It's 2:15 AM, and I'm in this weird limbo-state between reeally sleepy and reeeally trying to process all the sugar in my system so I don't crash.
So it's time to get existential:
So many motivational books/speeches tend to focus on you getting "what you've always wanted" or your "dream job," but they all seem to assume that you know what those are going in, that you have and have had a clear idea of where you want to be or what you want to be doing, and the difference between that idea and your current circumstances indicates that you aren't there yet.
But what if you don't have the clear idea necessary for partaking in their advice?
I read awhile back that "there's nothing stopping you from throwing pragmatic caution to the wind and taking a chance on what you really want," which is a nice image, and I'm sure somebody somewhere could take it to heart and take that first step.
But for myself, it's just that much more frustrating.
Even little cliches like "Dream big!" seem to have a big "N/A" over them for me.
The future is completely unknown territory, and the past just keeps piling up with seemingly zero progress made.
This perception isn't helped by the fact that I'm turning thirty in nine days and just finished filling out yet another job application for yet another minimum-wage retail job.
I don't think I would feel as hampered if I had some clear-cut goal, that I wanted with the fullness of my being and that was only kept from me by my own anxiety.
Every time I've attempted to explore the dark recesses of my own psyche, searching for some shining bit of passion that could become the above goal, the question of "HOW?" shoots it down every time.
Specifically "How are you going to pay for crap while attempting to achieve that goal?"
Especially since pretty much every search ends at either music or writing, and the question of money-in-the-meantime-as-a-married-man kills both.
So no progress is made, nothing new happens day to day, and I feel more and more worthless.
I have zero goals, zero motivation, and in my more introspective moments (like now), I feel on the verge of depression.
Even teaching seems like something I want to do for all the wrong reasons.
Not because I feel called to teach or because I love working with kids, but just so that I can feel like I'm using my education to get hired somewhere that provides health insurance.
Which I call "bringing more voices into the discussion," as if that would ever happen below the college level, and maybe not even then.
I feel like there's just nothing for me out there, nothing that can make use of my years of training while challenging me while providing greater financial stability.
And the stronger that feeling becomes the more I feel like a failure as a human being and a husband, especially as my wife pours more and more of herself into her dream-job, and takes on greater and greater stress trying to deal with our finances.
Thursday, August 13, 2015
Saturday, August 8, 2015
"It's Just a Game!"
I thought this might be a good way to bridge the gap between two groups which are constantly portrayed as competing with and mutually exclusive to one another in our culture.
Group 1: Fanatical Followers of Ball Sports
Group 2: Fanatical Followers of Role-Playing Videogames.
From the extreme perspective of the former, the latter are obsessing over people and places which have never existed and will never exist, are shut-ins devoid of social skills, are blights on society because they don't contribute and/or are mooching off their parents, etc.
From the extreme perspective of the Group 2, Group 1 are brutish, plebeian, brainwashed barbarians, and/or are enablers of such, who delight in the titillation of their most base, violent urges by proxies who are collectively paid billions of dollars a year, and who are hypocrites for shaming "nerds" for religiously following anime or game series while they themselves collect player and team stats just as religiously.
Of course, from a non-extreme perspective, both groups are simply taking in a form of entertainment which they enjoy.
My choice of title here stems from arguments I've had as a member of Group 2 with members of Group 1, both offensively and defensively.
Offensively, during any family gathering during football, basketball, or baseball season. Especially in moments when the rest of the room not named Myself or My Wife are losing their minds in the general direction of the television. Saying anything which betrays the fact that I'm NOT experiencing the emotional intensity swirling around the room invites anger and an overall "HOW DARE YOU?!" attitude.
Defensively, during any discussion of hobbies with family or friends who do not share this particular interest. Conveying my emotional reaction to a particular story moment in a game is almost an act of trust in these situations, because those hearing it may not have any similar experience (or think they don't, because too many people do not or cannot equate a videogame story with that of a novel or film or television series).
Both sports fans and gamers HATE to be told "It's just a game! Why are you so upset!"
And I think this should be a point of common ground between us, especially when so many social forces and their expectations try to set us against one another instead of allowing us to peacefully coexist in a mature manner.
Of course, those social expectations don't help the case for common ground when Group 1 is treated as "normal" while Group 2 is treated as "abnormal".
Or, more precisely, Group 1 is treated as part of the Western masculine ideal, and Group 2 is treated as effeminate (and therefore unacceptable because anything deemed female-ish is somehow automatically worthy of shame).
