated, and it has to stop. The people who come here involuntarily, often work back-breakingly hard in order to create a better life for their families.  In doing so, they also end up contributing to the economy and comprising part of the ever-expanding multicultural tapestry that has been the United States, ever since Christopher Columbus and his crew arrived in 1492 and claimed the land as their own.

We could call Christopher Columbus (left) the "first illegal immigrant," if you wanted to use those terms. (Alternatively, he could be called the first person to come into the country illegally.) But we would be wrong.  He wasn't the first explorer to set foot on the Americas (Leif Erikson (right) was...almost 500 years before Christopher Columbus "did."). Even still, it would not have been wrong for Columbus to set foot on the Americas -- his error was in stealing the land from the Native Americans.

Since then, the nation has become known as a "melting pot" -- one that embraces people from different backgrounds in order to make that multicultural thread the norm. It would be hypocritical for anyone in the United States (other than descendants of the original Native Americans) to reject immigrants, as they would essentially be denouncing themselves, the very product of other immigrants who arrived illegally.

Having a day to honor Christopher Columbus the Explorer does not seem like the right thing to do, as we should not be celebrating someone who "discovered" land that had already been discovered, claiming it as his own. So what if we celebrated Christopher Columbus the Immigrant?  Shouldn't do that either; Columbus himself was not an immigrant who just set out to create a better life for himself and his family, which is why he shouldn't be celebrated in the same context as the many other immigrants -- people -- who have risked their lives to emigrate, have contributed to the U.S., and have continued to make the country a richer, more diverse place. It is those people to whom I direct my gratitude and my admiration. This day (tomorrow) honors you.  (And kudos to the four states and other countries who got it right in appropriately naming the holiday that Columbus Day was designed to celebrate. We should follow suit to rename the day so as to truly honor the right people, since Columbus himself was certainly no role model.)

By the way, it turns out that there is a Leif Erikson Day, which occurs every October 9th. For some fun facts about that, click here.

Update: Here are links to more sites detailing why Columbus Day shouldn't be a thing.
*Christopher Columbus was awful.
*Indigenous People's Day


 

The mosaic is greater than the sum of its tesserae...but the tesserae are pretty important, too

No additional commentary needed, as this passage from The Lost: A Search for Six of Six Million, really says it best and says it well.

"To become a story, the details of ... what happened in real time, in real history, to a real person, would have to be subordinated to the overall outline that already existed, for whatever idiosyncratic reasons of personality and preference and taste... the way that the small stones or tesserae used by ancient Greek and Roman artisans were set into grout or cement according to a design of the artist's invention, a design without which (the artist would tell you) the tesserae themselves -- which would be glittering semiprecious stones, onyx or quartz or jasper, or merely homely bits of local stone -- were nothing, in the end, but attractive bits of rock.

Another way of saying this is that proximity brings you closer to what happened, is responsible for the facts we glean, the artifacts we possess, the verbatim quotations of what people said; but distance is what makes possible the story of what happened, is precisely what gives someone the freedom to organize and shape those bits into a pleasing and coherent whole -- to, for example, take three separate quotations, made by one person over the course of three nights, and string them together because when strung together in this fashion they create a dramatic effect far more powerful than they could possibly make if you were to encounter them in three successive chapters of a book" (p. 437).

Today's blog is brought to you by the number 94 billion

Maybe the U.S. really does need to put bars around its borders, because we're all guilty of committing a crime, and in one way or another, we are all at fault.

It's called a "crime against humanity."  According to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, these crimes "are particularly odious offences in that they constitute a serious attack on human dignity or grave humiliation or a degradation of one or more human beings. They are not isolated or sporadic events, but are part either of a government policy (although the perpetrators need not identify themselves with this policy) or of a wide practice of atrocities tolerated or condoned by a government or a de facto authority. Murder; extermination; torture; rape; political, racial, or religious persecution and other inhumane acts reach the threshold of crimes against humanity only if they are part of a widespread or systematic practice. Isolated inhumane acts of this nature may constitute grave infringements of human rights, or depending on the circumstances, war crimes, but may fall short of falling into the category of crimes under discussion."

Now let's consider the concept against the backdrop of immigrants and the U.S. policies in place (or lack thereof).  Specifically, let's look at those 11-12 million PEOPLE who do not have that highly coveted particular document, be it a visa, green card, or U.S. birth certificate -- all of which, let's face it, come from trees, anyway...and, really, to whom do the trees belong?  Nature!  If we live by the laws of nature, then why must we act so unnaturally?

So let's take a closer look.  Part of a widespread or systemic practice?  Check. Persecution? Check.  Part of a wide practice of atrocities tolerated or condoned by a government?  Check.

We must remember that, before we are members of any political, racial, religious, national, or any other group, we are all members of humankind -- or, if you want to be *really* technical, the human race.  (In layman's terms, we all belong to the same race!) That means that someone who commits a crime against another person is also essentially committing that same crime against himself.  Everyone else is also responsible.  Why, you ask?  Because we let it happen.

