Security

“Security can get on the nerves just as much as danger.” (Brown in Graham Greene’s The Comedians – 1965)

I am in a minority in refusing to see politicians and bureaucrats as beings before whom we, as bleating sheep, must bow the knee as if they were our wise and compassionate shepherds.

In general, I do not think they are wise, and I do not think they are compassionate.

I am in an even smaller minority in my viewing church leaders with deep disappointment in how we are responding to the current state of affairs. (But those country churches, mostly non-denominational, whose leaders still have the backbone of our forebears, have earned my respect in recent weeks.)

It has become very clear that, in general, if our founding era’s church leaders had been like those of today’s, we’d still be speaking the king’s English.

Spare me the theological expositions and explanations. Looking at the fruit tells me what I need to know. And that fruit lacks courage.

This is the context in which my respect for my father, which was already of the utmost, has in recent weeks done what I would have considered to have been impossible a mere month ago.

It has grown.

He was not a great reader or student of philosophy or theology, although he, and my mother, played a key role in preparing me to appreciate such, and more.

But he was courageous.

And he was loyal.

He loved God and he loved country and he loved home. Besides him, I can think of very few men — very few — whom I would want with me in a foxhole, or in any trial or crisis of life.  One I can think of died many years ago. I still see him as he walks from his little shack up to the labor camp alongside his burro. Another, died relatively recently. I see him as he drives his truck up my driveway on a Sunday afternoon as I’m listening to the BBC on short wave radio.

I used to think I am easily impressed. I guess I’m not.

The scene: San Félix, a town on the shores of the Orinoco River. It’s about 10 P.M. on a night in the 1940’s. Communist militants and sympathizers have been active. My father and the company controller, Mr. T, have been at the town’s movie theater and are now heading to the company pickup to drive back to Palúa, the riverfront camp.

A group of about 10 men accosted them and one ran up to Mr. T and struck him in the face, knocking him down. His glasses hit the ground and cracked.

Striking a man with glasses was considered cowardly. Striking an older man, such as Mr. T, was unforgivable. 

My father instinctively swung and landed his fist with a violent blow against the jaw of the perpetrator, who fell back awkwardly and heavily with a muffled thud on the dusty street. Then he realized: the man was drunk.

He looked up and saw that the other men stood, staring at him. Some were drunk, while others seemed sober, but sullen.

“Men, your friend is drunk. Otherwise, I am sure he would never have struck an older man wearing glasses. I assume you do not want to see your friend get hurt. Help him get up and return to his home! There is no need for us to fight. If you have any grievances, you must know by now that we will happily [con gusto] receive you and talk with you about it. Will you help your friend?”

As he spoke to the men, in perfect Spanish, Mr. T, following my father’s whispered commands, slowly made his way, undisturbed to the pickup, glancing back at my father, knowing that if the situation got out of hand, there would have been little for him to do to help out.

No one moved, except for the man on the ground, who rolled over on his stomach and vomited.

He clearly was not going to get up unassisted.

A man stepped forward and knelt by the fallen man, taking his left arm and wrapping it over his shoulder, “B, listen to me, I am going to stand up slowly, but I need you to hold on to me. Escúchame!” Then, looking over his shoulder, “Men, I need your help! Vengan!”

At this, the men stepped forward, almost in unison, and, having come to the area where B had fallen, strove to help the kneeling man rise along with the other, who was rapidly gaining full consciousness.

Eventually, about 5 or 6 of them accompanied the man helping B towards the south end of the town. The group, composed of individuals insistent on helping out one-by-one or two-by-two, continued southward, looking like a receding Rorschach test image. Others remained nearby, looking at Mr. T in the pickup as my father, leaning on the passenger side’s door, talked with him while also looking back, off and on, at them.

I did not learn about this incident from my father. In fact, I never heard him talk about it.

