A memory... It was the last day of school, my 4th grade year, and the Mustang Valley Elementary school playground was all abuzz. Not for the upcoming summer, the freedom, the endless hours of watching TV and playing basketball outside, but rather to watch a very interesting spectacle. I had, in all my wisdom, challenged J.L. Keplinger to a race around the edges of the yard. Around the swing sets and monkey bars, I had decided to run with the fastest boy in school, just to see if I could do it. I had just received word that I would be moving soon, out of the battered Oklahoma economy (the oil crisis of 1983, and the failing of the Penn Square Bank had made construction of buildings unnecessary, so my dad, being a sprinkler system designer had to move to more fertile ground), to Georgia, where everything was as green as the kudzu.
It was a futile experience, as everyone knew I was one of the slowest runners in my grade. There was no point. And I did lose that race by quite a bit. Now, as I look back, I wonder why I did that. Was it a spectacle made so that I could go out in some glorious fireball of attention (certainly my ADD would have said so)? Or was it some deep yearning to be more like the other children, more physical, more adept at something other than pretending I was a Transformer? Perhaps it was the same yearnings that Max had as he made his igloo in Where the Wild Things Are (which comes out next week). I still am not certain.
I think admiration has a large part to do with it. There are people that we look up to, not for any mental or emotional reason, but because the things they do are perfect. They discipline themselves to reach a level of their trade which is just not possible except for the top 1% of their peers. And while this occurs in business, in religion, in mental arenas, the most obvious is the athlete. As they exercise and perform at the highest level of sport, we look at them with admiration, with a little envy perhaps, to see what the most excellent of the human form might look like. As close to the Platonian "form" of "human" as there is. The Adonis of body, of mind, of skill. These are the people we look up to. It is not surprising that the Ancient Greeks held their Olympic Games in the nude, as it was not just a performance of the highest skills, but a stage for which others might admire the sculpted bodies, art chiseled alive by time and effort.
And we look at the athletes with that admiration, and they are set high on pedestals. As they should be. Look at the recent Olympic games set in Vancouver. Shaun White did amazing flips high in the air, a performance that demands power and skill to almost superhuman ends. How did he do that??? Or the beauty of the figure skaters. The flips and spins in the air, landing on blades of steel upon hard, cold ice. How can human beings be that perfect, that precise?? It boggles the mind, it pulls the emotions, to see mankind perform at that level.
As the IOC president said at the closing ceremony, "This Olympic games was a celebration of humanity." And so it should be. I've said it before, that the exaltation of mankind is as much as praise to God as it is to us. Just as the Olympic athlete should reach for measures of ability far beyond themselves, so should we reach for frontiers far beyond our reaches now. The moon landing of Apollo 11 was the greatest achievement of mankind thus far, and each performance of the Olympic athlete mirrors that achievement. It shows, for the world to witness, the ability of man, to reach, faster, higher, stronger, as the saying goes. And each Olympics has those shining moments where that happens.
We like placing the athletes, the Apollo Ohnos, the Tiger Woods of the sports, on pedestals. They become like gods to us, measures of mankind that we might never reach. And the envy comes through and becomes jealousy. We reach to pull them down off their pedestals and throw them into the muck. Such is the media's job, for while perfection gives ratings, the fall from perfection sells even more. Perfection is fleeting, and the descent, like the climb, is hard. Mercy to those who achieve perfection, only to fall upon the vices of mankind. We see those examples everywhere. Solomon, the wise, and Sampson the strong in Biblical times, succumbed to their wants and desires. Just as Tiger Woods did. Or Michael Phelps, to a lesser extent.
We must chain ourselves to the masts of our ships, and, having listened to the siren's calls, resist with all our minds and hearts. Ulysses, as Tennyson has proclaimed him, was just such a perfect soul, who, having reached his goal, sailed again, ever searching for the unknowns and the unreachable. "To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.."
So I think it is that feeling that made me challenge J.L. to that race. The admiration of a perfect being, in my mind, an athlete who could race and strive for things I never could have. To admire that one last time before I moved. If J.L. kept that up, I don't know. I found that he scored the most goals on the Southern Nazarene University soccer team from 1995-97, but what he has done since then, I don't know. Hopefully he did not succumb to the siren's call.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Space: The Unreachable Frontier
One of my first memories was standing along side my mother and a crowd of people at Will Rogers World Airport in Oklahoma City. It was 1981, and my mom had gotten me out of Mrs. Ravencraft's Kindergarten class to take me out to the airfield to see the Space Shuttle Columbia stop for refueling (or rather, the 747 that carried it) . It was the first flight of the shuttle into space, and it was a magnificent feat of engineering and capitalistic achievement for this plane to return to the United States with the promise of scientific discoveries, launching of satellites for companies throughout the country, and the continuation of the exploration of space that had ended a decade prior with the last of the Apollo rockets. And I got to see it. Apart from the 747, gliding down like some glorious eagle, landing on the runway for all the public to see and admire.
And now, with the shuttle program coming to a close, we look out again to the stars and see the moon and the planets as floating frontiers in space, and the dreams that garnered the science fiction masterpieces of Asimov and Bradbury now come upon us again. Can we once again reach the moon, Mars, the asteroids, the Final Frontier? It is our future. It is the salvation of mankind, to leave this planet and venture into the unknown, as our ancestors did in ships to the new world, or again into the American West on wagons in search of freedom, gold, and land.
We are a few days away from the anniversary of the tragic destruction of Columbia over the skies of Texas, and have just passed the anniversary of the Challenger accident. Proposed just yesterday was Obama's budget for the 2010 year, and it will turn out to be a tragedy with more consequences than the shuttle accidents. In Obama's proposed budget, NASA only receives $500 million for their programs. That sounds like a lot, but in the entire scope of things, it's only 0.5% of the total budget. In retrospect, the budget for NASA after Apollo 11 was 5% of the total budget.
Americans have lost their need to push toward the frontiers. We want to be entertained, cared for, cuddled, and the thought of pursuing our dreams, outside of get rich quick books and suing those who are successful, is quickly squashed. Academically, students are clumped together in mediocre classes, given the same grades, because those that succeed would infringe on the self-esteem of those who could not, for whatever reason, be successful. In the days of Apollo 11, as the title of the recent book talked about, failure was not an option. Today, failure isn't an option either, because no one is allowed to fail or succeed.