Thus Group 1, as the established, socially acceptable group, feels no need to build bridges.
They are secure in their fortress of manliness, and simply expect everyone to join their ranks eventually.
Group 2, as the outcast, sometimes gets addicted to being the outcast.
This is why we see anyone ever smeared as "casuals," and why so many Vlogs on YouTube center around conspiracy theories by game companies to "pander to the casual base"...which is somehow the most evil thing ever.
Nobody in Group 1 seems to worry about who is and isn't a "true fan," due to the assumption that everyone everywhere is or will be a fan at some point.
Thus Group 2 shoots themselves in the foot in many cases, alienating people who want to join up because they're somehow not dedicated enough (usually due to these individuals NOT demonstrating the stereotypes listed in the extreme perspective of Group 1 above).
Of course, it should be said that I'm mostly dealing in stereotypes here.
There are many, maaany individuals who occupy both camps, playing Skyrim all week and then heading to the local stadium on Friday night.
But maturity demands that the stereotypes be addressed as such, that individuals partaking in hobbies which bring joy to their lives be encouraged to do so, and for everyone to accept and enjoy the fact that it is not, in the end, "just a game".
Group 1: Fanatical Followers of Ball Sports
Group 2: Fanatical Followers of Role-Playing Videogames.
From the extreme perspective of the former, the latter are obsessing over people and places which have never existed and will never exist, are shut-ins devoid of social skills, are blights on society because they don't contribute and/or are mooching off their parents, etc.
From the extreme perspective of the Group 2, Group 1 are brutish, plebeian, brainwashed barbarians, and/or are enablers of such, who delight in the titillation of their most base, violent urges by proxies who are collectively paid billions of dollars a year, and who are hypocrites for shaming "nerds" for religiously following anime or game series while they themselves collect player and team stats just as religiously.
Of course, from a non-extreme perspective, both groups are simply taking in a form of entertainment which they enjoy.
My choice of title here stems from arguments I've had as a member of Group 2 with members of Group 1, both offensively and defensively.
Offensively, during any family gathering during football, basketball, or baseball season. Especially in moments when the rest of the room not named Myself or My Wife are losing their minds in the general direction of the television. Saying anything which betrays the fact that I'm NOT experiencing the emotional intensity swirling around the room invites anger and an overall "HOW DARE YOU?!" attitude.
Defensively, during any discussion of hobbies with family or friends who do not share this particular interest. Conveying my emotional reaction to a particular story moment in a game is almost an act of trust in these situations, because those hearing it may not have any similar experience (or think they don't, because too many people do not or cannot equate a videogame story with that of a novel or film or television series).
Both sports fans and gamers HATE to be told "It's just a game! Why are you so upset!"
And I think this should be a point of common ground between us, especially when so many social forces and their expectations try to set us against one another instead of allowing us to peacefully coexist in a mature manner.
Of course, those social expectations don't help the case for common ground when Group 1 is treated as "normal" while Group 2 is treated as "abnormal".
Or, more precisely, Group 1 is treated as part of the Western masculine ideal, and Group 2 is treated as effeminate (and therefore unacceptable because anything deemed female-ish is somehow automatically worthy of shame).
Thus Group 1, as the established, socially acceptable group, feels no need to build bridges.
They are secure in their fortress of manliness, and simply expect everyone to join their ranks eventually.
Group 2, as the outcast, sometimes gets addicted to being the outcast.
This is why we see anyone ever smeared as "casuals," and why so many Vlogs on YouTube center around conspiracy theories by game companies to "pander to the casual base"...which is somehow the most evil thing ever.
Nobody in Group 1 seems to worry about who is and isn't a "true fan," due to the assumption that everyone everywhere is or will be a fan at some point.
Thus Group 2 shoots themselves in the foot in many cases, alienating people who want to join up because they're somehow not dedicated enough (usually due to these individuals NOT demonstrating the stereotypes listed in the extreme perspective of Group 1 above).
Of course, it should be said that I'm mostly dealing in stereotypes here.
There are many, maaany individuals who occupy both camps, playing Skyrim all week and then heading to the local stadium on Friday night.
But maturity demands that the stereotypes be addressed as such, that individuals partaking in hobbies which bring joy to their lives be encouraged to do so, and for everyone to accept and enjoy the fact that it is not, in the end, "just a game".
Friday, August 7, 2015
A Fanfic I Should Probably Develop More
After Miraak's defeat, Sabrinia Dragonborn decided in deep meditation that to restore the Empire was the destiny Hermaeus Mora had spoken of, and returned to the mainland.