Take Kitty Genovese: a 28-year-old woman who was attacked, sexually assaulted, and murdered on her way home from work at 3am on March 13, 1964.  That sequence of events is already tragic.  But there were numerous people who heard her screams and her pleas for help and did not do anything.  A New York Times article, published a few weeks later, reported that there were 38 witnesses, though there is some debate as to how many of those actually saw or were aware of the entire incident.  So, even though only Winston Moseley was the one wielding a knife, those bystanders -- no matter how many or how few there were -- had the power to save her life.  And they didn't.  Forty years later, her name had become "synonymous with public apathy," as expressed in a segment on National Public Radio which commemorated her death.

It has been said that "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."  (The quote is often attributed to Edmunde Burke, though it seems he never articulated the phrase as succinctly as that.  He did, however, write in Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontents (1770) that, "when bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."  Still, it is less important who was the first to phrase that statement in that way; the point is the truth behind it.)  What I want to know is, why don't more people live by that belief?

Two decades before Kitty Genovese's death, the world was engaged in World War II.  Zeroing in on the Holocaust (a word of Greek origin, meaning "sacrifice by fire"), Jews experienced extreme persecution and genocide.  Those who were able to get out of the targeted areas were forced to find a way to do so, as they could no longer live peacefully in their desired communities.  Those who could not escape found themselves on death marches or being deported on trains that led to concentration camps or death camps.  These cattle cars held anywhere from 50-150 passengers, and, "at times, the floor had a layer of quick lime which burned the feet of the human cargo.  There was no water. There was no food. There was no toilet, no ventilation. Some boxcars had up to 150 people stuffed into them. It did not matter if it was summer, winter, boiling hot or freezing cold. And an average transport took about four and a half days."  Six million Jews perished during the Holocaust.  And not one person in the world did enough to stop it from happening.

Now, here we are, in 2011 -- about 70 years since the Holocaust and almost 50 since the attack on Kitty Genovese.  And where are we?  In May 2011 (two months ago), X-ray equipment led Mexican authorities to the discovery of 512 people (see above) crammed into two tractor-trailers heading for the U.S.  Who are we, as fellow members of the human race, to deny our teammates the right to a better life?  Why should we treat inhumanely and/or kick out the people who risk their lives to be better and to do better?  Who are *we* to be so elitist?  After all, more than 500 years ago, pre-Christopher Columbus, *we* were the ones who kicked the Native Americans off of their land so it could be ours.  Brings a whole new meaning to "This Land is Your Land, This Land is My Land," I can tell you that much.

I suppose I simply cannot understand how one human can decide the fate of another.  Isn't everyone the same?  Shouldn't we all be trying to help each other?  That may sound like an after-school special kind of message, but if it's the right thing to do, then who cares?  There is no neutrality in this world -- there are the people who act, and there are the people who don't, and everyone is responsible.  How can we let immigrants (who are, lest we forget, people just like us) willfully endanger themselves on a daily basis in conditions reminiscent of the Holocaust, just so they have the chance at a better life?  The conditions are eerily similar to those cattle cars of the 1930s and 40s, and well over half a century has passed since then.  What can we say we have actually achieved in that time?

I do acknowledge that there are and need to be border laws, for the sake of homeland security and all of that.  At the same time, however, people need to recognize that helping the countries that are producing our immigrants will have a trickle-down effect.  By going to the source and establishing partnerships to help those countries prosper will in turn spark less of a desire for those residents to willfully separate their families in search of a better life.  Those who leave their families to create a better life in the US would likely not leave their own communities if they could experience those better opportunities from their own home.  Wouldn't it, then, be in everyone's best interests to work to improve the quality of life in those other countries?  After all, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

Let's take a look at some facts that spell out a little more clearly the situation in which we (as a nation and as members of the human race) have found ourselves.

According to a 2007 article in The New York Times, if the U.S.wanted to round up all 11-12 million immigrants in the country without proper documentation and deport them, it would cost $94 billion.  NINETY-FOUR BILLION DOLLARS!  What we could do with $94 billion!  What would the effect be if that sum were spent on education, rather than on punishment?  If the U.S. is willing to (senselessly) deport all of those people who risked their lives just for the chance to *try* to make a better life for themselves and for their families, what does that say about our country's priorities (other than that we are elitists who kicked out the Native Americans in order to claim the land as our own)?.  The immigrants aren't coming to kick anyone off of the land; they just want to contribute to its preservation in order to help others.

If 11-12 million people are deported, wouldn't that just perpetuate a cycle of resentment and animosity, toward a country that claims to be a "land of opportunity" and the "land of the free and home of the brave"?  We need to break out of this cycle to move forward rather than to allow history to repeat itself.  It's clear that what has been done in the past hasn't solved anything, so let's try something new. I mean, what brave act did U.S.-born citizens risk their lives to do in order to earn the right to live/work here?