One summer, in the 1970’s, I interned at the mining office and, during my breaks, I’d visit the archives and read the dusty, decades-old memoranda submitted over the years by the general managers and controllers to the Pennsylvania home office. I came across a memorandum with a vivid description of my father’s actions many years before. The controller freely admitted, in his own writing, that my father likely saved him from great bodily harm that night in San Félix.

I know of several other such incidents involving my father, at least one of which occurred in my presence.

The circumstances for each were different. But they all pointed to one common constant: courage. A man’s refusal to be governed only by security. In doing so, he, ironically, created security for himself and for others.

We need to learn from such men again.

Palúa was about a mile west of San Félix (now part of Ciudad Guayana), and 180 miles from the Orinoco River delta.
San Félix, circa late 40s, early 50s. The theater (not pictured) was about a block to the right.
San Félix at the Caroní River ferry crossing, circa mid-50s
My father and Mr. T, circa 1948. San Félix, Venezuela.
My father and Mr. T, circa 1960. El Pao, Venezuela.
My father and me, circa 1963, on the Orinoco River, headed towards the great Orinoco delta on the Atlantic Ocean

The Bible and Quarantine – Addendum

Well, YouTube is on a mission to find any channel that has the interview of the emergency room doctors which I briefly discussed in my prior post (here). All links in my post have been blocked. 

YouTube has said they will remove anything on the Coronavirus that does not adhere to the WHO standards [sic!]. Yes, the same WHO who followed China’s script and delayed sounding the alarm. The same WHO which has been all over the map as to what and what is not recommended. That WHO.

Talk about rich.

And here is the official statement from the American College of Emergency Physicians:

“The American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM) jointly and emphatically condemn the recent opinions released by Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi. These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical societies and inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19. As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health.

“COVID-19 misinformation is widespread and dangerous. Members of ACEP and AAEM are first-hand witnesses to the human toll that COVID-19 is taking on our communities. ACEP and AAEM strongly advise against using any statements of Drs. Erickson and Massihi as a basis for policy and decision making.”

Now, anyone having passed a high school course on rhetoric and basic science would immediately see the outrageous problems in the above statement. Did you catch them? 

First, ad hominem attacks have no place in genuine scientific inquiry. I’ve long ago lost respect for “official bodies”. Think the American Bar Association’s (ABA) recommendations for Supreme Court justices. For example, once the late Judge Robert Bork was nominated for the Supreme Court, the estimable ABA, after having found him “highly qualified” for all other nominations, suddenly found him “unqualified.” They lost me from that moment on. The above statement by the ACEP and AAEM is one of which the old Soviet Union would have been proud. Do not be surprised if those Jacobin organizations are now seeking to have Drs. Erickson and Massihi’s credentials revoked. 

Lavrentiy Beria, call your office.

Second, there are no peer-reviewed studies on COVID-19! The medical profession and scientific communities are still in the process of learning and understanding. This is a time when open debate should be welcomed, not denounced whenever someone strays from the politburo’s position. 

How revealing a flu can be!

If you have not heard this interview, I strongly urge you to do so. The link below is to the California news station who filmed the interview in the first place. You’ll find the first part (about 50 minutes) and also the second (about 12 minutes). Both are well worth your time. To the very end.

https://www.turnto23.com/news/coronavirus/accelerated-urgent-care-doctors-recommend-lifting-shelter-in-place-order

The Bible on Quarantine Part 2

Last week’s post (Part 1) addressed the Biblical model with regards to pandemics or infectious diseases.

As we saw, that model requires quarantine of the sick but not of the entire population. 

There is a country that has followed that model. It is a country that long ago abandoned its Christian and Biblical heritage, but that, in this case, whether knowingly or not, has been following the Biblical model pretty closely.

That country is Sweden.

Sweden and the state of Michigan each have populations of about 10 Million people. Michigan has followed a draconic lockdown, which has spurred protests in the capital city of Lansing. Sweden has not resorted to any lockdown, the only developed country which has not followed the example set by the rest of the world. Michigan has over 3,300 deaths; Sweden has a thousand less than Michigan.