Arriving at the moot to select Skyrim's next High King on the back of Odahviing, she used her Thu'um to clear the heavy snow clouds out of the sky, and declared herself High Queen before the assembly. The moot, standing in universal awe, selected her.
Her Thu'um echoing over the mountains, she promptly declared herself the heir of Tiber Septim, Empress of Tamriel, claiming that as the Empire was born when mighty one of the dragon blood declared it so, thus it is reborn.
Gathering the scattered remaining Stormcloaks under her banner, the downtrodden Dunmer of Windhelm, and the legionnaires under the command of General Tullius, his will broken by her Thu'um, she marched across Skyrim.
At her command, Odahviing and Durnehviir slaughtered (and ate a few of) the Thalmor agents gathered at their embassy and burned it to the ground.
Pulling every string she had spent years tying off, Sabrinia deployed the thieves over which she was Guildmaster and the assassins over which she ruled as Listener to hunt down and capture every last Thalmor agent in Skyrim.
In a gruesome public ceremony in Solitude, Sabrinia sliced away each agent's clothing as they hung on the pillory. Then slashed each agent's abdomen open to spill their entrails.
Then she called her dragons.
The smell of cooked Altmer flesh didn't dissipate for miles, or for weeks.
Hurling every last assassin into the Reach, she finally burned out and crushed the last of the Forsworn after three weeks of directing the hunt.
Having cleaned her house, she sent thieves and assassins abroad like creeping tendrils, spreading stories of hope and cheer for potential allies and sending any who would oppose her into panicked disarray.
With her consort Serana as second-in-command, she rode west over the mountains into Orsinium, holding the Hammer of Malacath aloft to cheers from the native orcs, who formed up in ranks of thousands behind her armies.
Meeting with the leaders of Hammerfell, with Odahviing in the skies above, she formed the Sand Snow Accord, an alliance to wipe out the Dominion and set Sabrinia upon the Dragon Throne, with Hammerfell's independence guaranteed, though with the provision that any could rejoin the Empire.
Setting sail from Stros M'Kai, her forces sailed around the Summerset Isles, smashing the Aldmeri fleets with sword and arrow and Thu'um and dragon's fire to anchor just offshore from the capital city of Alinor.
Sabrinia took only one Nord, one Imperial, one Orc, and one Dunmer bodyguard in a small boat into the port, surrounded by Thalmor soldiers and mages, every one fearing and hating her, and hating their direct orders to wait.
Sabrinia was admitted to see the High Wizard alone.
The doors slammed shut behind her with a wave from the old High Elf, and sixteen Summerset Shadows leaped from the gloom with swords drawn.
One "YOL, TOOR-SHUL!" and a blur of blades later, she stood over the throne, the High Wizard shaking like a child in the face of a storm.
"Now, your Eminence, I have only two words for you. GOL, HAH!"
He shuddered at the force of her Thu'um, but only for a moment.
The pupils of his eyes dilated until the only colors were white and black.
She smiled at him, and presented a scroll.
"Sign this, give it to your servant just outside the door and tell him to follow the instructions to the letter, and return to your throne."
He did so, in blank silence but with the slow gravity with which one in his position does everything, from eating to passing judgment.
Sabrinia let him shuffle back to his throne and sit.
Let the old mer be found reclining regally.
"KRI, LUN-AUS!"
His body shook under her Thu'um, but stopped when the black dagger pierced his robe, the armor beneath it, and the back of his throne.
She left it there for the servants or the soldiers or the gods to find.
Sabrinia Dragonborn stepped into the sunlight to see the full might of her armies arrayed around the gleaming palace which once held the leadership of the Aldmeri Dominion, but would for now serve as a mausoleum for the enemies of the Dragon Empress, May She Live Forever.
Arriving at the moot to select Skyrim's next High King on the back of Odahviing, she used her Thu'um to clear the heavy snow clouds out of the sky, and declared herself High Queen before the assembly. The moot, standing in universal awe, selected her.
Her Thu'um echoing over the mountains, she promptly declared herself the heir of Tiber Septim, Empress of Tamriel, claiming that as the Empire was born when mighty one of the dragon blood declared it so, thus it is reborn.
Gathering the scattered remaining Stormcloaks under her banner, the downtrodden Dunmer of Windhelm, and the legionnaires under the command of General Tullius, his will broken by her Thu'um, she marched across Skyrim.
At her command, Odahviing and Durnehviir slaughtered (and ate a few of) the Thalmor agents gathered at their embassy and burned it to the ground.