In the book I am reading now, The Lost City of Z, David Grann searches through the records of the Royal Geographic Society in London. He is astounded in the amount of expeditions that were launched even as recently as the 19th and 20th centuries (up until probably about World War II), into the Outback of Australia, the Amazon rain forest, the tundra of Antarctica. And of those expeditions, a good number did not survive. Failure is the foundation for which success is built. By examining the records of the slain parties, clues were given to battle scurvy, to chart the longitude position of the explorer, records of plant life and animal life, both edible and not, that forged ahead trips that were ultimately successful, and thus, created a victory for mankind over the planet that he lives on. Even Apollo 11 was built on the failure of previous missions, the given lives of the astronauts who were explorers and pioneers in their own right. The Astronauts of the shuttles delivered satellites that have revolutionized communications, weather forecasting, military security, scientific discovery. And yes, there have been failures, namely Challenger and Columbia, but those Astronauts would, if you talked to them today, would gladly have sacrificed themselves for the continuing efforts of NASA to push towards the frontiers of space.
But those dreams are coming to a close. The Space Shuttle program is soon to be retired, due to the age of the crafts, and with Obama slashing NASA's budget, there won't be any American space missions for the foreseeable future. We will have to hitch rides on Russian shuttles. It marks a sad time when the government no longer sees the pioneering spirit of America as being worth pursuing. Other countries will become the pioneers, and their successes will bring financial and scientific success, and we will have to catch up, which is all but impossible. It is very conceivable, then, that the first Moon Colony will fly the flag of the Chinese, bringing Communism and a government controlled state to the planets of our solar system. It will not be the individual that strikes out on his own, on ships or wagons or on foot, but the machinery of the state that will conquer the frontier before those that would be pioneers could get there to experience freedom. In this case, why bother?
As in the movie Contact, there is a hope that the private citizens of this world would finance space exploration independently of governments. Those such as Richard Branson's company, or those that operate out of Burns Flat, Oklahoma, might achieve commercial space flight soon. The argument for profitable space flight is one that borders on science-fiction speculation, or the wonders of the pioneers mental state. One of my friends on Facebook, D. Shockley, was discussing this subject after I had mentioned the cut in NASA's budget. He said, [his words in italics]:
Very good points, and I agree with him up to the last line. Yes, the dream of flying into space privately, for profit and personal gain, is a pipe dream, because the cost of such an endeavor far outweighs the gain, for now. But like most pioneers in the past, those dreams have to be fulfilled. It is an obsession that mankind has to go beyond what is currently known. We have always been driven to understand everything. If something can't be done, we find a way to do it. While gravity is a universal force, there is very little that gravity can do to keep us here on this planet when the rest of the universe awaits us. So let the dreamers dream, and let them put it into practice. Give Icarus the chance to make his wings and to fly them, and hope he does not fly too close to the sun. We should support and encourage all those who want to be the pioneers of the 21st century. As Ayn Rand said in her lecture "Apollo and Dionysus," it is of the utmost importance that we reach for the stars, lest we become stuck in the mud and the grime of home.
And now, with the shuttle program coming to a close, we look out again to the stars and see the moon and the planets as floating frontiers in space, and the dreams that garnered the science fiction masterpieces of Asimov and Bradbury now come upon us again. Can we once again reach the moon, Mars, the asteroids, the Final Frontier? It is our future. It is the salvation of mankind, to leave this planet and venture into the unknown, as our ancestors did in ships to the new world, or again into the American West on wagons in search of freedom, gold, and land.
We are a few days away from the anniversary of the tragic destruction of Columbia over the skies of Texas, and have just passed the anniversary of the Challenger accident. Proposed just yesterday was Obama's budget for the 2010 year, and it will turn out to be a tragedy with more consequences than the shuttle accidents. In Obama's proposed budget, NASA only receives $500 million for their programs. That sounds like a lot, but in the entire scope of things, it's only 0.5% of the total budget. In retrospect, the budget for NASA after Apollo 11 was 5% of the total budget.
Americans have lost their need to push toward the frontiers. We want to be entertained, cared for, cuddled, and the thought of pursuing our dreams, outside of get rich quick books and suing those who are successful, is quickly squashed. Academically, students are clumped together in mediocre classes, given the same grades, because those that succeed would infringe on the self-esteem of those who could not, for whatever reason, be successful. In the days of Apollo 11, as the title of the recent book talked about, failure was not an option. Today, failure isn't an option either, because no one is allowed to fail or succeed.
In the book I am reading now, The Lost City of Z, David Grann searches through the records of the Royal Geographic Society in London. He is astounded in the amount of expeditions that were launched even as recently as the 19th and 20th centuries (up until probably about World War II), into the Outback of Australia, the Amazon rain forest, the tundra of Antarctica. And of those expeditions, a good number did not survive. Failure is the foundation for which success is built. By examining the records of the slain parties, clues were given to battle scurvy, to chart the longitude position of the explorer, records of plant life and animal life, both edible and not, that forged ahead trips that were ultimately successful, and thus, created a victory for mankind over the planet that he lives on. Even Apollo 11 was built on the failure of previous missions, the given lives of the astronauts who were explorers and pioneers in their own right. The Astronauts of the shuttles delivered satellites that have revolutionized communications, weather forecasting, military security, scientific discovery. And yes, there have been failures, namely Challenger and Columbia, but those Astronauts would, if you talked to them today, would gladly have sacrificed themselves for the continuing efforts of NASA to push towards the frontiers of space.
But those dreams are coming to a close. The Space Shuttle program is soon to be retired, due to the age of the crafts, and with Obama slashing NASA's budget, there won't be any American space missions for the foreseeable future. We will have to hitch rides on Russian shuttles. It marks a sad time when the government no longer sees the pioneering spirit of America as being worth pursuing. Other countries will become the pioneers, and their successes will bring financial and scientific success, and we will have to catch up, which is all but impossible. It is very conceivable, then, that the first Moon Colony will fly the flag of the Chinese, bringing Communism and a government controlled state to the planets of our solar system. It will not be the individual that strikes out on his own, on ships or wagons or on foot, but the machinery of the state that will conquer the frontier before those that would be pioneers could get there to experience freedom. In this case, why bother?
As in the movie Contact, there is a hope that the private citizens of this world would finance space exploration independently of governments. Those such as Richard Branson's company, or those that operate out of Burns Flat, Oklahoma, might achieve commercial space flight soon. The argument for profitable space flight is one that borders on science-fiction speculation, or the wonders of the pioneers mental state. One of my friends on Facebook, D. Shockley, was discussing this subject after I had mentioned the cut in NASA's budget. He said, [his words in italics]:
Space cannot be commercialized beyond launching satellites because there is no direct profitable reason to do so. Is it reasonable to expect business to fund excursions to the Moon and Mars to find a profitability? No it really isn't. However, and I can't believe I'm goin' to say this, government funded space research in the past has lead to leaps of technology the we enjoy today. Microwave ovens, terrestrial satellite, tang, food preservation, microchips. The sheer irrational desire to beat the Russians to the moon pointed the way to profitable avenues with which business could latch onto and consumers enjoy newer and cheaper things. Maybe there are ways to commercialize the Moon and Mars, but until it can be demonstrated, it far far too uncertain for real business, unfortunately. Sorry John Carmack, your space company is an unprofitable pipe dream!
