An Unholy Alliance

We have seen lengthy television commercials recently here in Colorado Springs that advertise the new partnership between Girl Scouts of America and Raytheon. I get it, everything has to be about girls in science careers, and STEM in general (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math). Still, the GSA could have found a better ally.

Raytheon came onto my radar back in 2001 or so as the second Gulf War was ramping up. I was living in Tucson, Arizona at the time and participating in anti-war protests with some regularity. Raytheon has a facility on the southern outskirts of town. They make missiles there. The company announced last May that it will be expanding its Tucson location to the tune of $550 million. Raytheon is the largest employer in southern Arizona and as such was rewarded with a five million dollar grant from the state to help with the upgrade.

There were persistent claims that Raytheon was using depleted uranium in their missile products during the second Gulf War, making them essentially radioactive weapons. That is not the only controversy that has plagued the company over the years, with problems ranging from environmental issues to workplace diversity concerns, and inflation of federal defense contracts (surprise, surprise). Raytheon may claim in their television commercials with the Girl Scouts that they want to basically "make America safe again," but their history is one of warfare and the death and destruction that results from it. Yes, they use science, but to what end? The company is the ultimate poster child for the military-industrial complex.

Apparently, the Girl Scouts of America are just fine with all of this, probably because Raytheon has money to burn. Raytheon gets to wrap itself up in feel-good sentiments provided by the warm fuzzies we get from the GSA. What is not to love? Do we not all look forward to cookie season, feeding our tummies while warming our hearts and minds with the knowledge that we are spending in support of a great cause? There is nothing but an upside for Raytheon as it greenwashes itself.

Could the Girl Scouts not find a corporation with a more peaceful platform? What about partnering with a telecommunications giant, or renewable energy conglomerate, or some other enterprise that reflects optimism for the future and has an explicit mission that reflects public interest instead of private affluence and "security" for the wealthy few? Did they bother calling Oprah Winfrey for suggestions? How about Elon Musk? Bill Gates? Richard Branson? Ted Turner?

Yes, we need better cybersecurity, and to be able to defend our own country at home, but we are mostly exporting our weapons and defense technologies to the highest bidder, under an administration that is actively spurning involvement with our traditional alliances like NATO and the UN. The ramifications seem obvious: We will have less and less national and global security as our defense contractors get greedier and greedier, their morals eroding as their profits skyrocket.

At least one friend has suggested that the marriage of Raytheon and the Girl Scouts may not be the worst thing. As women ascend the corporate ladder, she suggests, the sphere of female influence will expand (hopefully), leading to a more humanitarian approach to profit-making, backing away from the idea that there is no profit in peace. I wish I were as optimistic. I wish we had the time for a rise in the power of compassionate women.

Interestingly, the Boy Scouts of America recently decided to admit girls to their ranks. It will be telling if the GSA starts losing membership to the BSA as a result of the decision to partner with Raytheon. Not that the BSA has a history devoid of controversy, either, but now girls have a choice in organizations that can foster their future careers. Maybe both organizations will begin to fizzle and we will see a surge in participation in Junior Achievement, 4-H, Future Farmers of America, and similar clubs that lack the baggage of scouting. Maybe kids will just keep playing soccer, Little League, and video games instead.

Gun Control

The commentary on the shooting spree in Tucson earlier this month has naturally led to a debate about stricter gun control. My personal opinion is that I am far more afraid of some members of my own species than I am any of the venomous, predatory creatures I may encounter on a hike in an Arizona canyon, or on an African safari. That is not even counting weaponry that makes the exercise of lethal force even more possible for Homo sapiens. I think we need to remember that we are animals ourselves, but that we also have the capacity for foresight, personal responsibility, self-control, and honest communication.

I don’t see the abolishment of personal firearms coming any time soon, but I am also not understanding why people are so up in arms about the Second Amendment at this point in our nation’s history. We already have well-armed militias, they just happen to be mostly racist survivalists. Don’t you feel safer now?

Why do we feel the need to obtain a gun on a moment’s notice? We want a waiting period before a woman undergoes an abortion, but you should be able to get a gun instantaneously? Forgive me, but this is the scenario I see playing out too often:

Gun Shop Owner: “Ok, I see from the background check you haven’t committed any crimes…”
Customer (to himself): “No, this will be my first offense.”

We cannot assume that lack of a prior crime means the person is not preparing to commit one, be it suicide, homicide, or some other act of violence. Purchasing a weapon can be a highly impulsive action, and it should not be accommodated so readily when the consequences could literally be so grave.

Psychiatric evaluation should be mandatory for anyone wanting to purchase a firearm. The more time allowed for intervention, anger management, and prescribed medication, the better. Stress, real or imagined, is arguably at an all-time high, and the answer is not putting guns in the hands of the angry and frustrated.