Pulling every string she had spent years tying off, Sabrinia deployed the thieves over which she was Guildmaster and the assassins over which she ruled as Listener to hunt down and capture every last Thalmor agent in Skyrim.
In a gruesome public ceremony in Solitude, Sabrinia sliced away each agent's clothing as they hung on the pillory. Then slashed each agent's abdomen open to spill their entrails.
Then she called her dragons.
The smell of cooked Altmer flesh didn't dissipate for miles, or for weeks.
Hurling every last assassin into the Reach, she finally burned out and crushed the last of the Forsworn after three weeks of directing the hunt.
Having cleaned her house, she sent thieves and assassins abroad like creeping tendrils, spreading stories of hope and cheer for potential allies and sending any who would oppose her into panicked disarray.
With her consort Serana as second-in-command, she rode west over the mountains into Orsinium, holding the Hammer of Malacath aloft to cheers from the native orcs, who formed up in ranks of thousands behind her armies.
Meeting with the leaders of Hammerfell, with Odahviing in the skies above, she formed the Sand Snow Accord, an alliance to wipe out the Dominion and set Sabrinia upon the Dragon Throne, with Hammerfell's independence guaranteed, though with the provision that any could rejoin the Empire.
Setting sail from Stros M'Kai, her forces sailed around the Summerset Isles, smashing the Aldmeri fleets with sword and arrow and Thu'um and dragon's fire to anchor just offshore from the capital city of Alinor.
Sabrinia took only one Nord, one Imperial, one Orc, and one Dunmer bodyguard in a small boat into the port, surrounded by Thalmor soldiers and mages, every one fearing and hating her, and hating their direct orders to wait.
Sabrinia was admitted to see the High Wizard alone.
The doors slammed shut behind her with a wave from the old High Elf, and sixteen Summerset Shadows leaped from the gloom with swords drawn.
One "YOL, TOOR-SHUL!" and a blur of blades later, she stood over the throne, the High Wizard shaking like a child in the face of a storm.
"Now, your Eminence, I have only two words for you. GOL, HAH!"
He shuddered at the force of her Thu'um, but only for a moment.
The pupils of his eyes dilated until the only colors were white and black.
She smiled at him, and presented a scroll.
"Sign this, give it to your servant just outside the door and tell him to follow the instructions to the letter, and return to your throne."
He did so, in blank silence but with the slow gravity with which one in his position does everything, from eating to passing judgment.
Sabrinia let him shuffle back to his throne and sit.
Let the old mer be found reclining regally.
"KRI, LUN-AUS!"
His body shook under her Thu'um, but stopped when the black dagger pierced his robe, the armor beneath it, and the back of his throne.
She left it there for the servants or the soldiers or the gods to find.
Sabrinia Dragonborn stepped into the sunlight to see the full might of her armies arrayed around the gleaming palace which once held the leadership of the Aldmeri Dominion, but would for now serve as a mausoleum for the enemies of the Dragon Empress, May She Live Forever.
Friday, July 10, 2015
The Most Obnoxious Dogma
I was raised in church.
I consider myself a follower of Christ, and endeavor to love everyone as I believe He loves us.
But there are certain dogma and doctrines which too many church people cling to like they're Christ's undergarments, and which make my life so much more difficult when dealing with and relating to people who weren't raised in church (such as my wife), or were raised in church and eventually abandoned Christianity because of church people.
1) Biblical literalism
This single philosophy has caused the spread and solidification of so much deliberate ignorance over the centuries, especially when church officials had the power to hand down death sentences to anyone who questioned it (like, say, scientists), and today when politicians make a show of pandering to church people by refusing to act on the scientific community's findings.
To say nothing of leading to believing in a church-conjured bogeyman from Job's story (the accuser), and inflicting that interpretation upon the rest of the anthology, and upon all recorded history as well.
This has led to an abandonment of common sense (while ironically declaring the philosophy to BE common sense), and the demonization of anyone who wishes to delve into the cultural, historical, and literary contexts of the various texts included in the anthology, because we tend to reach different conclusions than the church-people-approved catechism.
2) Sola Scriptura
In conjunction with #1, this becomes all the more obnoxious.
For those playing the home game, this is a Latin phrase meaning "scripture alone".
Originally, this doctrine was codified in the midst of many church publications and tracts assuming the same authority as the Bible, to say nothing of Papal Bulls and the Roman Catholic policy of indulgences, and the codifiers (among them Martin Luther) wished to wipe the slate clean and return to the basics.