If you prefer comparing against neighboring countries, which did impose lockdowns, the results are comparable when taking population densities and other factors into consideration. Two California emergency room physicians in the front lines of this pandemic were interviewed last week and addressed comparisons between Sweden and Norway (links below).

Let us take a look at the model that Sweden has been following.

In the first place, Sweden has not mandated the closing of anything. Everything is voluntary. If the businessman wants to stay open, he may stay open. If the lady wishes to eat in a restaurant, she may eat in a restaurant. Schools, churches, and cities continue open. Warnings have been issued addressing the aged, advising they should stay inside, especially during times of high contamination, since the aged are the ones most affected.

If someone gets sick, they are asked to quarantine or to go to a hospital until well.

The police do not go about arresting or penalizing anybody for going shopping, or enjoying a day in the park, or just going for a ride in a car or on a bicycle. 

Of course, Sweden has been criticized, attacked, mocked, and despised.

Why?

Could it be that the experts in other countries do not like it when they are contradicted? Two weeks ago, a group of 22 “scientists” attacked the officials of Sweden’s department of health, demanding the Swedish government discard the directives of that department and impose the measures all the other countries have imposed. They implied that the Swedish population had been willfully deluded by ignorant authorities and by an epidemiologist who has been seduced by his sudden fame.

Wow. It’s not nice to contradict “experts.”

A French journalist may have let the cat out of the bag when, while interviewing a Swedish epidemiologist, he said, “…it’s almost as if we want Sweden to fail because then we’d know the fools are they and not us.” [the quote is a paraphrase; I cannot find the original source]

But, leaving polemics behind, let us take a look at the results thus far.

The development of the contamination and the illnesses and deaths has been following the Swedish medical predictions pretty closely. Their models differed dramatically from the English models, to which the great majority of the governments of the world submitted. Their initial numbers have since been substantially reduced because they were exaggerated numbers to begin with.

Sweden counts each death as a Covid-19 death if the deceased had the virus, even though they know that the virus is not necessarily the cause of death for all who die and test positive for the virus. In other words, someone might die of cancer but if he had the virus, they count the death as a Covid death. Sweden does it so in order to be consistent with the majority of countries (and states) which have been categorizing their deaths in like manner.

Daily deaths are about 80 but have been decreasing. More will die in the coming weeks and months, but the mortality rate has been much less than the alarming predictions of 80 Thousand to 90 Thousand that were supposed to have died by summer.

The contamination rate has also been decreasing. The hospital situation is acceptable. The English models (to which most other countries adhered) anticipated that there’d be 8 Thousand to 9 Thousand patients requiring intensive care. The actual numbers are a fraction of that: 530. The hospitals are not overwhelmed. 

Sweden did not buy the “flatten the curve” meme.

The Swedish department of health is expecting that the country will develop a “herd immunity” against the virus. This is something that would not be easy to develop in other countries who have, in effect, quarantined the entire population. For now, this expectation cannot be proved. But, going forward, when the other countries proceed to “loosen” their lockdowns, we shall see how acute the next “waves” of contamination in those countries will compare to Sweden. For now, some Swedish medical researchers believe that 40 percent of Stockholm’s population has had the virus and the herd immunity will be achieved by end of May. This too has not been proved, but if it turns out to be so, then the Swedes will be in a far better situation than the rest of us.

Of course, the Swedish economy has suffered: GDP is expected to decrease by 4% and unemployment is expected to hit 9%. But that compares extremely positively against the economic reality of other countries who’s numbers are far worse. For example, England’s GDP decrease is expected to be 13%, or more than triple the Swedish drop.

In sum, it would have been far better to have followed a model more aligned with the much maligned Bible, where the aged and the sick would have been placed in quarantine; where we would have had a better chance of achieving herd immunity; where the models predicting catastrophic (“apocalyptic”) death rates would have been scrutinized more closely and would have been seen to have been greatly exaggerated (in fact, historically, those models have never been very accurate).

