One can be Granted Liberties but do They Know the Meaning..?
Today whilst listening to some extraordinary music the wildness of the wave that struck me I believe would measure somewhere within the Tsunami Scale. If we avail ourselves to the medium of critical thinking then we must self-reflect (Berger, Paul) pursuant to what a wave that powerful means, what are the intended learning steps, and to analyze, assess, and improve thinking.
In both undergraduate studies as well as graduate studies there is always that one professor who publically asks, “What is this critical thinking” about. Suffice it to say that in my academic history we students always seemed to come up with the briefest notion of: It is thinking about what one is thinking about.”
Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking. They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and confidence in reason.
I make no quam about what I do. I try to view various situations on earth and rather than to regurgitate the events and listen to the main-stream media and their biases injected to a given report, I on the other hand, having a journalism background select the events to report on in a nontraditional or alternative manner.
Of the first part of this writing we (colleagues included) want to have a look again at the First Amendment, insofar as we we’re all brought up at a different time when protesting, and in some cases rioting was the net result of the situation. Therefore without further adieu let’s look at what the First Amendment says…and through analysis, assessment, and self-reflection let’s look to the alternative approach.
In an effort to regain some kind of civility from three very jagged shorelines, events such as the entire fiasco in Ferguson, Missouri not only defied rational thought, the people there who responded in leveling the city, resorted to fire arms, or simply protested in a violent way crushed the 1st Amendment.
Now to those respected “community organizers” such as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and others in politics such as President Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and others who consider themselves community leaders, please I ask for any kind of debate pursuant to Michael Brown and the grand jury who (gee whiz) listened to the real evidence and thus came to the decision they did.
Krauthammer said that the media, politicians and public figures created the racially-tense atmosphere in the wake of the grand jury decisions in Ferguson and Staten Island.
“Race was imposed on this by the Al Sharptons of the world … race was injected deliberately and cynically. That truly is deplorable.”
So how does the 1st Amendment factor in to these nonsensical behaviors? I come from the original “Protest Generation” where our spokespeople taught nonviolence was the way to be heard the loudest. Joan Bias, Woody and his son Arlo Guthrie, were in the earliest protesting yet young Arlo and at the sound of his name I hear “You can get anything you want, at Alice’s Restaurant…” and never forget Bobby Dylan and of course, Joni Mitchell!
Specifically the First Amendment is crushed by those who — during a “protest” would seek to uproot and/or inconvenience someone’s like taking control of the Brooklyn Bridge or the FDR Avenue just walking through streets — warrants being arrested. What you do have a right to do is petition the government for grievances (this process is done by everyone who ever organized a protest). And again I know that Congress hasn’t made any laws abridging the right of people to peaceably assemble.
If everyone wanted to observe the law and thus — your rights — then to petition is actually going into the civic center to procure your permit as to where you will set up — and the Brooklyn Bridge is not one of them! Concurrently, by law any civic protest or gathering of people must be done within civil guidelines’ — that means no walking in the streets with banners, or as I witnessed late last night call and response chanting “Who do we want to kill….” The cops; “When do we want to kill cops…” Right now!