Which to a point is all well and good, but too many church people have interpreted the doctrine to mean that the Bible is the ONLY THING CHRISTIANS CAN READ. EVER.
Church people don't just want to tell you how to read the sacred anthology, they want you to ONLY read the sacred anthology. So any writings of historical contemporaries of the authors included in the sacred anthology, interpretations of those writings, new ideas and conclusions regarding the sacred anthology or any contemporaries or any later works, entertaining works of fiction, scientific research.........the list is endless, and its repression varies from church to church and within churches.
3) "Fallen" humanity
Church people like to point to the Garden of Eden story and its references throughout the anthology for this one, but even cursory research of creation myths across different cultures (ya know, the kind of research that literalists run screaming from) demonstrates that the Garden story is just like any other culture's story to answer the fundamental questions of the ancient world:
"Why is there a world?"
"Why are we here?"
"Why are we cruel to each other?"
Nearly every creation myth in every ancient culture answers these three questions in ways unique to that particular culture, and the Eden story is no different, demonstrating the priorities of a nomadic people who frequently interacted with agrarian societies.
I can easily imagine a young Hebrew boy walking with his family's herds past a city at night, and turning to his father to ask, "Why don't we live in cities and plant crops?"
And his father answering, "Back before your grandfather's grandfather, there was no need to plant crops or herd animals..."
And so on, into the story of Adam and Eve's disobedience, which forced everyone to work the soil and herd animals. And maybe the father also tells the Cain and Abel story, in which the obviously non-Hebrew farmer is rejected by God while the obviously-Hebrew herdsman is blessed by God...and then subsequently killed by the farmer.
Which sounds quite similar on a microcosmic level to the Egyptian oppression and enslavement of the Hebrews.
Hmm.
But facts and hard evidence (talking snake anyone?) do not come into these stories, because the stories weren't based on facts or hard evidence.
So extrapolating some kind of factual relationship between a story of two people disobeying God and every human ever being automatically "tainted" makes no sense, and furthermore is dangerous because it can and has led to a philosophy in which we avoid taking care of each other as fellow humans.
Either because we as the caregivers are "fallen" and use that fallen-ness as an excuse to do nothing, or because those of whom we should take care are "fallen," and thus unworthy of our care.
These are just a few that I can think of at the moment, and yes I realize that #1 seems to have caused the problems in #2 and #3.
I've interacted with so many church people online who treat these as foundational precepts of Christianity, yet my own life without them has been so much more fulfilling and abundant since I concluded that they were spiritual deadweight.
Especially in forming relationships with people of different (or no) spiritual traditions.
I consider myself a follower of Christ, and endeavor to love everyone as I believe He loves us.
But there are certain dogma and doctrines which too many church people cling to like they're Christ's undergarments, and which make my life so much more difficult when dealing with and relating to people who weren't raised in church (such as my wife), or were raised in church and eventually abandoned Christianity because of church people.
1) Biblical literalism
This single philosophy has caused the spread and solidification of so much deliberate ignorance over the centuries, especially when church officials had the power to hand down death sentences to anyone who questioned it (like, say, scientists), and today when politicians make a show of pandering to church people by refusing to act on the scientific community's findings.
To say nothing of leading to believing in a church-conjured bogeyman from Job's story (the accuser), and inflicting that interpretation upon the rest of the anthology, and upon all recorded history as well.
This has led to an abandonment of common sense (while ironically declaring the philosophy to BE common sense), and the demonization of anyone who wishes to delve into the cultural, historical, and literary contexts of the various texts included in the anthology, because we tend to reach different conclusions than the church-people-approved catechism.
2) Sola Scriptura
In conjunction with #1, this becomes all the more obnoxious.
For those playing the home game, this is a Latin phrase meaning "scripture alone".
Originally, this doctrine was codified in the midst of many church publications and tracts assuming the same authority as the Bible, to say nothing of Papal Bulls and the Roman Catholic policy of indulgences, and the codifiers (among them Martin Luther) wished to wipe the slate clean and return to the basics.
Which to a point is all well and good, but too many church people have interpreted the doctrine to mean that the Bible is the ONLY THING CHRISTIANS CAN READ. EVER.
Church people don't just want to tell you how to read the sacred anthology, they want you to ONLY read the sacred anthology. So any writings of historical contemporaries of the authors included in the sacred anthology, interpretations of those writings, new ideas and conclusions regarding the sacred anthology or any contemporaries or any later works, entertaining works of fiction, scientific research.........the list is endless, and its repression varies from church to church and within churches.
