The Alternet is reprinting the story Killing Them Softly: Pope Francis Condemns Income Inequality, Sanctions Gender Inequality. On this blog, I never promised to be balanced, but I also didn’t promise to refuse to look at different sides of a story.  In the author’s words:

The release on Tuesday of Evangelii Gaudium, the pope’s manifesto for the renewal of the church, has set off a pandemic of swooning among liberals, particularly because of the pope’s welcome critique of so-called “free market” ideology and the gaping income inequality it creates. Overlooked is the internal inconsistency of the document, in which exclusion of the poor from full participation in society is rightly portrayed as an evil, while exclusion of women from full participation in the church is defended as necessary.

I looked up some of what the Pope had to say in his exhortation.

103. The Church acknowledges the indispensable contribution which women make to society through the sensitivity, intuition and other distinctive skill sets which they, more than men, tend to possess. I think, for example, of the special concern which women show to others, which finds a particular, even if not exclusive, expression in motherhood. I readily acknowledge that many women share pastoral responsibilities with priests, helping to guide people, families and groups and offering new contributions to theological reflection. But we need to create still broader opportunities for a more incisive female presence in the Church. Because “the feminine genius is needed in all expressions in the life of society, the presence of women must also be guaranteed in the workplace”[72] and in the various other settings where important decisions are made, both in the Church and in social structures.

104. Demands that the legitimate rights of women be respected, based on the firm conviction that men and women are equal in dignity, present the Church with profound and challenging questions which cannot be lightly evaded. The reservation of the priesthood to males, as a sign of Christ the Spouse who gives himself in the Eucharist, is not a question open to discussion, but it can prove especially divisive if sacramental power is too closely identified with power in general. It must be remembered that when we speak of sacramental power “we are in the realm of function, not that of dignity or holiness”.[73] The ministerial priesthood is one means employed by Jesus for the service of his people, yet our great dignity derives from baptism, which is accessible to all. The configuration of the priest to Christ the head – namely, as the principal source of grace – does not imply an exaltation which would set him above others. In the Church, functions “do not favour the superiority of some vis-à-vis the others”.[74] Indeed, a woman, Mary, is more important than the bishops. Even when the function of ministerial priesthood is considered “hierarchical”, it must be remembered that “it is totally ordered to the holiness of Christ’s members”.[75] Its key and axis is not power understood as domination, but the power to administer the sacrament of the Eucharist; this is the origin of its authority, which is always a service to God’s people. This presents a great challenge for pastors and theologians, who are in a position to recognize more fully what this entails with regard to the possible role of women in decision-making in different areas of the Church’s life.

If you read the Alternet article, you can see that despite the words of the Pope as quoted above, there is still room to complain.  I must admit that I felt TL;DR about the article – Too Long; Didn’t Read (it all).  However, if you are interested in this sort of thing, you might want to read more of the article.

The Real News Network has the second part of a series in the video Credibility of the Ruling Elite is Being Shredded – Chris Hedges on Reality Asserts Itself pt2.

On RAI with Paul Jay, Chris Hedges says that while people are disgusted with the centers of power, unless there is a constructive alternative, any eruption will be nihilistic and could be fascist

At 2:37 of the video, there is a picture with a caption Alexander Berkman in 1919 on the eve of his deportation from the US

Having started to read the book Death of the Liberal Class by Chris Hedges, I am wondering how it came to pass that my maternal grandfather was not deported from this country before he had a chance to even start his family here. “Chapter III – Dismantling the Liberal Class” is quite startling. The extent to which government and 1% supported propaganda and intimidation has played a role in shaping us since prior to WW I is really eye opening.

I covered the first part of The Real News Network series in the previous post The Pathology of the Rich – Chris Hedges on Reality Asserts Itself pt1.

I received an email from MoveOn.org that I partially quote below.

Dear MoveOn member,

Breaking news: Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is working on a hawkish bill that would torpedo President Obama’s interim agreement with Iran by setting unrealistic goals for the final deal.

Just how bad is the bill? “It would blow things apart. If you want a war, that is the thing to do.” That’s how a Democratic senator summarized a recent, similar proposal.

And this isn’t a fringe bill either—it’s gaining ground among Democratic members of the House—and if we do nothing it will become bipartisan.

Congress is debating this bill in the next few days. This a crisis for diplomacy. If even just the House of Representatives passes this bill, it tells the Iranian people that America isn’t serious about diplomacy—and even if President Obama vetoes it, the damage is done.

That’s why I created an urgent petition on MoveOn.org, telling the House of Representatives to back President Obama’s diplomatic approach to Iran.

Click on this link to sign the petition.

In reading the book Death of the Liberal Class by Chris Hedges, I have learned of the massive propaganda campaigns that have been used since the run-up to WW I to change people’s minds to be in favor of a war and to suppress all dissent.  You wouldn’t believe what is in the book, although it is backed up with citations.  If 10% of what is in the book is true, this latest attempt at warmongering must be stopped.

The current situation is nothing like Chamberlain and Munich prior to WW II.  We are not claiming this will bring everlasting peace, we are just claiming we ought to give peace a chance.  We have orders of magnitude more military power than we did prior to the start of WW II.  If the agreement with Iran fails, there will be plenty of time to use that power.  With all due skepticism in place, there is no reason to scuttle a peaceful effort that might achieve all the goals that the ordinary U.S. citizens would want.