It is not unwise to seek our guidance from the Word of God. 

Below you will find a link to one of the articles addressing the Swedish experience from The Spectator (London).

Also, further below, you will find two links to a presentation before the press given last week by two California doctors who are in the front lines of the fight against the virus. The interview is about 62 minutes long and is excellent

This presentation is now at 4.7 Million views. 

“We’ve never seen it where we put the healthy in quarantine.” The first link is about 50 minutes long; the second is about 12 minutes. Very informative and very valuable. These two emergency room physicians also compare the results between Sweden and Norway. In addition, they talk about the immune system.

“Academics and reality are two different things.”

“When I write a death note, we are being pressured to add Covid…even when we think that the death had nothing to do with Covid.”

They allude to the Bible’s requirements for quarantine. 

It is fascinating to listen to the journalists’ questions. In effect they tend toward: dare you question the wisdom of Dr. Fauci?

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-swedish-experiment-looks-like-it-s-paying-off

Well. The longer link below got close to 5 Million views and was blocked by YouTube. Surprise! So it’s not really “Listen to the experts.” It’s more like, “Listen to OUR experts!” Anyway, link above had not been blocked as of this morning. Hopefully it is still accessible for you. It combines both links below.

Dr. Erickson COVID-19 Briefing

Dr. Erickson COVID-19 Briefing, Pt. 2

The Bible on Quarantine Part 1

Sometimes, this blog will “stray” from its focus on Venezuela. 

This is one of those times.

In our modern age, it is easy to scoff at any writing that has “The Bible” in its title, unless the purpose of the writing is to mock, degrade, or lightly esteem. However, our own founding documents, to which we adhere to this day (whether joyfully or grudgingly) were written in an era when the Bible was the most cited source in all polemics.

John Eidsmoe, in his Christianity and the Constitution reports on exhaustive research by Professors Lutz and Hyneman who reviewed “an estimated 15,000 items, and closely read 2,200 books, pamphlets, newspaper articles, and monographs with explicitly political content printed between 1760 and 1805 [our founding era]….

“…the source most often cited by the founding fathers was the Bible, which accounted for 34 percent of all citations. The fifth book of the Bible, Deuteronomy, because of its heavy emphasis on biblical law, was referred to frequently….”

In fact, in the 1770’s, when the Declaration of Independence was written, the Bible accounted for 44% of all citations. In the 1780’s, when the Constitution was written, it accounted for 34% of all citations. More than any other by far.

My point is simply that, however much the Word of God may be mocked by our illustrious elites and moderns, it clearly was foundational to the thinking of our founders and to the origins of our nation.

So, what does it have to say about quarantines and how might that apply to the “lockdowns” afflicting much of our country and the world?

The link below is to Thoughts on Quarantine by Chris Zimmerman.

I believe it is of utmost importance that we see all things by the Light of God’s Word. He not only defines reality, He created reality. He has determined how we should live. We stray from that path to our detriment and risk.

Our lenses should be the Bible, not daily press briefings or newspapers or the internet or — heaven help us — Hollywood celebrities.

Next week, the second part of this post will focus on a country which, knowingly or not, actually followed the biblical model pretty closely. How have they fared compared to the rest of the world, which has not?

The following is from the Chalcedon newsletter.

Thoughts on Quarantine

Chris Zimmerman

“Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.” Rev. 18:10

In recent weeks we have witnessed the frailty of all the systems of man worldwide. Indeed, Revelation 18:10 should come to mind to all of us and shake us to the core in the realization that when God’s just judgment comes it can bring down any stronghold of man in an instant. With the endless stream of press conferences and news, we have heard repeated assertions that all actions done in response to the recent virus spread and resulting quarantine are to protect lives and must be accepted as valid (read: morally right) regardless of the consequences. But, of course, for the Christian examining all things in light of Scripture, questions should arise:

1. Are the actions taken in alignment with Biblical laws on quarantine?
2. Against whom should these actions legitimately be taken when valid?
3. What is our responsibility to protect lives in respect to this issue?
4. Where are the Christians who should be leading in this battle for the truth?