3) "Fallen" humanity
Church people like to point to the Garden of Eden story and its references throughout the anthology for this one, but even cursory research of creation myths across different cultures (ya know, the kind of research that literalists run screaming from) demonstrates that the Garden story is just like any other culture's story to answer the fundamental questions of the ancient world:
"Why is there a world?"
"Why are we here?"
"Why are we cruel to each other?"
Nearly every creation myth in every ancient culture answers these three questions in ways unique to that particular culture, and the Eden story is no different, demonstrating the priorities of a nomadic people who frequently interacted with agrarian societies.
I can easily imagine a young Hebrew boy walking with his family's herds past a city at night, and turning to his father to ask, "Why don't we live in cities and plant crops?"
And his father answering, "Back before your grandfather's grandfather, there was no need to plant crops or herd animals..."
And so on, into the story of Adam and Eve's disobedience, which forced everyone to work the soil and herd animals. And maybe the father also tells the Cain and Abel story, in which the obviously non-Hebrew farmer is rejected by God while the obviously-Hebrew herdsman is blessed by God...and then subsequently killed by the farmer.
Which sounds quite similar on a microcosmic level to the Egyptian oppression and enslavement of the Hebrews.
Hmm.
But facts and hard evidence (talking snake anyone?) do not come into these stories, because the stories weren't based on facts or hard evidence.
So extrapolating some kind of factual relationship between a story of two people disobeying God and every human ever being automatically "tainted" makes no sense, and furthermore is dangerous because it can and has led to a philosophy in which we avoid taking care of each other as fellow humans.
Either because we as the caregivers are "fallen" and use that fallen-ness as an excuse to do nothing, or because those of whom we should take care are "fallen," and thus unworthy of our care.
These are just a few that I can think of at the moment, and yes I realize that #1 seems to have caused the problems in #2 and #3.
I've interacted with so many church people online who treat these as foundational precepts of Christianity, yet my own life without them has been so much more fulfilling and abundant since I concluded that they were spiritual deadweight.
Especially in forming relationships with people of different (or no) spiritual traditions.
Saturday, July 4, 2015
Happy Birthday America
What is great about America*:
1) Free exchange of ideas.
2) Free practice of religious beliefs that do not infringe upon the rights of others.
3) Most of my friends and relatives live here.
4) My wife and I happened to be born here around the same time, which drastically increased the odds of our eventual meeting and pairing.
5) A growing movement to stamp out prejudice and bigotry, which gains ground with each new generation.
6) Barbecue.
7) Jazz.
8) Barbershop music.
*Not all of the items on this list are exclusive to America.
What is NOT great about America, that I can think of off the top of my head**:
1) Greed is our primary cultural value.
2) The unfettered, irrational individualism which has stemmed from #1, resulting in a nation of individual citizens almost completely unable to connect with each other because we're all obsessed with "getting ahead," which naturally results in "getting ahead of the other person," which prevents any kind of empathy with anyone.
3) The almost nonexistent sense of community which has resulted from #2, as we have all been pitted against one another by marketing and propaganda from the 1% (who strangely enough are motivated only by #1) to prevent us from realizing that not only are we a community, we are a community of oppressed people.
4) The ignorance and hysteria fueled by the 1% maintaining #3, causing massive numbers of oppressed people to act only in the best interests of their oppressors, and which has led to all kinds of irrational hatred of art and knowledge and people who are different.
5) A fascination with excess, stemming from #2, which leads us to all kinds of delights in violence and gluttony and ignorance in an attempt to portray ourselves as greater than the next person. This includes everything from "professional eating" to Bible-thumping at the Creation Museum to cheering whenever we fling soldiers willy-nilly across the globe.
6) A near-total inability to prioritize in a mature manner, stemming from #3.
We focus more on what our neighbor is doing in his/her bedroom than on the fact that our children's school is falling apart.
We willingly donate money to buy the pastor of a megachurch a new yacht, but scream bloody murder at the idea of paying taxes for infrastructure maintenance or basic services, and when that infrastructure falls apart and/or those services become unavailable due to lack of funds, we scream bloody murder AGAIN because we treat them as our due.
We complain that our educational system is falling apart, but in the same breath demand that nonscience be taught in science classes, demand no regulation or standards for education (even though in the act of complaining we admit to some kind of standard), and complain that teachers are overpaid.
**These may not be limited to America, but other countries tend to not parade them around like they're something to be proud of.
Food for thought.
1) Free exchange of ideas.
2) Free practice of religious beliefs that do not infringe upon the rights of others.
