Ash in Their Feather Dusters

I try to read two or three books a week, though I admit that life sometimes gets in the way and I can only read one. The past two months have been rough, though, and I haven’t had time to do as much pleasure-reading as I would like.

Now that my exam is over, though, I’ve been catching up on my pleasure-reading.

I came across this passage in David Neiwart’s In God’s Country. It’s a book about the patriot/militia movement, interesting mostly in the politics of marginalization and probably relevant to Senator Obama’s recent comments about guns, religion, and xenophobia.

The villagers, he said, knew about the camp, and watched daily as thousands of prisoners would arrive by rail car, herded like cattle into the camps. And they knew that none ever left, even though the camp never could have held the vast numbers of prisoners who were brought in. They also knew that the smokestack of the camp’s crematorium belched a near-steady stream of smoke and ash. Yet the villagers chose to remain ignorant about what went on inside the camp. No one inquired, because no one wanted to know.

“But every day,” he said, “these people, in their neat Germanic way, would get out their feather dusters and go outside. And, never thinking about what it meant, they would sweep off the layer of ash that would settle on their windowsills overnight. Then they would return to their neat, clean lives and pretend not to notice what was happening next door.

“When the camps were liberated and their contents were revealed, they all expressed surprise and horror at what had gone on inside,” he said. “But they all had ash in their feather dusters.”

We’ve all heard this story, of course, one way or the other, but this particular telling of it seems uniquely chilling. There’s something compellingly, disappointingly human about that final detail.

Misplaced Priorities

Oklahoma State Legislator Sally Kern’s priorities may be just a little bit misaligned.

I could be wrong, of course. She could be right. 1000Gears encourages a very pronounced “love however you wish” sort of philosophy. That last category is unfortunately empty right now, but I’m working on it. It’s a difficult subject for me, as you may imagine. Mrs. Kern presumably comes from a less-libertine background and sees the world through a different lens.

From my side of the argument, given that Americans consume more resources per capita than just about anyone in the world, it might be good for the world if more of us elected to get our collective rocks off in non-reproductive ways. There are several good alternatives for straight-oriented people, too, if you’ll excuse my empty tag again (I have no good excuse for its absence).

From her side of the argument, she believes something about “God’s word” and a fear of indoctrination. I respect that, in my own way. Religion has a tremendous influence on the way we view the world; our interpretations of God’s word shape our priorities and it’s unreasonable to expect us to neglect that. If she feels that Leviticus 20:13 is God’s highest command to her, then I respect this as her personal decision, even if I disagree with the decision itself. For my part, I confess to a weakness for pork, rare steaks, and the occasional shellfish, so I lean more towards Matthew 25:40 myself.

Her opinion, though, remains her opinion, and I respect her right to share it. Personally, given our ham-handed foreign relations, ballooning national waistline, worsening fuel crisis, abysmal trade deficit, and impending credit collapse, it’s a little hard for me to see how a little more safe, sane, and consensual love-and-let-love could be bad for the country. I guess that’s just a matter of priorities.