Very good points, and I agree with him up to the last line. Yes, the dream of flying into space privately, for profit and personal gain, is a pipe dream, because the cost of such an endeavor far outweighs the gain, for now. But like most pioneers in the past, those dreams have to be fulfilled. It is an obsession that mankind has to go beyond what is currently known. We have always been driven to understand everything. If something can't be done, we find a way to do it. While gravity is a universal force, there is very little that gravity can do to keep us here on this planet when the rest of the universe awaits us. So let the dreamers dream, and let them put it into practice. Give Icarus the chance to make his wings and to fly them, and hope he does not fly too close to the sun. We should support and encourage all those who want to be the pioneers of the 21st century. As Ayn Rand said in her lecture "Apollo and Dionysus," it is of the utmost importance that we reach for the stars, lest we become stuck in the mud and the grime of home.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
Phintastic and Ferbalicious
Escapism and the Disney Channel
Ray Bradbury painted a picture of our world, in "The Pedestrian," one of glowing windows, blue and flickering, with televisions on and running, far into the night. The street lights in the neighborhoods illuminate nothing, for no one is out, even in the evenings, sitting on rocking chairs as they did before the invention of the picture box. I will admit it freely, the television plays a key role in my getting to sleep at night. There's nothing like the inane ramblings of Sportscenter to erase all pesky thoughts from your mind, resulting in the descent into the dream world.
But during the day...ah...that is when the television truly shines as a vehicle of escape. Tolkien once called the need for escapism heroic. Using the metaphor of the prisoner, he states, "Why should a man be scorned if, finding himself in prison, he tries to get out and go home? Or if, when he cannot do so, he thinks and talks about other topics than jailers and prison-walls?" ("On Fairy Stories" from The Tolkien Reader) In such a time as this, when the flood of information both depressing and horrifying, there is a great need for escapism, for books and television shows that bring us out of the world of adult responsibility and into the blissful innocence of Blake's "Lamb".
I can honestly say that I love the Disney Channel. While the movies they've produced, both animated and live, haven't really done anything for me (the last Disney Movie I really liked was The Thirteenth Year, which was made in 97.), their recent sitcom series have been absolutely amazing. Yes, the characters are stereotyped and flawed (the intelligent poor character, the rich stupid character, the idiotic parent...), and the episode plots so predictable that you can see the ending for miles. But there's something about the world that they have created that makes it very appealing. In each episode, life's problems are solved within 22 minutes (11 for Phineas and Ferb). If only real life were like that. And while sit-coms have been doing this for years (watch an episode or two of Full House, if you can stomach it), Disney has perfected the style and made it applicable not only for children, but for adults as well.
Phineas and Ferb deserves more discussion. It's the best show on television, and it could last as long as The Simpsons because it's animated, and summer can last much longer than the 104 days the title sequence talks about. The writers also worked on Family Guy, and so P&F contains quick glimpses of adult culture while remaining accessible for children of any age. I could, and have, just left that show, along with Suite Life, Hannah Montana, and Wizards of Waverly Place, on all afternoon, while doing chores, taking a nap, or whatever, and it wiles the hours away. Now if they could only switch Nickelodeon's ICarly with Disney's deplorable Sonny with a Chance, I would have all the good shows on one station.
Each show is entirely livable. As if in a dream. I could live on the S.S. Tipton forever, or aside the beach near Hannah Montana's house.... great stuff. It's why they are all escapist television shows. Assuredly, most of the shows on nowadays are just that, but none that looks back quite as well into the world of naivete and innocence as those on the Disney Channel. Reality shows show people conniving and primitive, fighting amongst themselves for food, power, love, money. It is the wost type of sport. Leave "Reality" TV to find a pastime worse than the Ancient Romans could have ever dreamed. Or, as in American Idol, they show people whose dreams are crushed, evaluated, and eliminated, all by "celebrity" judges. Dramas and other sitcoms on network TV show the vilest of human creatures, and they point out that even the good guys have their flaws. It is rare and unexpected when Law & Order leaves you with and ending with everything tied up. It mostly leaves you hanging, wondering, questioning the justice of the world that it portrays. I can barely watch these shows.
Rather, if I have to choose the television shows to watch, I would switch between Disney Channel and Star Trek, as that show looks forward into the future of what man can become, even if it is unrealistic. The fantasy world Roddenberry created is one of potential, of the success and preservation of the best of mankind. There is very little positivity in the shows anymore, and it is a gem to actually find a show that does.
***
When philosophers and historians look back at the time following WWII, they'll label this period The Age of Escapism.... Brief history esson:
Reason: ~1650-1776 (Man is capable of knowing anything)
Romanticism 1776-1865 (Man lives in a world with Physical and Supernatural realms, and we must strive for the unknown, knowing it is a futile task.)
Realism 1865-WW1 (Man lives in reality only, and Nature is cold and uncaring)
Modernism WW1-WW2 (Man must question whether he exists at all, nothing really matters, communication is impossible, all history has failed us, and we must struggle to find something new.)
This is, of course, a brief and probably very simplistic look at how mankind has looked at his world. To this, I would add, from 1945 to now, the Age of Escapism. Man can live in this world, but as so much information floods his mind, it becomes impossible to grasp a hold of anything. Therefore, we should live in worlds of fantasy, letting that which we cannot understand go unacknowledged.
I could actually write a book detailing how our world has convinced us that living in worlds of fantasy is the best action to take. From Brave New World (Huxley) to the ideas of Communism and Socialism, to the Youth Revolution of the 1960's, it all can point back to the idea that mankind can live in fantasy worlds while those who want the power (who also are living in fantasy worlds) take care of us.
As soon as the world had the ability to create the material goods that it does now, thanks mostly to capitalists like Henry Ford and his mass production of goods on assembly lines, people started to advertise that this or that item could change the world. And I don't just mean television, although that invention opened up people's minds to worlds far beyond what mere books could contrive. Capitalism in America created the wealth necessary to allow people to chase after their own fantasy worlds. To pursue their addictions, from food (now available in microwaveable, artificial goodness), to drugs and sex, to the endless halls of the Internet, where any fantasy can become real, as long as it's made of HTML language.
The mass production of books also allowed authors to write more and more books, letting their minds wander as far as they could perceive, and the great boom of science fiction and fantasy genre fiction was born. It is odd that the creation of Epic Fantasy, mostly thanks to Tolkien, only happened in the 20th century, instead of centuries before. And now dragons, vampires, wizards, amongst the other space aliens, etc... now pervade our books and our imaginations. For every mind that exists, there is an ideal world to escape to, when the labors of everyday life get too taxing.