3) Most of my friends and relatives live here.
4) My wife and I happened to be born here around the same time, which drastically increased the odds of our eventual meeting and pairing.
5) A growing movement to stamp out prejudice and bigotry, which gains ground with each new generation.
6) Barbecue.
7) Jazz.
8) Barbershop music.
*Not all of the items on this list are exclusive to America.
What is NOT great about America, that I can think of off the top of my head**:
1) Greed is our primary cultural value.
2) The unfettered, irrational individualism which has stemmed from #1, resulting in a nation of individual citizens almost completely unable to connect with each other because we're all obsessed with "getting ahead," which naturally results in "getting ahead of the other person," which prevents any kind of empathy with anyone.
3) The almost nonexistent sense of community which has resulted from #2, as we have all been pitted against one another by marketing and propaganda from the 1% (who strangely enough are motivated only by #1) to prevent us from realizing that not only are we a community, we are a community of oppressed people.
4) The ignorance and hysteria fueled by the 1% maintaining #3, causing massive numbers of oppressed people to act only in the best interests of their oppressors, and which has led to all kinds of irrational hatred of art and knowledge and people who are different.
5) A fascination with excess, stemming from #2, which leads us to all kinds of delights in violence and gluttony and ignorance in an attempt to portray ourselves as greater than the next person. This includes everything from "professional eating" to Bible-thumping at the Creation Museum to cheering whenever we fling soldiers willy-nilly across the globe.
6) A near-total inability to prioritize in a mature manner, stemming from #3.
We focus more on what our neighbor is doing in his/her bedroom than on the fact that our children's school is falling apart.
We willingly donate money to buy the pastor of a megachurch a new yacht, but scream bloody murder at the idea of paying taxes for infrastructure maintenance or basic services, and when that infrastructure falls apart and/or those services become unavailable due to lack of funds, we scream bloody murder AGAIN because we treat them as our due.
We complain that our educational system is falling apart, but in the same breath demand that nonscience be taught in science classes, demand no regulation or standards for education (even though in the act of complaining we admit to some kind of standard), and complain that teachers are overpaid.
**These may not be limited to America, but other countries tend to not parade them around like they're something to be proud of.
Food for thought.
Tuesday, June 30, 2015
The LEGO Movie and Social Progress
And now for something completely different...
I find it fascinating and ironic that The LEGO Movie's plot involves a group of people, forced into a system in which their individual creativity is repressed or sacrificed for the benefit of a one-man oligarchy, breaking free of that system to found a system in which their individual creativity is channeled for the benefit of everyone.
Especially given that the United States has spent nearly a century treating "Socialism" like it's the worst curse word ever, while simultaneously bemoaning the loss of community involvement and general friendliness toward strangers with whom one shares a neighborhood.
But we can't really act surprised at this point.
What other result could we expect when we make "me getting ahead" our sole cultural foundation?
Especially combined with a infinite-expansion economic philosophy, in which "me getting ahead" is never enough, so it has to be "me always getting further/farther ahead".
Which naturally results in "me always getting further/farther ahead of you," demonstrated perfectly by attempting to drive pretty much anywhere other people are in America.
The more we as a culture have emphasized individual financial achievement, the more we have left things like "common courtesy," "manners," and "taking care of each other" in the past.
As much as I HATE the "good old days" mentality pervading far too much of my elders' psyches, we students of history are capable of tracing a line through American history showing a fall-off in things like communal identity.
Much of it fueled by a rise in unfettered, cutthroat capitalism.
Go figure.
HOLY CRAP 100TH POST!!
Only took........way too long.
I find it fascinating and ironic that The LEGO Movie's plot involves a group of people, forced into a system in which their individual creativity is repressed or sacrificed for the benefit of a one-man oligarchy, breaking free of that system to found a system in which their individual creativity is channeled for the benefit of everyone.
Especially given that the United States has spent nearly a century treating "Socialism" like it's the worst curse word ever, while simultaneously bemoaning the loss of community involvement and general friendliness toward strangers with whom one shares a neighborhood.
But we can't really act surprised at this point.
What other result could we expect when we make "me getting ahead" our sole cultural foundation?
Especially combined with a infinite-expansion economic philosophy, in which "me getting ahead" is never enough, so it has to be "me always getting further/farther ahead".
Which naturally results in "me always getting further/farther ahead of you," demonstrated perfectly by attempting to drive pretty much anywhere other people are in America.
The more we as a culture have emphasized individual financial achievement, the more we have left things like "common courtesy," "manners," and "taking care of each other" in the past.