We have seen the actions at the federal and state levels and, no doubt, felt their impact. Social distancing, prohibitions against gatherings of 10 or more (sometimes even fewer), restrictions on retailers and more have been mandated. It seems with each passing week the doomsday predictions were justification for further restrictions. As the weeks slowly crawled by we began to hear a growing crescendo of cries against the quarantine actions under the banner of “the cure cannot be worse than the disease” and, thus, invalid. Is there truth to this? What saith the Scriptures?

While all of Scripture is God’s Law-Word, central to this discussion will be the laws of hygiene and disease found in Leviticus 13-15. It is here we can see the patterns, precepts and principles of God’s commands that must be the foundation of any of our thinking on the issues of disease and quarantine. What do we see? We see that there are responsibilities for family, church and state with respect to these questions. God’s Law speaks to the reality of disease in a fallen world and gives us the lawful responses to it. These responses not only limit the spread of said disease but support its elimination at the same time while minimizing the impact on the larger community and its dominion work.

First, the actual practice of quarantine is thoroughly Biblical. What is described as leprosy in our translations can be better understood as typical of any infectious disease. As Rushdoony points out,

“It is important to note that the concern is for the welfare of the family and the community; neither can be sacrificed out of pity for the victim. It is thus noteworthy that we have here the source of the idea of quarantine . The concept is Biblical. As applied by Orthodox Jews and by orthodox Christians, it has included the quarantine not only of infected persons but also of infected animals and plants.” (1) [emphasis mine]

Rushdoony’s point is that pity for a diseased victim should not override the well being and health of the family and broader community by allowing the infected person to destroy either. Indeed, he goes on to say,

“Quarantine, it should be noted, is a moral fact: it asserts that there is a good and evil response to a situation. Quarantine does not say that the sick man is evil, but to expose others to a serious illness or disease is evil, and therefore separation is good, healthy, and necessary.” (2)

So, this is an open and shut case today, then, right? We have a virus making its rounds across the world so all actions taken by the state are, thus, good and right? Or, is there more to this issue than initially thought?

“Many commentators have seen the forms of “leprosy” or diseases described in Leviticus 13-14 as types or symbols of sin. However, as Harrison reminds us, the Bible never does so. Disease is simply presented as disease, one consequence of a fallen world. Quarantine is a separation of disease, and more quarantine is a separation of evil from society. This is very important to note. We do not flee from disease and sin, but rather separate sin and contagious disease from the community. Our Lord says, “I pray not that Thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that Thou shouldest keep them from the evil (or, the evil one)” (John 17:15). Modern separationism too often quarantines the healthy and the moral, not the diseased and the criminal members of society.” (3)

There are two points that are missed when considering whether quarantine actions are lawful. First, note that in all cases it is the sick individual that is quarantined, not the healthy. As pointed out in these same chapters, the fact that the healed member is required to be consecrated back into his priestly, dominion work means that the healthy member is expected to continue in his, without interruption. Rushdoony recognized this in the earlier quotes where, historically, infectious persons, plants, homes, etc were placed in quarantine; in other words, those confirmed to be sick or, as Leviticus 13:1-8 points out, those who were believed to be sick by outward evidence . This requirement of outward evidence is crucial as it strikes the balance between the freedom of the individual (this would include protections opposed to mandatory invasive testing) against the protections for the community. We have a similar practice in the legal sphere: the Biblical requirement of “innocent until proven guilty” is likewise to be applied here as “healthy until proven diseased.”