***
So I shall go home this afternoon, turn on the Disney Channel, and forget about the things I should be doing, about the world around me, and tread water. It's not the most productive thing to do with my life. It's not going to get me further in life, but it reminds me, amongst all the tragedy and "reality" of this world, that things could be, or might be better. In this way, I'll get the best of both worlds.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Haiti: The New Frontier
I know that political posts are too numerous to count these days. And it seems that I've turned continuously to the subject for reflection, especially since reading Ayn Rand's works. Events in this world, as I've discovered, cannot be evaluated without looking at the ideologies that run it. And since I can honestly say I don't care for the platforms of either Republicans or Democrats, I have to search for what I do believe in. World events help to put this in perspective.
Thus we come to Haiti. Natural disasters occur frequently throughout the world, bringing misery, death, corruption. They bring to light the best and the worst in human nature. They also elucidate what has been missing for so long, "the safety valve." The unique aspect of the Haitian disaster is that, since the country is so small, the earthquake devastated the entire country. The infrastructure, the government, everything, wiped away. Thus the people there have to begin anew.
What an opportunity, to start over again. To erase the old ways and create new ways of living. A responsible and self-aware human being would jump at the chance to create a society, to borrow a religious phrase, in their own image. We used to have that ability, freely, in this world, before every corner was explored and colonized. The frontier, the lands beyond human habitation, for which we were the pioneers that started over just by traveling over the land and seas, away from corrupt governments and totalitarian religious systems, to live in our own way. Naturally, I would think of the Utopian land of John Galt in Atlas Shrugged, but Ms. Taggart was right in that book, too, when she looked back in admiration to her ancestors who built the railroads across the country to give people the chance to build their own lives, out of the land and the soil and the rocks and the gold.
For more information on the idea of Frontiers, especially of Fredrick Jackson Turner's idea of the "Safety Valve" and the American West, check out this link. Great stuff!
One day, in the future, we will be given that chance again, when human technology gives us the chance to expand the frontier beyond our planet, to the regions that Roddenberry imagined. But for now, this isn't possible. We have to make do with circumstances that provide us with frontiers here, today. The rebuilding of a country, out of the catastrophes, either man made or natural, give us a unique chance to start another experiment, much like that of the United States, some 200 years ago. Haiti, I'm afraid, will not be given that chance, because some of the government is still left, and our current government won't take over. I wouldn't want them to, anyway.
***
Instead, we hear on the television, on the radio, constant pleas for donations of money (which we don't have in abundance), charged to our cell phone bills (to which the telecommunication companies profit), or added on to our grocery bills, to be taken down to Haiti by some domestic non-profit organization, and used to rebuild the ruined infrastructure. Or, the donations might be given to international organizations that might do the ame thing, only to have the money disappear into the pockets of corrupt politicians, upstart military generals, and those who would control the people of Haiti through meager rationing of that which we give freely to them. In my opinion, it is not money that we need to give to the people of Haiti. It is ourselves.
Investors, entrepreneurs, ambitious people with dreams of success, of building their own empires in a place where they can live their lives and pursue their dreams without being regulated and controlled...these are the ones that should go to Haiti. Those that can rebuild the infrastructure, the hospitals, the schools, the roads, these people are essential to the future of the country. Yes, it takes money, but it takes the people who can undertake the operation and create something out of the rubble. Let's turn Haiti into a country of profit, into a place of tourism, industrial businesses, and educational and scientific marvels, not a land where we've dumped money into a government that will simply waste it all, or by giving to organizations that leak money as through the cracks in the buildings around them.
I don't know how to do this, but I would start with the idea that the government (for starters, the people who would invest in the country) have a responsibility to provide the basic necessities for the people who live there. Food, water, shelter, safety. For shelter, I would look at the works of Le Corbusier, a french architect, or look at the ideas that Americans have had with turning empty train cars into housing (see earlier blogs). We can provide the water and food, and the safety is of the utmost importance. That's where our military should step in, in levels similar to those in the middle east. Call it Imperialism, call it Manifest Destiny, whatever you will, but the idea of turning an impoverished country into one of great potential fulfills the American Dream.
So, fine, write the checks for $100 million dollars, but let's send the people to Haiti that can not only rebuild the nation's present, but build its future as well. I'd like to think that this what George W. Bush called "Compassionate Conservatism." It's a term that has been ridiculed by liberals, by the media, and misunderstood by everyone else. What could have been done better in Iraq, in Afghanistan, we have the ability to do it now, here, in Haiti. Let's lift them up, to fulfill the dreams of the impoverished, and our own as well. Let's not just shove money at them, a little food, and then leave for them to be ruled again by whomever would. It's our chance to show the world that America builds people up, and not just tears them down.
Thus we come to Haiti. Natural disasters occur frequently throughout the world, bringing misery, death, corruption. They bring to light the best and the worst in human nature. They also elucidate what has been missing for so long, "the safety valve." The unique aspect of the Haitian disaster is that, since the country is so small, the earthquake devastated the entire country. The infrastructure, the government, everything, wiped away. Thus the people there have to begin anew.
What an opportunity, to start over again. To erase the old ways and create new ways of living. A responsible and self-aware human being would jump at the chance to create a society, to borrow a religious phrase, in their own image. We used to have that ability, freely, in this world, before every corner was explored and colonized. The frontier, the lands beyond human habitation, for which we were the pioneers that started over just by traveling over the land and seas, away from corrupt governments and totalitarian religious systems, to live in our own way. Naturally, I would think of the Utopian land of John Galt in Atlas Shrugged, but Ms. Taggart was right in that book, too, when she looked back in admiration to her ancestors who built the railroads across the country to give people the chance to build their own lives, out of the land and the soil and the rocks and the gold.
For more information on the idea of Frontiers, especially of Fredrick Jackson Turner's idea of the "Safety Valve" and the American West, check out this link. Great stuff!
One day, in the future, we will be given that chance again, when human technology gives us the chance to expand the frontier beyond our planet, to the regions that Roddenberry imagined. But for now, this isn't possible. We have to make do with circumstances that provide us with frontiers here, today. The rebuilding of a country, out of the catastrophes, either man made or natural, give us a unique chance to start another experiment, much like that of the United States, some 200 years ago. Haiti, I'm afraid, will not be given that chance, because some of the government is still left, and our current government won't take over. I wouldn't want them to, anyway.