In order to become a teacher, one must become certified.  But becoming certified once does not guarantee a teacher's status as "certified" forever.  Every few years (the actual number varies from state to state), a teacher must complete a certain number of professional development hours in order to maintain certification.  That makes sense -- it ensures that teachers are adapting to the changing times.  Why don't the same kinds of rules apply to U.S. citizenship?...Say, that every few years, one must complete some community service or project that contributes to the well-being of the country.  If you don't do your job as a teacher and maintain your certification, you might get put on probation and then lose your teaching license.  If you don't do your job as a citizen, maybe the same rules should apply (put on probation and then deported).  I do realize that this citizenship business is much more extreme than a teaching license, but maybe it could be deported for a year, just to experience first-hand how hard it is to adapt to life in a new country.  Perhaps this exercise would teach American citizens how to be more proactive citizens, rather than mere bystanders.

I don't wish to suggest that this whole "land of opportunity" thing centers on immigration.  Here are a few other examples.  Click on any of the below links for more eye-opening information than is listed here.

WATER: Almost one billion people do not have access to clean water.

LITERACY: 776 million people cannot read or write.

SHOES: 40% of the world's population doesn't have shoes.  (Though I don't mean to endorse this next site, I do really like this video that they have on it and encourage everyone to check it out, as it's very well done.)

Rather than spending our time, money, and efforts fighting in wars, why don't we work to promote peace and opportunity for all? Immigration is not the CAUSE of a broken system; it's one of the effects. It's not the problem itself; it's a SYMPTOM. So, why don't we work to fix the system so everyone *worldwide* (that is, our teammates, our brothers and sisters in the human race) has equal access to education, clean water, shoes, etc...basic necessities of life!  Only then will the U.S. as a country truly embody the idea that it doesn't matter upon what soil one was born.

In 1776, the United States of America became an independent country upon the signing of the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson.  The opening of the second paragraph of the document states that, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness..."  Almost 200 years later, in 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered his famous "I Have a Dream" speech, within which he said (starting at about 12:25) that, "I still have a dream.  It is a dream that is deeply rooted in the American dream.  I have a dream, that one day, this nation will rise up, and live out the true meaning of its creed: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'"

It has been almost 50 years since MLK, Jr., gave that speech.  The U.S. now has an African-American president, Barack Obama, and we have made important strides in many areas.  In this particular moment, the government has seemingly reached an impasse when it comes to the trillions of dollars of debt facing our nation.  Wouldn't it be great if we had 11-12 million educated sets of ideas for how to proceed, along with 11-12 million pairs of hands to actually execute that plan, rather than be 94 billion MORE dollars in debt?

What's in a home?

When you travel the same route every day, it is very easy to pass the same landmarks and the same people without even noticing. In a sense, you become immune to your surroundings and it just stops being a "thing," since it merely forms part of the natural environment around you.

Last August (2010), I started a new job, working as a teacher at a school about 20-30 minutes away, by car. (Isn't it interesting how we measure distance in time?)  It took me awhile to figure out the best route to get there from where I live, but once I did, I've pretty much stuck with it (barring traffic reports suggesting I take a different route).

Sometime around November, the self-proclaimed homeless man on a certain streetcorner along my route stopped being a random street presence.  Since I wouldn't always arrive at the traffic light when it was green, I would pass the time by looking around at the people in the cars around me and on the street.  He and I would exchange an awkward smile, awkward because, there I was, toasty in my heated car while he braved the cold outside.  Should I have felt guilty? Should he?  From that point on, every once in awhile, I would give him a small bottle of water, a piece of fruit, or a loaf of bread while I was stopped at that traffic light.  Like a carnivalesque toy that only plays when prompted by an inserted coin, upon receiving my small donations the guy would wish me a good day and tell me to stay safe. I would tell him to do the same.

One day in December, as I was driving to work, I noticed that the skies were looking ominous. By the time I arrived at "his" streetcorner, it was already drizzling. I happened to have an extra umbrella in the car (albeit neon pink and with one broken spoke), but as the light turned red, I rolled down my window and asked him, "Do you wannan umbrella? It's a little broken, but it still works..."  Walking over to take it from me, he replied, "Thanks! I ain't never had one of these things before."  As the green light signaled my departure, I thought to myself, "He's never had an umbrella? How is that possible?"  But then I realized that assumed commonalities among people are not necessarily common at all...that in this day and age, there's simply no place to close-mindedly determine that one's cover-of-the-book perceptions "must" be true.  (It's important to note that perceptions are different from judgments.)

Rather than make snap judgments about the situation, I have come to wonder about this guy.  Why is he not on that corner in the afternoons when I drive home?  Is "his" corner more lucrative than the one on the other side of the street, manned by someone else during the morning rush?  Where does he go after his "shift" is over?  And why, during the two-hour school delays because of ice and/or snow, was he not there? Where did he go?  And if he wasn't there during the delays because of the weather, then why was he there when it was raining?  I don't know the answers to those questions, but I do wonder about them.

