Edwin Starr died on April 2, 2003, at age 61 and almost 3 months. By comparison, I am age 61 and just past 4 months. I may have outlived Mr. Starr but have not out-lifed him.
Edwin Starr was famous for singing this song by Norman Whitfield and Barrett Strong:
War, what is it good for, absolutely nothing
War, what is it good for, absolutely nothing
Say it again, y’all
War, good God, what is it good for, absolutely nothing
Listen to me
Ohhh, war, I despise
Because it means destruction
Of innocent lives
War means tears
To thousands of mothers eyes
When their sons go to fight
And lose their lives
War, it ain’t nothing but a heartbreaker
War, friend only to the undertaker
War, it’s an enemy to all mankind
The point of war blows my mind
War has caused unrest
Within the younger generation
Induction then destruction
Who wants to die
War, it ain’t nothing but a heartbreaker
War, it’s got one friend, that’s the undertaker
War, has shattered many a young man’s dreams
Made him disabled, bitter and mean
Life is much too short and precious
To spend fighting wars these days
War can’t give life — it can only take it away
War, it ain’t nothing but a heartbreaker
War, friend only to the undertaker
Peace, love and understanding
Tell me, is there no place for them today
They say we must fight to keep our freedom
But Lord knows there’s got to be a better way
War, Good God y’all
What is it good for
Stand up and shout it
Nothing
War. These days, good god. Good as an excuse to shoot down civilian airliners. Good as an excuse to launch missiles into city neighborhoods. Good as an excuse for beheading those who don’t agree with you. Good as an excuse for people to behave as un-godlike as humanity can imagine. War. What is it good for? Absolutely nothing.
_________________________
A long-term annoyance of mine is how The New York Times decides who is important and who is not. The latest example involves the victims of the Malaysian airplane shot down in the skies over Ukraine. Here is the opening sentence of their profile of the victims:
“Among the 298 people aboard Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 were a renowned AIDS researcher, a Dutch senator and an Australian novelist.”
That may be true. But the majority the victims were ordinary folks like you and me who do not have celebrity credentials and so did not “rise to the top” of their report of the murder victims.
This kind of reporting has got to stop. While the New York Times should be free to decide who should merit one of their full-blown obituaries, it should not be in their power to discriminate among those killed indiscriminately, in their front-page news.
The next time I board a plane, should I look at those in the seats around me and wonder, how many more important people than myself are on this plane, and does The New York Times know about them, so that in the event that I am killed, The New York Times can be sure to mention them and their accomplishments instead of my own trivial life?
Whether The New York Times changes or not, we can. We can do something about our own addiction to celebrity. We can scale back our worship of accomplishment and the length of people’s Linked-In profiles. We can give The New York Times a reason to treat the murders of each of those passengers and crew members on an equal basis. How? By visiting that article (linked here) and submitting a comment that expresses our disgust for such reporting.
I am no Senator. I am no AIDS researcher. In fact, I hate labels. I am exactly the kind of person who would never warrant a mention by The New York Times if my plane crashed.
I want The New York Times to mention everyone or no one.
The problem is not The New York Times. The problem is in our culture. Cultures change, one revolution of the hour hand at a time. They change as you, I, then your friend, and my neighbor, and then one person after another after that, decide that some ways of thinking don’t work anymore. Because they don’t do justice to humanity.