***
Instead, we hear on the television, on the radio, constant pleas for donations of money (which we don't have in abundance), charged to our cell phone bills (to which the telecommunication companies profit), or added on to our grocery bills, to be taken down to Haiti by some domestic non-profit organization, and used to rebuild the ruined infrastructure. Or, the donations might be given to international organizations that might do the ame thing, only to have the money disappear into the pockets of corrupt politicians, upstart military generals, and those who would control the people of Haiti through meager rationing of that which we give freely to them. In my opinion, it is not money that we need to give to the people of Haiti. It is ourselves.
Investors, entrepreneurs, ambitious people with dreams of success, of building their own empires in a place where they can live their lives and pursue their dreams without being regulated and controlled...these are the ones that should go to Haiti. Those that can rebuild the infrastructure, the hospitals, the schools, the roads, these people are essential to the future of the country. Yes, it takes money, but it takes the people who can undertake the operation and create something out of the rubble. Let's turn Haiti into a country of profit, into a place of tourism, industrial businesses, and educational and scientific marvels, not a land where we've dumped money into a government that will simply waste it all, or by giving to organizations that leak money as through the cracks in the buildings around them.
I don't know how to do this, but I would start with the idea that the government (for starters, the people who would invest in the country) have a responsibility to provide the basic necessities for the people who live there. Food, water, shelter, safety. For shelter, I would look at the works of Le Corbusier, a french architect, or look at the ideas that Americans have had with turning empty train cars into housing (see earlier blogs). We can provide the water and food, and the safety is of the utmost importance. That's where our military should step in, in levels similar to those in the middle east. Call it Imperialism, call it Manifest Destiny, whatever you will, but the idea of turning an impoverished country into one of great potential fulfills the American Dream.
So, fine, write the checks for $100 million dollars, but let's send the people to Haiti that can not only rebuild the nation's present, but build its future as well. I'd like to think that this what George W. Bush called "Compassionate Conservatism." It's a term that has been ridiculed by liberals, by the media, and misunderstood by everyone else. What could have been done better in Iraq, in Afghanistan, we have the ability to do it now, here, in Haiti. Let's lift them up, to fulfill the dreams of the impoverished, and our own as well. Let's not just shove money at them, a little food, and then leave for them to be ruled again by whomever would. It's our chance to show the world that America builds people up, and not just tears them down.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
bbzzzzzzz....thwack!!!
Yes, it's time once again for a "Things That Bug Me!" session. It's generally where I get to rant about things I've seen, and you get to read it.
♣ I know everyone's frozen here in Conyers, GA, with the polar winds that have pummeled the area for the past week (and believe me, 40 degrees is balmy right now), and there has been some ice on the ground the past couple of days. But it's gone now, and hasn't been there forever. So what I want to know is, why do people, when I'm on my way to work up the 2 lane backroads to save time, insist on going 30 mph down the roads!!! And today was even worse. It was a Mustang sports car! Going 30... Now, as much as I totally don't care about cars or things like that, I can appreciate the potential of a Mustang when there are no police cars around. It would be the same as some old guy taking a Ferrari down the interstate at 40, when the speed limit was 70, and the car could easily go 90 without thinking about it. You bought the car! You know what it can do!! Use it!!!
It's like the guy on Price is Right this week. Fit, muscular, Adonis type guy, tall, in his mid 20's, and he gets to the Showcase Showdown and does one of these finesse spins to try and get a dollar. Spin. The. Wheel. Let it go around 8 times... show it who's boss! Drove me nuts!
I've talked about this before... using your natural talent to its fullest extent (which applies to everyone except me, see my Singing post a few weeks ago.) If you can sing...then sing. David Phelps went from this booming tenor voice with the Gaither Vocal Band to his solo career where he sang these weaker ballads. Let's punch the notes. And while my stepdad would have said that he was resting his voice, because you can actually harm it if you strain it too much over a given time, there's a part of me that says, "So?" Produce the best work you can for as long as you can, and then you can be proud of the creations that came forth. Or athletes.... Barry Sanders did it right (although for the wrong team.) He let it fly for a few years, then retired. I would suspect that he would have stayed longer had his efforts been equalled by anyone else in the organization, but the Lions are like that, even today.
♣ And I'm sure I've said this before, in another blog sometime in the past, but I'm gonna say it again. I went to Blockbuster and was instantly greeted by the cashier as I came in....well, sort of. She said, "Hello," but never looked up from what she was doing, never acknowledged I had come in outside of the bell on the door that announced that someone had come in. Unacceptable behavior, in my opinion. If I am working near a door at Borders, I will move around a shelf and make sure they see me. Make eye contact. It's the best way of letting some know you're there, and you care about them. Of course, if Blockbuster let's this behavior go on like they do (and this isn't the only Blockbuster I've seen that does this,) it's no wonder they look like they're on their last leg. They must have better customer service that that if they hope to stay open. That mistake alone would make me want to order from Netflix, or download them online through, um, other means.
Just imagine what Blockbuster would be like if there were employees there that truly cared about the product they were selling, and were experts at that field, and good in giving customer service. Then, all the customers that call up Borders and ask, "I'm lookin' for that movie that has Johnny Depp in it...you know the one I mean?" could call Blockbuster and the employees there would actually know and could order it or have it in stock. That would be a service that even Wal-Mart could not duplicate, even with the low prices. And then, if Blockbuster had contracts with the major studios, they could easily have a downloadable center where empty DVD's could be made into movies, complete with the covers on the DVD's, and the packaging...etc... Talk about a considerable cut in costs, as well as the availability of thousands of movies without actually having to process them or wait for them in the mail. This would set Blockbuster back on the road to profitability, but I doubt it will ever happen. I described something like this for bookstores a year or two back.
♣ And speaking of bugs...I think scientists need to introduce a DNA strand that makes cockroaches taste like chicken. Undoubtedly, bad taste is something that the bugs use to keep animals from eating them. Because my cat, while she'll chase after moths and lizards and whatever else, totally ignores roaches, even though they run about by the dozens. But if scientists were to introduce a slight change into the pests genetic makeup, like making them smell like tuna or something, they would become a viable food source for bigger animals. Just a thought..... :)
♣ I know everyone's frozen here in Conyers, GA, with the polar winds that have pummeled the area for the past week (and believe me, 40 degrees is balmy right now), and there has been some ice on the ground the past couple of days. But it's gone now, and hasn't been there forever. So what I want to know is, why do people, when I'm on my way to work up the 2 lane backroads to save time, insist on going 30 mph down the roads!!! And today was even worse. It was a Mustang sports car! Going 30... Now, as much as I totally don't care about cars or things like that, I can appreciate the potential of a Mustang when there are no police cars around. It would be the same as some old guy taking a Ferrari down the interstate at 40, when the speed limit was 70, and the car could easily go 90 without thinking about it. You bought the car! You know what it can do!! Use it!!!