******
In early January, in Columbus, Ohio, a homeless man made the national news for his "golden voice."  Ted Williams, a roadside regular, held a sign advertising his "God given gift of voice" when, one day, a journalist stopped to talk to him.  Not even two days later, a video showcasing Williams and his "golden voice" had become a YouTube sensation, boasting more than a millions hits.  A month and a half later, there have been more than 11 million hits on that video alone (not to mention the countless radio and television broadcasts on which he or his story has since appeared).  The Williams story is a story of an overnight dream-come-true.  Years ago, he had fallen prey to a world rife with alcohol and drugs and, though he was involved in radio, his environment caved in around him.  This was his second chance.

Immediately, he received offers for voice-over spots for commercials (like for Kraft Macaroni & Cheese) and for more permanent employment with the Cleveland Cavaliers, among numerous other offers.  He also became a homeowner, thanks to the generous support of the Cavs. Not even two months since being "discovered," he has been featured on television and radio, has reunited with his formerly estranged mother and children, entered and left rehab in Texas (a decision which came about too hastily, according to Williams), and moved to a sober house in Los Angeles, where he is currently trying to feel out the voice-over industry.
******

The week after this story hit the press, I was, once again, driving to work, a near-expired bag of tortillas on the car seat next to me.  I had planned to give them to the dark green windbreakered guy I saw every day, but as I approached the traffic light, it was already green.  Should I save it until tomorrow?  Should I just slow down?  I decided that, though no big deal for me to wait until "tomorrow," tomorrow could be a lot farther away for the guy, so I slowed to a brief stop to ask him, "Do you want some tortillas?"  Since he is always conscious of the traffic (he has to be), he ran over and gave me his usual, "Thank you, dear -- you stay safe now!" to the musical accompaniment of a car honking behind me.  Seriously?! SERIOUSLY?!  On a street where there are three lanes of traffic on either side of the median strip, someone has to impatiently honk their horn at someone who is giving food to a homeless person? Who does that malcriado [poorly raised person] think he/she is? SERIOUSLY?!  Honestly, would that person get in trouble wherever he/she was going for saying, "Sorry I'm late. I was stopped at a *green* light because the person in front of me slowed down to give some food to the homeless" ?? I mean, that person SHOULD get in trouble -- he/she should get fired for being a complete ignoramus!  But, alas, I'm not judging; I'm merely stating the facts... I'm not saying that the person is necessarily a bad person, just an ignorant one.

In the past several weeks, I've heard a few "Thanks, dear -- you stay safe"s and, lately, even without the exchange of something to eat or drink.  A couple of days ago, he saw me and I could see through my window that he was starting to chat, so I rolled down my window.
"It's supposed to feel like summer this afternoon, can you believe it?" he asked.
"No, I can't -- they say it's gonna hit 70!" I replied.
"And then they're calling for snow next week!  Only in Maryland.." he said.
"I guess so!" [And the light turned green.]
"You have a good day, dear!"
"You too!" And as I left, I rolled up my window, thinking...no one is above exchanging pleasantries with others.  Maybe I should invest in a bumper sticker that says, "Honk if you're a goose."  We'll see what that driver has to say about that.

My entry submission to the travel contest

Although I came in third for the contest, I still wholeheartedly believe in my entry submission.  So I post it here as another blog to file away with the others. Just 'cause I'm not about to take 8 trips to places around the world, doesn't mean the reflections of past and current experiences cease to exist.  Here's to truth-telling life experiences, now and always.
------

By Melissa Robbins                      December 2, 2010
Travelers are like snowflakes, unique with a collective power that could change the world. An ardent travelphile, I’ve been fortunate to have breathed the air in many places. Though I have my Masters degree, it's not my 19 years of formal schooling that's taught me the most, but my adventures outside the classroom.

I’ve gone hang-gliding over Rio de Janeiro, paragliding in the Swiss Alps, lion-hunting in the Serengeti, and have lived in Spain, Italy, Brazil, and El Salvador. I believe true travelers seek out the local lifestyle by learning the spoken language and relentlessly immersing themselves in the unspoken rhythm that keeps the people and town running; they then carry those experiences with them in that uncomfortably-heavy-and-unforgiving travel backpack thereafter.

Zig-zagging around the globe is—let’s face it—not always as glamorous as it sounds. It is, however, a true representation of life at its core. In blogging my way through South America, I chose my words carefully to avoid publicizing that, in Brazil, I’d been held up at knifepoint. Physically, I escaped unscathed, but the memory of that 30-second-frozen-in-time moment has shaped my life. Not only did that teach me that I could run fast in flip-flops, but I was also forced to experience something that unfortunately plagues Brazilians daily in their quest to survive. I now see that travel blogging isn't merely reporting the smile-inducing adventures in a reader-friendly way; truly capturing the essence of a place also means painting a picture so vivid, readers can envision themselves living the blog.