As much as I HATE the "good old days" mentality pervading far too much of my elders' psyches, we students of history are capable of tracing a line through American history showing a fall-off in things like communal identity.
Much of it fueled by a rise in unfettered, cutthroat capitalism.
Go figure.
HOLY CRAP 100TH POST!!
Only took........way too long.
Monday, June 29, 2015
The Internet
Aaaaand we're back. Gah.
It's interesting to notice that every electronic communication medium we have developed in the past century and a half is spoken of as if it is a separate, physical location.
I saw it happen "on TV".
I talked with her "on the phone".
We chatted "online" or "on the Internet".
So no wonder we develop psychological issues regarding these media.
We've made them a completely separate universe instead of simply treating them as enhanced forms of normal communication.
A conversation via phone is still a conversation.
The whole point of the telephone's invention was to allow people to have a conversation without being limited by shouting distance.
Receiving information via TV is still receiving information.
We who still read newspapers don't treat the newspaper as some kind of microcosm in which words are different or have different meanings than they would if someone gave us the information by speaking aloud in our physical presence.
Perhaps we have this mentality because our access to these communication media is dependent upon technological progress.
Our ancestors could have never imagined television (or radio, for that matter).
Information was in a constant state of out-of-date, depending on how long it took distributors of it to receive it, process it, condense it into a format which could be broadcast, and then broadcast it.
Put in specific terms, if an enemy army was attacking, someone had to see it and run to the king, the king would send someone to run to the town criers, and the town criers would tell everyone in the town, at least everyone within shouting distance.
This process could take weeks, depending on how big the kingdom was.
Print made it a little easier, but you still had to have someone physically take the printed information to the masses.
Compare that to today's by-the-millisecond, twenty-four-hour information stream, hitting us at home and on the road and at work.
No wonder scientists figure we've created more information in the past ten years than humanity did in the past thousand.
Which I think is partially due to not much of the ancients' information surviving to the present day.
Hard to look at hieroglyphics and figure out what ancient Egyptians talked about while drunk.
Pretty sure it wasn't Osiris being killed and cut into pieces.
It's also no wonder that we're cracking up psychologically.
The world has always been in a constant state of change (biologically, geologically, socially, culturally, technologically, etc.), but up until these past twenty years or so we weren't so keenly aware of it.
Thus old people bemoan the loss of stability, and new adults seek desperately for it, unable to gain their parents' and grandparents' illusion which held out for so many millennia.
It's interesting to notice that every electronic communication medium we have developed in the past century and a half is spoken of as if it is a separate, physical location.
I saw it happen "on TV".
I talked with her "on the phone".
We chatted "online" or "on the Internet".
So no wonder we develop psychological issues regarding these media.
We've made them a completely separate universe instead of simply treating them as enhanced forms of normal communication.
A conversation via phone is still a conversation.
The whole point of the telephone's invention was to allow people to have a conversation without being limited by shouting distance.
Receiving information via TV is still receiving information.
We who still read newspapers don't treat the newspaper as some kind of microcosm in which words are different or have different meanings than they would if someone gave us the information by speaking aloud in our physical presence.
Perhaps we have this mentality because our access to these communication media is dependent upon technological progress.
Our ancestors could have never imagined television (or radio, for that matter).
Information was in a constant state of out-of-date, depending on how long it took distributors of it to receive it, process it, condense it into a format which could be broadcast, and then broadcast it.
Put in specific terms, if an enemy army was attacking, someone had to see it and run to the king, the king would send someone to run to the town criers, and the town criers would tell everyone in the town, at least everyone within shouting distance.
This process could take weeks, depending on how big the kingdom was.
Print made it a little easier, but you still had to have someone physically take the printed information to the masses.
Compare that to today's by-the-millisecond, twenty-four-hour information stream, hitting us at home and on the road and at work.
No wonder scientists figure we've created more information in the past ten years than humanity did in the past thousand.
Which I think is partially due to not much of the ancients' information surviving to the present day.
Hard to look at hieroglyphics and figure out what ancient Egyptians talked about while drunk.
Pretty sure it wasn't Osiris being killed and cut into pieces.
It's also no wonder that we're cracking up psychologically.
The world has always been in a constant state of change (biologically, geologically, socially, culturally, technologically, etc.), but up until these past twenty years or so we weren't so keenly aware of it.
Thus old people bemoan the loss of stability, and new adults seek desperately for it, unable to gain their parents' and grandparents' illusion which held out for so many millennia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