It's like the guy on Price is Right this week. Fit, muscular, Adonis type guy, tall, in his mid 20's, and he gets to the Showcase Showdown and does one of these finesse spins to try and get a dollar. Spin. The. Wheel. Let it go around 8 times... show it who's boss! Drove me nuts!
I've talked about this before... using your natural talent to its fullest extent (which applies to everyone except me, see my Singing post a few weeks ago.) If you can sing...then sing. David Phelps went from this booming tenor voice with the Gaither Vocal Band to his solo career where he sang these weaker ballads. Let's punch the notes. And while my stepdad would have said that he was resting his voice, because you can actually harm it if you strain it too much over a given time, there's a part of me that says, "So?" Produce the best work you can for as long as you can, and then you can be proud of the creations that came forth. Or athletes.... Barry Sanders did it right (although for the wrong team.) He let it fly for a few years, then retired. I would suspect that he would have stayed longer had his efforts been equalled by anyone else in the organization, but the Lions are like that, even today.
♣ And I'm sure I've said this before, in another blog sometime in the past, but I'm gonna say it again. I went to Blockbuster and was instantly greeted by the cashier as I came in....well, sort of. She said, "Hello," but never looked up from what she was doing, never acknowledged I had come in outside of the bell on the door that announced that someone had come in. Unacceptable behavior, in my opinion. If I am working near a door at Borders, I will move around a shelf and make sure they see me. Make eye contact. It's the best way of letting some know you're there, and you care about them. Of course, if Blockbuster let's this behavior go on like they do (and this isn't the only Blockbuster I've seen that does this,) it's no wonder they look like they're on their last leg. They must have better customer service that that if they hope to stay open. That mistake alone would make me want to order from Netflix, or download them online through, um, other means.
Just imagine what Blockbuster would be like if there were employees there that truly cared about the product they were selling, and were experts at that field, and good in giving customer service. Then, all the customers that call up Borders and ask, "I'm lookin' for that movie that has Johnny Depp in it...you know the one I mean?" could call Blockbuster and the employees there would actually know and could order it or have it in stock. That would be a service that even Wal-Mart could not duplicate, even with the low prices. And then, if Blockbuster had contracts with the major studios, they could easily have a downloadable center where empty DVD's could be made into movies, complete with the covers on the DVD's, and the packaging...etc... Talk about a considerable cut in costs, as well as the availability of thousands of movies without actually having to process them or wait for them in the mail. This would set Blockbuster back on the road to profitability, but I doubt it will ever happen. I described something like this for bookstores a year or two back.
♣ And speaking of bugs...I think scientists need to introduce a DNA strand that makes cockroaches taste like chicken. Undoubtedly, bad taste is something that the bugs use to keep animals from eating them. Because my cat, while she'll chase after moths and lizards and whatever else, totally ignores roaches, even though they run about by the dozens. But if scientists were to introduce a slight change into the pests genetic makeup, like making them smell like tuna or something, they would become a viable food source for bigger animals. Just a thought..... :)
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Book Review: The Reliable Wife, by Robert Goolrick
Once again, this is a debut novel by an author who has great potential, with his ability to write about life in a revealing way, that shows the inner grubs that lay hidden beneath the rocks. The language is sparse, lyrical, and in the beginning, very well done.
But as this is a debut novel, and most authors do not write their masterpieces right out of the gate, this book does has its flaws. There are paragraphs that are identical in message and tone, almost right next to each other, as if one wasn't enough. Some of the plot lines come from nowhere, and dissolves into nowhere, leaving a spot that is essential to the plot, but not woven into it.
In some areas I was left longing for the lyrical writings of Ian McEwan, as he wrote in Enduring Love, but I ended up getting that of his Cement Garden. So his style is not yet to the potential that he has. His message, though, is very much there.
Like in The Piano Teacher, and in other books, there were spots of time in which, if the character had stopped, and lived, it would have been a happy ending. There were times of peace for Charlene, in Ralph's farmhouse at the beginning, while reading Whitman and taking walks in the frozen wasteland. Or in St. Louis, reading books of gardening in the libraries. In each of these cases, she had sustained some level of contentment. And this is the state we all yearn to arrive at one day. However, much like the characters in the book, this is not possible for any of us. Further steps are taken, the center cannot hold, to quote Keats. For people desire more than just contentment. They want the pleasures and wild joys that one only finds at the peaks of emotions, little knowing that, in most cases, the depths of depression lie just over the cliff.
Goolrick takes the decadent life that the characters like Antonio has and shows what happens when people take that step away from contentment. It reminds me, again, of the party scene in Cloverfield, where self-indulgent 20 somethings drink away the night, talking about their futures as if nothing could stop them, little knowing the monster about to attack their city. The prostitutes and their men, the druggies and the people that supply them, they all played the game and end up, at the end, where Charlene's sister did, in the slums.
The book is about control and happiness, and in the end, the conclusion that, much like Voltaire's Candide, the only happiness to reach in this world is when we "tend our gardens." The work of creating beauty out of a world of chaos, raising a family, this is what Voltaire and Goolrick try to achieve at the end. But as in Candide, the journey is not without heartbreak, loss, unspeakable joys, and unspeakable horrors.
I look forward to his next book, as his writing craft will undoubtedly improve. The book gave me much to think about, and much to write on, which is all I can ask.
But as this is a debut novel, and most authors do not write their masterpieces right out of the gate, this book does has its flaws. There are paragraphs that are identical in message and tone, almost right next to each other, as if one wasn't enough. Some of the plot lines come from nowhere, and dissolves into nowhere, leaving a spot that is essential to the plot, but not woven into it.
In some areas I was left longing for the lyrical writings of Ian McEwan, as he wrote in Enduring Love, but I ended up getting that of his Cement Garden. So his style is not yet to the potential that he has. His message, though, is very much there.
Like in The Piano Teacher, and in other books, there were spots of time in which, if the character had stopped, and lived, it would have been a happy ending. There were times of peace for Charlene, in Ralph's farmhouse at the beginning, while reading Whitman and taking walks in the frozen wasteland. Or in St. Louis, reading books of gardening in the libraries. In each of these cases, she had sustained some level of contentment. And this is the state we all yearn to arrive at one day. However, much like the characters in the book, this is not possible for any of us. Further steps are taken, the center cannot hold, to quote Keats. For people desire more than just contentment. They want the pleasures and wild joys that one only finds at the peaks of emotions, little knowing that, in most cases, the depths of depression lie just over the cliff.
Goolrick takes the decadent life that the characters like Antonio has and shows what happens when people take that step away from contentment. It reminds me, again, of the party scene in Cloverfield, where self-indulgent 20 somethings drink away the night, talking about their futures as if nothing could stop them, little knowing the monster about to attack their city. The prostitutes and their men, the druggies and the people that supply them, they all played the game and end up, at the end, where Charlene's sister did, in the slums.