I’m not going to try to “beat the system” to win this contest. I believe voters can recognize someone’s genuineness and innate desire to use all experiences—trials and tribulations alike—to make positive changes in the world, one step at a time. If you want a fictional, light-hearted-full-of-fluff-beach-read, don’t vote for me. If you wonder what makes other places tick, as lived by someone who blogs even when she doesn’t have her passport in hand (http://andsmilestogobeforeisleep.blogspot.com/), I’d be very grateful to receive your coveted vote.

Meanwhile, I'll be abiding by the ever-relevant Confucian philosophy: “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.”

You gotta fight...for your right...to beeee equal

The first week of the new year is over, and the results of the competition have been announced.  Alas, I did not win...in fact someone else with the last name Robbins won, which essentially means that the "wrong" Robbins won.  But, I want to take a minute to thank all the people who voted for me, who told their friends and families to vote, and who voted with multiple email addresses.  Even though the contest people disqualified me for 5 days (before I got them to reinstate me into the competition) because they believed that there was an "unnatural number of votes for my entry in a very short period of time" (thus, in their minds, *necessarily* constituting voter fraud, since, G-d forbid, people actually like my blog at the same time), I ended up with 1124 votes, when all was said and done (and after they took away 100+ votes of mine).  By the numbers, it looks like I ended up in 3rd place, but there's no way to know for sure about the validity of the votes received by the two people with higher numbers than mine.

At first, I was disappointed -- who wouldn't have loved winning tens of thousands of dollars' worth of travel?  Hell, that's what I spend my money on anyway, so why not just cut out the middle man?  But then, upon further reflection, I realized that the competition was the very antithesis of its intended purpose.  If the purpose was to allow someone the $70,000+ opportunity to travel to 8 different destinations and blog about it, what the contest people essentially did was further polarize the blogger from the "bloggees."  The average person doesn't have the opportunity to do what the grand prize allows this contest's winner to do.  And it is very unlikely that the people whom the winner will encounter on each of these trips will have had a similar opportunity.  Thus, the true winners -- I believe -- are the people who make this grand prize happen for themselves.  16 trip packages (8 trips for 1 +guest) do not just fall into one's lap with no strings attached.



Am I bitter that I didn't win?  No -- a little disappointed, but not bitter.  Would I like to have won? Of course.  Do I hold a grudge against the "other" Robbins?  No.  Since she won the competition, she should get the grand prize.  I don't know if I'll check back to see her blogs or not whenever she ends up taking her trips, but I do know that the perspectives of someone who receives $70,000+ worth of opportunities on one winter day in January are going to be vastly different from someone who works for those same opportunities every day of his/her life.  That doesn't make one viewpoint any "better" than another, but I think it needs to be acknowledged that every day, people fight to survive and to make life better for themselves and their families, and it's *those* people who deserve a wealth of opportunities.

So, although I stand on the 3rd place step of the podium, perhaps it's not so bad...after all, I'm the closest to the ground or, in other words, closer to the people.  And therein emerges a new interpersonal relationship in looking into the eyes of the person in front of you, rather than looking down on them.  (Note: I'm only 5'5", so even though I'd be on that 3rd place step, I'd still be looking into the eyes of the people in front of me, if not up at them.)

Thanks again to all of you for all of your help. You have given me new insight that will only continue to fuel my drive.  Now let's raise our glasses and toast to the creation of an extended community of hard workers and equality fighters...but since equality doesn't fight for itself, put those glasses down and let's get back to work.

One person can make a difference, but many people can make lots of differences!...or something like that

Brazil, February 2008

I have just submitted my entry to the Blog Your Way Around the World contest.  Lots of people have entered, and it's impossible to have any expectation of winning such a seemingly out-of-this-world (well, more like out-of-this-country...8 times!) grand prize.  I have 29 days to amass the votes, and I think that's a reachable goal. I can't vote for myself 2,000 times, though (I refuse to create 2,000 unique email addresses), so now it's time to see how far the power of online networking actually goes.

Will it be a Happy Hanukkah and a Happy New Year?  You tell me.  Better yet, *show* me!

Tanzania, August 2010

Peru, August 2009

{In my most teachery voice, "I know you can do a GREAT job of showing me you know how to vote.  Can you show me?"}

Thanks for the capacity to be giving

Jewish law requires that people give one tenth of their income to the poor.  That religious obligation is called Tzedakah.  So, if you earn 10 billion dollars a year, 1 billion of that goes to those less fortunate than you.  If you earn 10 dollars a year, 1 dollar of that goes to the needy.  Yes, I suppose that people will try to argue that they are needy in different ways (which is true) and, therefore, their self-proclaimed "neediness" qualifies them to receive Tzedakah without having to give it (which is not true).  Or maybe that, if you are earning 10 dollars a year, you can't afford to give 1 dollar away, but where's the compassion?  There will always be someone in the world who earns 0 dollars a year.

me, leaving big, tall building for the last time!