Second, Rushdoony has pointed out that disease in the Bible is “presented as disease, one consequence of a fallen world.” Inherent to true freedom are the risks of life in a fallen world: you could fail in business, you could be injured or killed in a collision or you could be exposed to any number of sicknesses that abound in our world. That world, true, is being renewed by the Lord through His actions and those of His people in their dominion work but the pushing back of the curse means we must deal with the problems of the curse along the way. This means exposure to a hidden illness is not the same as being made ill by it. We regularly swap viruses and bacteria in our daily interactions with others without a single incident due to the body’s normal, God given immunities. So, while we must apply the laws of quarantine to those who are actually ill and manifesting the symptoms thereof, we must also protect the work for the kingdom among those that are healthy.

The implications of this in light of the present debate are enormous: so called “social distancing” should be between the diagnosed ill and the healthy, not between the healthy alone. Businesses should function as normal but those that become ill should remain at home until healthy. Risks of disease have always been present in any large gathering of people, today’s virus notwithstanding. It is a simple fact that we must choose to live in the reality of this fallen world, God’s world marred by man’s sin and full of risks (and blessings), or we will be forced to submit to increasing tyranny “for our own safety.”

We must therefore recognize that while it is wrong for Christians to think that the state has zero authority in regard to disease it is also equally wrong to lock down the healthy with the sick. Christians alone bear the Truth in this world and we need to be about the business of directing the debate on this issue accordingly so that true freedom can be realized. To just blindly follow the masses only adds to our judgment and is our assent to tyranny.

(1) R. J. Rushdoony, Leviticus, Vol. III of the Commentaries on the Pentateuch (Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 2005),135.

(2) Ibid., 136.

(3) Ibid., 144

One of the most mocked books in the Bible, yet its remedies have always had a salutary relevance to a healthy society throughout history. We see yet again that God’s injunctions are less draconian or cruel than those of men: Leviticus requires quarantines of the few; most modern governments are requiring quarantines of the many (except for themselves, of course).
This is NOT in line with proper quarantine
Quarantines have worked throughout history

https://mailchi.mp/791fbab642b8/our-worries-get-in-the-way-3046954?e=be71bf23aa

El Loco

El Loco’s haunts were unknown. For the most part.

Mining camp residents spotted him occasionally, and only when they journeyed to or from San Felix, the port town on the banks of the Orinoco River, about 40 kilometers north. If they were lucky, their trip would coincide with an El Loco sighting. He’d be seen walking jauntily, swinging his arms in an exaggerated, yet nonmilitary-type, arc; unmindful of the storms of dust raised by cars or trucks as they passed him, always slowly, because everybody wanted to see El Loco and laugh with him, and the sightings seemed too few and too far between.

He’d always laugh and lift his arms in childlike, yet firm salute; one hand always gripping a staff, as if some sort of rudderless Moses wandering the El Pao – San Felix road for generations. 

Probably no American had seen him up close. But, judging from 30 or 40 feet away, a consensus of sorts had developed among them affirming El Loco was probably in his early thirties

He seemed to be much taller than average in that era and in those regions, maybe five feet nine or ten inches; wiry, strong, virile, and with huge hands. These judgments-from-afar were about as much as could assuredly be said about him, as the distance did not permit inspection of his physiognomic features. More on that further below.

Of course, everybody understood that someone had to be “taking care of” El Loco, else he could not survive. Here, perhaps, the legendary Venezuelan hospitality played a critical but hidden role.

An American cattleman with business interests in Venezuela once wrote his personal impression of Venezuelan society saying that it was the most open and cordial in all of South America. He further noted that, unlike the Argentines and Brazilians, who used hotels or restaurants or clubs to entertain visitors, the Venezuelans entertained in their own homes; in that respect, he concluded, they were very much like the Americans.

That observation was true, though too limited. Venezuelans didn’t invite only known, or business, guests to their homes; they compelled strangers, especially the poor, and the “locos”, apparently mindful that, at times, some, unawares, had entertained angels.