The book is about control and happiness, and in the end, the conclusion that, much like Voltaire's Candide, the only happiness to reach in this world is when we "tend our gardens." The work of creating beauty out of a world of chaos, raising a family, this is what Voltaire and Goolrick try to achieve at the end. But as in Candide, the journey is not without heartbreak, loss, unspeakable joys, and unspeakable horrors.
I look forward to his next book, as his writing craft will undoubtedly improve. The book gave me much to think about, and much to write on, which is all I can ask.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Tyger, Tiger: Tiger Woods and Hard Core Pornography
It's all about control, really. Money and sex and power. Politics and manipulation. It's who we are. Trying to come up with some excuse for living. To find some niche in this world and to make something out of ourselves. And that's where the power comes in. In Blake's world of Experience, that's what we must grow into. Finding responsibility and affluence and power in this world, without succumbing to the temptations and the vices that are so easily attained these days. And in this world are so many people that tell us how it's supposed to be, who give us the top story, the popular headlines, the promises that we'll be taken care of by those more powerful than us, but who in actuality are savvy enough to make us believe it. The government and the media, two of many forces that would make of us victims whose only recourse is to rely on others to provide for our supposed happiness.
And Tiger Woods was just one of many victims to fall for the temptations of this world. He was a genius athlete, and the only thing that mattered was the Golf game. But companies came aside him and said, if you'll just wear this hat, or this shirt, or those shoes, will give you money. Or drive away in this car, shave with this razor... the list is endless. We'll even give to your own non-profit organization, help the kids in the urban centers play golf and forget their troubles for a while (or whatever). Make you think you're doing good for other people. Just become a walking billboard. And the other temptations.... the ones that got him into trouble..... yes, he was the victim in these actions. But we ought not to take pity on him.
For he was the one who gave them permission to do those things, to say what they say, to control his life for him. He gave them the sanction to profit off of his abilities. And now, without him, they will have to find some other gifted soul to make money off of. Perhaps it will be some tennis phenom, or the gifted pitcher for the Yankees. Who knows...
***
I was recently listening to a lecture given by Ayn Rand in the mid 1970's, called "Censorship, Local and Express," where she outlined the major Supreme Court cases for Obscenity rulings. The rulings, she found, were quite interesting, and I found a direct connection between pornography and Tiger Woods.
Modern pornography is an indirect result of the media on which it is produced. There were, of course, paintings that were considered obscene long before the camera and the photograph were invented. The invention of television didn't affect the amount of porn that was produced in the beginning, as, outside of 8mm reels that were located in adult Nickelodeons and movie theaters even up to the 1970's, there was no way to experience pornography at home except for magazines and still shots in books...etc.... Admittedly, the invention of the Polaroid camera did what the Internet did in terms of bringing the recording of desires into the forefront, as now photographs could be made instantly, and in private, so that everyone now could have pictures of their desires (be it legal or not). It was ultimately the invention of the VCR that made pornography available to all citizens.
But that is just the history of porn through the lens of the media that made it. To stem the tide of such material, various court cases were argued in the 1970's. The most important case was Miller vs. California in 1972. Miller was convicted of sending unsolicited advertisements of sexually explicit magazines to people, and so he argued that the conviction violated his 1st Amendment rights. The Supreme Court heard the case and upheld the lower courts decision. It was the reasoning for this upholding that interests me. Chief Justice Warren Burger showed that, to hold trial on an obscene work (I'll let Wikipedia do my work for me):
However, as Rand pointed out, there are no definitions given to what may be offensive, or who an "average person" might be. Also, what are the "contemporary community standards" that a work must be judged upon? In other words, the conservative Judges ruled that the government has the right to deem something obscene, and therefore, exempt from 1st Amendment protection, by some vague idea of moral law, that which could change from courtroom to courtroom.
There were other judges that upheld the lower courts decision based on the idea that Interstate business transactions had been made, so the federal government had the right to regulate those transactions. This reason was given by some of the more liberal Judges, who, although disagreeing with the idea of regulating based on moral principles, at least ideologically, found it easier to regulate business transactions as regulations of material things.
I have always said, even before I had heard it in Rand's lecture, that the Republican politicians are very willing to have small government, as long as they retain the right to regulate moral or ethical laws. Democrats find it abhorrent to regulate morality; however, they see a large, powerful government as a way of taking care of its citizens, regulating the material and business transactions in order to maintain control over people's lives. Neither method of control is acceptable, in my opinion. Rand goes a step further, in saying that the two political parties control those issues that they value most. In short, the Democrats want to control your things, your material possessions, while the Republicans want to control your mind, your thoughts.
So where am I going with all this? As I was listening to this lecture, I recalled the issues that the media brought up about Tiger Woods. The arguments against Tiger fall into two camps. He has committed immoral acts according to "community standards" and therefore should be allowed to fall from the pedestal on which he has been placed (note that the media is the entity that put him there). In doing so, he has committed a breach of contract from the businesses using him as a billboard, staining their image and decreasing profits. The stories you hear on the news is either shocking revelations of immorality, or how many sponsors have pulled their use of Tiger in advertisements.
It all comes down to control. One opinion is outraged over the immorality of the act, and the other revels over the loss in profit from failed business ventures. In each case, we oogle over the acts done, and the money lost. And all the while, the media profits from increased ratings. As they should, as we have become programmed to emotional outrage over immoral acts (to the point of getting pitchforks and branding torches), or in morbid curiosity over the loss of so much profit, as if in satisfaction that the loss of revenue somehow makes us feel better. The media realizes all this and feeds us other people's failures, so that we might feel good about ourselves. We have become a society in which success is tolerated as long as we can profit from it. And failure is expected, even anticipated, as the vultures look forward to pulling every last scrap off the bone.
There are people who look past the scavenging vultures and reach a conclusion far beyond the World of Experience. In the case of pornography, Justice William O. Douglas said that the Government had no right to interfere in the private lives of its citizens, and hailed the 1st Amendment as protection against censorship and control by a Authoritarian government. His opinion echoes that of Voltaire, and also of many Libertarian voices today. Each individual has the right to determine what is obscene and what isn't, and if they decide that a work is obscene, they should refrain from experiencing it.