"The only certain things in this world are death and taxes," said Benjamin Franklin.  One of the reasons I opted against pursuing a career in a big, tall building (see right) with a big, green paycheck is that satisfaction in life comes with no pricetag.  If you die only with enough Benjamin Franklins to wallpaper the inside of your coffin, what have you really accomplished in life?  But if you die having paid it forward and having instilled rock-solid values and ethics into others by example, while having a wealth of priceless experiences along the way, one would think that that satisfaction would provide a whole lot more of a comfortable resting place than a handful of paper with Benjamin Franklin's picture on it.  Even still, if you are unable to set aside even one iota of greed to give to others, nota bene: there's something in it for you; charitable contributions can earn you a tax deduction, kind of like a compromise.  You give your money to charity; you don't pay taxes...isn't that a good exchange?  The government gives *you* Tzedakah.  But again, what makes you worthy of being given unto when you don't embody the giving spirit yourself?

I write this post not to be preachy, not to ask for Tzedakah for myself (though by Jewish law, it is frowned upon to refuse it), and not to convert anyone...I understand that many people (Jews and non-Jews alike) don't necessarily feel any obligation (whether religious, personal, or otherwise) to give unto others.  But how can you criticize the world and point fingers at people who or institutions that don't meet/exceed your expectations when you are not doing something to actively change it?

Luz Meri, me, and Elsi (El Salvador, June 2009)

In the spirit of Thanksgiving, I feel it my personal obligation to acknowledge that which *I* feel thankful for and invite you to do the same (much like I did last year).  While I am in agreement with many about things to be thankful for (friends, family, significant other, my little ones in El Salvador, job, etc.), I also feel compelled to express my thanks for the chance to be giving, my thanks for the knowledge I have gained in my 27 years... that it is not solely particular items one should be thankful for, but also the capacity to appreciate them.

(Sidenote: I am pleased to report that my girls in El Salvador have passed another year of school.  Elsi (15 years old) has just passed eighth grade and will start ninth in January.  Luz Meri (9 years old, 10 in January) just finished third grade and will start fourth grade in January.)

So as you sit down at your Thanksgiving feast tonight, and as you update your Facebook status messages to reflect "all" that you are thankful for, I just want you to think about this: would you still be A-O-K if that turkey on your table were one tenth smaller?

No one's any bigger if they use the word "n*gger"

Several months ago, there was a lot of publicity criticizing the latest celebrity to go off on a "N-word" rampage. Since all those happenings sort of jumble together, I got to thinking about some underlying issues.

Now, before I explain my thoughts, let me just acknowledge that I do not deem it appropriate in any context to use the "N-word," except perhaps for carefully planned lessons on history whose sole purpose is to educate in a neutral way. Personally, I wouldn't use the word in my everyday life (n*gger) or with friends (n*gga); I also don't listen to music that uses those words (not necessarily because of that word -- it's just not a favorite of mine).

But what I'm wondering is, is it ever "okay" to use that word? I'm not saying I would, but it's common knowledge that people -- many of whom are of the African-American persuasion -- refer to each other as "n*ggas."  Is it okay if they say it?  Along the same lines, is it okay if someone of a different race says it, even if it's meant in the same context (a la "homie," "pal," "buddy," etc.)?  When does it shift from being acceptable to being racist?

In addition to the word's usage in conversation, I'm wondering about the rules of song.  For instance, the "N-word" comes up frequently in music, oftentimes in rap.  If you slap a "Parental Advisory" label on the album cover, does that excuse the language inside the case?  If someone (again, either of the same or different race) is listening to the album and sings/raps along to the music, what about that?  It's not technically their words. It's like telling a story and saying, "And then the guy called the other guy a n*gger."  If you're quoting someone else, does that have any effect?

Even South Park tackles the subject, as seen in this parody of Wheel of Fortune.

---
It seems my thoughts are more questions, in an effort to understand where people draw lines and make judgments.  I'm curious to know what you all think and, hopefully, we can get an interracial dialogue going so shed some clarity on the issue.

the United States of Abhorrence

People on their high horses are due for a reality check.  Similarly, America is, too.  Yesterday, the US of A celebrated their 234th birthday, but what does that even mean?  Okay, so on July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was signed...by Americans.  Nearly three centuries earlier, in 1492, Columbus sailed the ocean blue, which ultimately led to the untimely (would it ever have been timely?) eviction of the Native Americans who already occupied the land.  Now, I was never so great at history, but if you just go up to a random house and kick out the people who live in it, only to claim it as your own, does that actually make it your own?  Does that mean you get the right/privilege to make the household decisions and that, when telemarketers call, asking for the head of the household, you can rightfully answer, "Yes, I am [s]he"?

While our independence from England itself is a pretty monumental event -- one that deserves recognition and pride -- I'm not so sure the rest of it does.  Consider it a reverse Robin Hood, if you will -- rather than stealing from the rich to give to the poor, it seems that the US of A took from the poor (who may, in fact, have been rich with resources), asserted their independence from the rich, and showed no grain of appreciation for the "tramplees" [those who are trampled upon], without whom the US wouldn't have had land to rest their weary egos.