But if everyone was able to defend themselves (with a gun), then crimes like the Tucson shooting would not take such a heavy toll. Someone would have shot the bad guy already. Sure, but a citizen “hero” could just as easily kill another innocent bystander. We have a trained constabulary to kill innocent Black people….I mean….apprehend criminals. Sorry, I spent eleven years in Cincinnati….

Further, the overwhelming impression I get from gun advocates is that they want guns to allow them to protect the rest of their “stuff.” You won’t hear that argument from the gun lobby, though, because it sounds too selfish. Well, we are selfish, for crying out loud. Every animal is selfish, we just go to great lengths to disguise our selfishness. This dishonesty, I believe, is at the root of most social issues in the world today. We want our way, but can’t bring ourselves to say so in the most honest, straightforward manner.

Do you remember the Y2K scare? It was going to be a manmade disaster with all the computers crashing and causing total chaos. Even some people I truly admire were talking about stocking up and arming themselves “just in case.” Why? We don’t react that way to a natural disaster like a tornado, hurricane, or earthquake. Heck, we put down our guns, and pick up shovels and sandbags instead. What is the difference? You lose “stuff” in any kind of catastrophe!

The bottom line as I see it is that we need mostly to admit our selfishness. I want fewer guns because I’m sick of good people getting murdered and maimed, and I really don’t see an upside to more weapons. I am also seeing less merit in the accumulation of material wealth all the time. We need to share more, possess less. Above all we need to re-establish trust in one another. Where do you stand? Please comment. The only thing I ask is that you be honest.

Tragedy in Tucson

I feel somewhat obligated to comment on the recent mass shooting incident in Tucson being that I am a current resident, and have briefly met Representative Giffords. My local friends and I are shocked, saddened, and outraged by this event, but I’ll stick largely with the facts here.

First, let us not minimize the fact that six people have already perished. Among them were a federal judge, John M. Roll, and a nine-year-old girl, Christina-Taylor Green. Congresswoman Giffords was staging one of her routine “Congress on Your Corner” events at a local strip mall, and Judge Roll had merely swung by on his way home to pay his friend a brief visit. The young girl, in irony of all ironies, had gained fame as one of the Faces of Hope, featured in the book of that title about babies born on September 11, 2001.

Additional fatalities included Giffords’ Constituent Services Director, Gabe Zimmerman, retirees Dorwan Stoddard, Dorthy Murray, and Phyllis Schneck. Twenty individuals in all were wounded. The good news is that four out of the five people on the critical list last night have now been upgraded to “serious.”

Gabrielle Giffords herself remains in critical condition, but a Sunday morning press conference held by the doctors and surgeons who are treating her was filled with optimism. Miraculously, her injuries involved only one hemisphere of her brain. Before and after surgery she was able to respond to simple commands (squeeze my hand, show two fingers, etc), which considering the gravity of her condition is nothing short of amazing.

I was giving a presentation at the Medical Entomology Today conference here in Tucson when this calamity happened. My topic was “Social Media and Self-Diagnosis: How the Internet has Made Medical Entomology Better and Worse.” While I was describing how electronic technologies are changing how the public gets information, members of my audience were receiving text messages about the tragedy. Politely, no one interrupted my talk.

When I was informed of the event my heart was in my throat. I had the honor and pleasure of meeting Representative Giffords when she attended the “Butterfly Affaire” fundraiser at the Tucson Botanical Gardens back in October. She was her usual smiling self, and I helped her find butterflies which she eagerly shared with her family and other members of her entourage. This woman goes out of her way to find opportunities to mingle with her constituents, and never gives the impression that anyone is beneath her. She could care less about your political affiliation, but cares deeply about your physical (read healthcare) and economic well-being.

I’m not going to devote one word to the gunman, you can find that out for yourself if you wish.

What continues to disturb me is the direction our American society is taking. One could make the argument that we are a devolving species, going backwards in our cultural evolution at the least. We are literally our own worst enemies, filling the roles of competitors, parasites, and predators once occupied by other organisms during the course of our divergence from the rest of the great apes. Clearly, we have the capacity to hold in check our destructive instincts and tendencies and behave instead in an altruistic manner that ultimately benefits us as individuals. We are increasingly choosing not to do that. We no longer have patience. We must have things “our” way, right now.

We also have more weapons at our disposal for forcing others to comply with our whims, or to destroy our (perceived) adversaries. We need to scale down our definition of “weapons of mass destruction.” Obviously, an automatic handgun qualifies.

There was a blood drive today at the two Red Cross donation centers, in honor of the fallen from yesterday’s tragedy. I didn’t go, figuring the facilities would be swamped (and buses run infrequently on Sundays, affecting my ability to get to and from the nearest location). I am overdue for donating, though, and will likely do so later in the coming week. It is a nice, tangible gesture to affirm life in general. Self-sacrifice, whether it takes the form of sharing one’s blood voluntarily, parting with money for a good cause, or some other act, is just the remedy for what ails us as a society so self-obsessed. Find a way to sacrifice, and do it regularly. Watch the positive chain reaction.