In the case of Tiger Woods, the dissenting voice comes from Mike Huckabee, who stressed that ultimately, this is an individual problem for Tiger and his family. The public has no right to interfere or examine the private lives of individuals, even "celebrities" such as Tiger and his wife. We should all be examining issues that actually concern us, issues that were so easily put aside by the media and our own brains. Immorality and Failure are far more interesting than Health Care, or the supposed Environmental crisis. It's not the media's ultimate fault that we were so easily distracted. It is ours. We have given them the sanction to victimize Tiger Woods, to pull apart his flesh and expose him to the world, while we sit back and watch. They are simply doing what will make them profit, what will give them control over our lives. We have become a society of onlookers, like those who slow down gandering at traffic accidents. We have become the people sitting in Plato's Cave, watching the shadows of images on the wall, while those who control the fire do as they please.
[Not exactly sure I got where I wanted to go with this, so I'll edit it later. If anyone actually reads this, thoughts would be appreciated.]
And Tiger Woods was just one of many victims to fall for the temptations of this world. He was a genius athlete, and the only thing that mattered was the Golf game. But companies came aside him and said, if you'll just wear this hat, or this shirt, or those shoes, will give you money. Or drive away in this car, shave with this razor... the list is endless. We'll even give to your own non-profit organization, help the kids in the urban centers play golf and forget their troubles for a while (or whatever). Make you think you're doing good for other people. Just become a walking billboard. And the other temptations.... the ones that got him into trouble..... yes, he was the victim in these actions. But we ought not to take pity on him.
For he was the one who gave them permission to do those things, to say what they say, to control his life for him. He gave them the sanction to profit off of his abilities. And now, without him, they will have to find some other gifted soul to make money off of. Perhaps it will be some tennis phenom, or the gifted pitcher for the Yankees. Who knows...
***
I was recently listening to a lecture given by Ayn Rand in the mid 1970's, called "Censorship, Local and Express," where she outlined the major Supreme Court cases for Obscenity rulings. The rulings, she found, were quite interesting, and I found a direct connection between pornography and Tiger Woods.
Modern pornography is an indirect result of the media on which it is produced. There were, of course, paintings that were considered obscene long before the camera and the photograph were invented. The invention of television didn't affect the amount of porn that was produced in the beginning, as, outside of 8mm reels that were located in adult Nickelodeons and movie theaters even up to the 1970's, there was no way to experience pornography at home except for magazines and still shots in books...etc.... Admittedly, the invention of the Polaroid camera did what the Internet did in terms of bringing the recording of desires into the forefront, as now photographs could be made instantly, and in private, so that everyone now could have pictures of their desires (be it legal or not). It was ultimately the invention of the VCR that made pornography available to all citizens.
But that is just the history of porn through the lens of the media that made it. To stem the tide of such material, various court cases were argued in the 1970's. The most important case was Miller vs. California in 1972. Miller was convicted of sending unsolicited advertisements of sexually explicit magazines to people, and so he argued that the conviction violated his 1st Amendment rights. The Supreme Court heard the case and upheld the lower courts decision. It was the reasoning for this upholding that interests me. Chief Justice Warren Burger showed that, to hold trial on an obscene work (I'll let Wikipedia do my work for me):
The basic guidelines for the trier of fact must be: (a) whether 'the average person, applying contemporary community standards would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. (from the article on Obscenity)
However, as Rand pointed out, there are no definitions given to what may be offensive, or who an "average person" might be. Also, what are the "contemporary community standards" that a work must be judged upon? In other words, the conservative Judges ruled that the government has the right to deem something obscene, and therefore, exempt from 1st Amendment protection, by some vague idea of moral law, that which could change from courtroom to courtroom.
There were other judges that upheld the lower courts decision based on the idea that Interstate business transactions had been made, so the federal government had the right to regulate those transactions. This reason was given by some of the more liberal Judges, who, although disagreeing with the idea of regulating based on moral principles, at least ideologically, found it easier to regulate business transactions as regulations of material things.
I have always said, even before I had heard it in Rand's lecture, that the Republican politicians are very willing to have small government, as long as they retain the right to regulate moral or ethical laws. Democrats find it abhorrent to regulate morality; however, they see a large, powerful government as a way of taking care of its citizens, regulating the material and business transactions in order to maintain control over people's lives. Neither method of control is acceptable, in my opinion. Rand goes a step further, in saying that the two political parties control those issues that they value most. In short, the Democrats want to control your things, your material possessions, while the Republicans want to control your mind, your thoughts.
So where am I going with all this? As I was listening to this lecture, I recalled the issues that the media brought up about Tiger Woods. The arguments against Tiger fall into two camps. He has committed immoral acts according to "community standards" and therefore should be allowed to fall from the pedestal on which he has been placed (note that the media is the entity that put him there). In doing so, he has committed a breach of contract from the businesses using him as a billboard, staining their image and decreasing profits. The stories you hear on the news is either shocking revelations of immorality, or how many sponsors have pulled their use of Tiger in advertisements.
It all comes down to control. One opinion is outraged over the immorality of the act, and the other revels over the loss in profit from failed business ventures. In each case, we oogle over the acts done, and the money lost. And all the while, the media profits from increased ratings. As they should, as we have become programmed to emotional outrage over immoral acts (to the point of getting pitchforks and branding torches), or in morbid curiosity over the loss of so much profit, as if in satisfaction that the loss of revenue somehow makes us feel better. The media realizes all this and feeds us other people's failures, so that we might feel good about ourselves. We have become a society in which success is tolerated as long as we can profit from it. And failure is expected, even anticipated, as the vultures look forward to pulling every last scrap off the bone.
There are people who look past the scavenging vultures and reach a conclusion far beyond the World of Experience. In the case of pornography, Justice William O. Douglas said that the Government had no right to interfere in the private lives of its citizens, and hailed the 1st Amendment as protection against censorship and control by a Authoritarian government. His opinion echoes that of Voltaire, and also of many Libertarian voices today. Each individual has the right to determine what is obscene and what isn't, and if they decide that a work is obscene, they should refrain from experiencing it.
In the case of Tiger Woods, the dissenting voice comes from Mike Huckabee, who stressed that ultimately, this is an individual problem for Tiger and his family. The public has no right to interfere or examine the private lives of individuals, even "celebrities" such as Tiger and his wife. We should all be examining issues that actually concern us, issues that were so easily put aside by the media and our own brains. Immorality and Failure are far more interesting than Health Care, or the supposed Environmental crisis. It's not the media's ultimate fault that we were so easily distracted. It is ours. We have given them the sanction to victimize Tiger Woods, to pull apart his flesh and expose him to the world, while we sit back and watch. They are simply doing what will make them profit, what will give them control over our lives. We have become a society of onlookers, like those who slow down gandering at traffic accidents. We have become the people sitting in Plato's Cave, watching the shadows of images on the wall, while those who control the fire do as they please.
[Not exactly sure I got where I wanted to go with this, so I'll edit it later. If anyone actually reads this, thoughts would be appreciated.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