Then weeks would go by with no one having seen him. Where was he? At such times I would hear speculation when accompanying my mother at the commissary in the Otro Campo (known to the Americans as the labor camp), or with my father in the American Camp bar. Some voices affirmed, as if they were eye-witnesses, that El Loco was still on the road, but, in fact, no drivers or passengers had seen him. Others rumored El Loco was on jungle paths, headed temporarily for other destinations, as if looking for side adventures to spice up his El Pao – San Felix routine. Still others did not really care or think about it, and just assumed El Loco would reappear on his favorite road soon enough. And he eventually did, as if he had been nowhere else. As if he would live forever.

Regardless of opinions as to his whereabouts, the Venezuelans along the El Duo road just shrugged, confident in the truth of the old Spanish aphorism, “God takes care of the widows, the orphans, and the crazies.” It did not occur to them that God used them to do the caring.

El Loco walked with a swinging gait, a long, thick staff in one hand. His dusty jet-black hair shagged over his collar and a bit over his ears. He always walked with, never against, the traffic. Whenever I heard or read about a man in rags, I’d picture El Loco. His rags were always in khaki, just like the men in El Pao, only very worn and torn. And, instead of a dull yellow, El Loco’s khakis seemed rusty red.

Once, on a drive to San Felix, we saw him up close.

As we approached him in our car, to my utter, indescribable delight, El Loco swung round and stopped, looking toward the Oldsmobile as it slowly approached. El Loco began jumping in place, raising his arms and waving them. He was strong; he could wave the arm carrying that staff as easily as the other. Then he yelled a loud, croaking-like cheer as he laughed. His entire face laughed. And his teeth shone a bright white.

To me, laughing with my parents as we all saluted El Loco, it seemed even the Oldsmobile laughed. We drove slowly by El Loco, as we waved at him while he waved back, croaking, yelling, laughing, screaming, jumping. His cheeks’ bony arches seemed like sharp hills guarding his oviform eyes, whose color matched his hair, only brighter. And they seemed, to the boy, to be looking right into his own eyes.

Unlike most adults, El Loco was able, with absolutely no awkward self-consciousness, to look at someone in the eye, no matter what the age, and sustain that look until naturally broken. I just knew El Loco looked only at me, as if he knew me. As if we’d met before. Somewhere. There was no fear in me. On the contrary, like all children, I considered El Loco as very approachable, a dear friend and protector.

I stuck my head out the back window resting it on my arms on the frame as I looked back at El Loco, who was still jumping and yelling and laughing, forming a striking, puppet-like silhouette against the green, as the dust rose behind the car.

What most knew about El Loco was limited to the fact that he spent his days and years striding between El Pao and San Felix. Clearly folks cared for him; after all, it was assumed, he ate and slept. The I recall once, and only once, during an unusual mid-day drive to San Felix, seeing El Loco sitting peaceably in a chair in the front, porch-like structure of one of the cabins off the road. The farmer sat across from him, as the wife served him lunch and the children stood by. Sometimes El Loco would not be seen for what seemed to be weeks, before he’d reappear again on the road bringing joy to folks, especially children, who drove by.

I don’t remember the last time I saw him. He just melted away, like a mirage, into the jungle and before I knew it, I realized I had not seen him in years, maybe decades.

But I think about him. I can see him walking firmly, soldier-like, on the right side of the road, gripping his staff with his right hand, wildly swinging the left. El Loco whirls round and there is that wide grin once again, mouth way open, white teeth flashing. He lets off that loud cheer as he raises his hand and staff, pointing to the heavens.

1959 Oldsmobile Delta 88. Ours was white, not two-toned. As my father used to say, “Se come la carretera.”[Roughly translated, “She swallows the road.”]
Picture a cross between Henry Silva and Anthony Perkins in old, raggedy khakis, with hair more like Perkins’, but a bit longer, and you’d have an approximation of El Loco as I remember him from early childhood.
Clearing and building the El Pao-San Felix road. The period I remember most about El Loco was when the road was unpaved.