If you're the coach of a youth basketball team and your team cheats, ending up with more points on the scoreboard than their fairly-playing opponents, who actually deserves the praise?  Will you continue to celebrate the anniversary of the win-by-cheating annually, with federal holidays, fireworks, and rampant celebrations?  Or will you teach your kids a lesson so that history doesn't repeat itself and they can try to make amends for the past and adopt better practices for the future?

What say you, members of the jury?  Is the USA founded on principles of cheating and destructive egoism?  What exactly are we celebrating, then?

Happy Birthday, with or without the tamales

People have asked me what I'm going to "do" for my birthday, if I'm going to plan a party or have some wild and crazy event in my honor.  The simple answer to that is "no."  Frankly, I'm just not interested this year.

When I was in El Salvador last year at this time (where my community, living on very few financial resources, threw me a surprise party (which -- don't tell -- I knew about from the day before)), I had a conversation with a 14-year-old girl named Elsi on her birthday (July 3), two days after mine.  There had been all this commotion in the community about my birthday (July 1), a date when people had given me a party, cards, cake, and love, and when I asked Elsi [pictured, left and right, with the dough to make tortillas] what she normally did for her birthday, her response was, "Maybe I'll get a card and maybe we'll eat tamales."  Tamales are a pretty common food to eat down there but, according to Salvadoran standards, they're not an everyday snack -- they're just too darn expensive (less than $2, I think).

Experiences like this are very grounding because it serves as a slap-in-the-face wake-up call that birthdays are merely the days when your age number changes.  You don't turn a year older -- it's just the day after the one before it.  Why do people even give presents on that day?  Congratulations -- I didn't think you'd make it 'til today and you have, so well done!  Bravo!  Maybe it's the opportunity to celebrate someone's life, in which case the birthday boy or girl becomes the person of honor for the day.  In this day and age, many people who are monetarily gifted might spend upwards of $100,000 on a party, thus bestowing upon themselves the authority to act as king or queen for the day.  In a place with few financial resources, however, it might not even mean a tamale.

What does this say about the people who only know how to celebrate by "doing something"?  Asking if someone is "doing something" for his/her birthday would suggest doing something out of the ordinary that would, consequently, count as "something."  My take on it is that one should "do something" every day so that, come birthday time, what one actually does is "nothing."

People often say, "it's the thought that counts."  I disagree.  It's the action.  I'm not saying that someone has to shell out lots of money -- or even any money -- to show their appreciation of somebody or to celebrate something.  But it's people's individual ways -- with respect to their everyday practices -- that reveal their true intentions.  Personally, I think people should adopt a well-intentioned mentality every day of the year.  Then, on the anniversary of their birth, they can merely sit back and reflect contentedly that they have lived every day of the previous year to the fullest.  They can be proud that every day has meant something because they have done something every day, raising the default bar so that something has become the new nothing.  I guess, then, when people ask what I'm doing for my birthday, it's with the something-nothing in mind.  So, to that, I say that this year, I'm just going to keep doing what I've been doing so that by the time my last birthday has rolled around, my collective days of doing nothing will have inspired others to turn "somethings" into "nothings" and will have left a lasting mark.**

**(Coincidentally enough, had I been born a boy, my name would have been Mark.)

Could you pour some sugar in my World Cup?

World Cup fever is upon us and the 2010 games are under way!  Just from watching the games and from seeing the fullness of the stadiums (stadia?), it's easy to tell how much pride people have for their home country as well as for the sport of soccer, football, fútbol, futebol -- whatever you want to call it.  While the World Cup is, indeed, a competition, it brings out such profound emotion among its players, fans, and even non-fans.

As I sit glued to the TV, watching the players from these 32 countries compete against each other, I realize that they are all motivated by a common goal (no pun intended).  Several months ago, I wrote a blog about judging people and the idea that members of countries with few financial resources choose to spend their money on soccer jerseys and not something more conducive to helping their communities to prosper (that being according to the American perspective on what it means to "prosper," of course).  Well, in seeing the hope and the group unity that is awakened by the World Cup makes me wonder whether the World Cup could achieve more than simply determining the winner of a soccer tournament.

Current events have us shaking our heads at the BP oil spill or at natural disasters (floods, earthquakes, etc.) or wars, but we as a community -- a global community of more than 6 and a half billion people -- have the power to overhaul the greater school of thought among us.  In other words, look how soccer brings together many of those people.  Everyone is excited and hopeful at what the competition brings and wants their country's team to advance to the finals.  Could it be that the World Cup is a microcosm of the world at large?

You have your die-hard fans (patriots), your fans who don't control their rage when the final whistle is blown (extremists), your team captains and coaches (leaders), your followers (law-abiding members of society), your referees (law enforcement), your yellow cards and red cards (citations/jail), and your uniforms (passports) as a means of identification.  (Naturally, there are also those who couldn't care less (the innocent bystanders/civilians).) Even though 31 teams ultimately end up feeling the pangs of defeat, everyone comes together to celebrate the sport and the fact that everyone exists on a level playing field (again, no pun intended -- well, maybe only a little bit intended), despite the fact that every country's background is vastly different from one another, with some that boast more opportunities, privileges, and resources, financial or otherwise.

Many people have established non-profit organizations centered around soccer as a peacemaking activity (like Grassroot Soccer), but I think perhaps these noble entrepreneurs haven't taken it globally enough. They might set up shop in a small African village or in an off-the-beaten-path Latin American community, but we need something more far-reaching...Then again, you can't create change without a starting point, something small-scale to expand into something more widespread.

I guess my point is this: soccer has the power to bring the world together. Why not take advantage of that so that everyone can wear their respective jerseys but play for the same team?  Is that too much to ask?  Coaches, fans, and players all working together? It all starts with the kickoff...

The Heinz dilemma...is there a right answer?

"In Europe a woman was near death from cancer. One drug might save her, a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The druggist was charging $2000, ten times what the drug cost him to make. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said "No." The husband got desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done that? Why?" [Kohlberg, 1969, p. 376]

The "Heinz" dilemma was created by American psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg (1927-1987), known for his theory of stages of moral development.

What do you think about Heinz's actions?  Items to consider: spousal relationships and obligations, property rights

Reflection on language learning

On February 10, 2009, my teacher gave my class 15 minutes to "reflect" upon language learning.  Now, it's not easy for me to  simply "reflect" on command but, for whatever reason, this time I managed a draft of something. Let me know what you think.
-----------

In language learning, there's a point where everything just "clicks."  Thinking no longer occurs in English but, rather, in the target language (for me, anyway).  When I studied Spanish, it came pretty easily to me.  My last year of college, I took a course on all things Don Quixote, which included reading the 1,000-plus page book.  While I loved reading that book, I struggled with it.  A lot of the language was antiquated and there were so many nuances to get.  Fortunately, because we discussed the book so extensively in class, I believe I was able to absorb most of those nuances (I don't think it would ever be possible to get all of them).  Had I not taken the class, however, I know I would have missed out on a lot of the book's subtleties.

When I studied Arabic, I didn't reach the "clicking point" before I had to put the language aside.  It was difficult and, though I kept working at it, the time that was necessary to devote to it became too great and I had to put it aside.

Guiding principles: It's better to understand a few items really well than to have a satisfactory comprehension of a broad range of material (with respect to language learning), although depending on the concept, that could be arguable. [Note: I'm not sure if this last part is just notes from the class or part of my response.  In either case, I agree with the message.]

-----------

What makes a good teacher?

The other day, as I was cleaning out old graduate work (since, being a Master now, I don't need any of it!), I came across a few items I drafted in class that I thought I would share.

I wrote this first item on October 2, 2008.  I had five minutes to free-write about what makes a good teacher.  This was my response:

A good teacher is someone who not only makes his/her students feel comfortable in the classroom but who also encourages students to participate actively.  Thus, the classroom environment becomes one in which, regardless of outside circumstances, everyone is an equal member of the class and has the opportunity to contribute as much as anyone else.  A good teacher strives to achieve this goal, while at the same time not letting the students forget where they come from.

-----------
What do you think makes a good teacher?  Are there different criteria for a teacher by profession and a teacher by nature?

Maybe the Star-Spangled banner wasn't waving over the U.S. after all

Last week, I attended a D.C. United game, where they beat Kansas City 2-1.  That's not the point of this blog, though.  Neither is the $4 little bottle of water or $4 mini-thing they called a hot dog.  But again, I digress...

D.C. United is a team name -- one that represents, well, a united Washington, D.C. (go figure).  Where I take issue isn't in the optimistic team name but, rather, our national anthem, The Star-Spangled Banner, that played over the loudspeaker in the stadium...an anthem that continuously acknowledges that this land belongs to the free and serves as the home of the brave.  So, tell me, how, in this case, does one define the concept of freedom?  When someone buys land, from whom do they buy it?  When Columbus and his people "discovered" America, they kicked out the Native Americans and claimed the land as their own.  If I take a little trip down to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and try to kick out Mr. President himself, I won't be starting a new country but, rather, extending my trip a little bit down in the Big House!  It's like stealing a bicycle and selling it as from the original owners.  Truth of the matter is, everyone here lives on borrowed land, so to discriminate based on a falsely-defined notion of freedom would simply be elitist.  Is anything or anyone, in fact, free?  Also, such behavior would show the U.S. to be a country that does not practice what it preaches.  Take a look at the unabridged lyrics of the national anthem and then let me know what you think.  If you need another topic upon which to expound, here you go: anthem = an + them. Discuss.

-----
O! say can you see by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming,
Whose broad stripes and bright stars through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof through the night that our flag was still there;
O! say does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen through the mists of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,
A home and a country should leave us no more!
Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

O! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved home and the war's desolation!
Blest with victory and peace, may the heav'n rescued land
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,
And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!