You are not trapped in a world that you never made. You help make it, we help make it the way it is.
We are unlike the other animals and species we share this planet with in that we make our own ecosystem. There is no economy, government, religion, culture, or any human system of power or wealth distribution or perspective that we ourselves have not created. We choose to make the world we live in, and we choose our outcome as a species.
I say this because whenever I have a conversation about what I see as the misplaced priorities all around me, the answer is typically a shrug, or some general sneering expressed at my lack of understanding regarding how complex "the system" is, and that thats just the way "it" works.
But we control "it" we decide "it"..so don't tell me how fucking complicated it is. At least share in the collective responsibility we bear in a world where -
We do the absolute minimum or less to work on stopping humanity from making our world less habitable for ourselves and the other animals who live on it.
We pay people on reality TV more than we pay teachers.
We pay a football coach more than we pay the dean of the school.
We value TV celebrities more than we value scientists.
We answer someone's hunger with a scramble to figure out why their hunger is their fault.
We let our government engage in wars that are about our own imperialism.
We let our racism and our prejudices define how we feel without acknowledging that racism and prejudice is something we all have, something we all have to learn to deal with.
We consistently devalue real labor, and increase the rewards for labor which does little to enrich the many, but much to enrich the few.
We are okay with giving for profit company's more money and more profit, funding wars and the largest military the world has ever seen, but FDR's four freedoms are unattainable, education, healthcare, freedom from hunger, better human quality of life issues..these are all unattainable for the majority...but certainly taken by the few.
We are okay with rhetoric that divides us..yet anyone who travels knows that individuals will always change a preconceived perception towards a group.
Don't say "we can't do it, capitalism..its too complicated..our government won't" ...etc, etc. Don't put the problem elsewhere. We're not trapped in a world that we never made. We've chosen this one.
We make it. We can change it. It's all on us.
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Saturday, July 6, 2013
Snowden is a TRAITOR!
The Supreme Court has interpreted this to mean that no one can commit treason unless it’s with a country against whom our Congress has declared war. This means that neither the Vietnam War nor the Korean War nor the War on Terror can yield treasonous Americans, as none of these wars were declared by Congress. (MSNBC)
I find it very scary, that without evidence of real treason (which has a very clear constitutional definition) the court of public opinion, as well as both republicans and democrats, are trying Snowden on TV news. The other day, John Kerry had this to say:
When asked if he considers Snowden a traitor, Kerry said he wouldn’t “play word games about what he is or isn’t,” but went on to say that the 29-year-old is a “traitor to the oath he took to his fellow employees, to the duty he took freely by his own choice.” (New Yorker)
By this logic, ANYONE who blows the whistle on unlawful or immoral behavior is a traitor. A cop who "rats on" other cops for corruption. The soldiers who published information on Abu Ghraib. Food processing plant employees who take photos of chicken processing. Employees of the federal government who blow the whistle on as clear a violation of the fourth amendment as one will find.
All traitors according to Kerry.
It would seem that this program has the backing of both parties, so for once we have unity in creating a nationally televised two minutes hate on Edward Snowden, and this is a partisan politics free fun fest. The talking heads went from defending him and attacking the program to attacking him in a two week period. You really have to ask why.
His run from the government seems clear enough - hes a fugitive for bringing this to light, as he knew he would be. There were other NSA whistleblowers who served time for leaks on this program, as documented here.
What happens with Snowden from here on out is nothing but a distraction. It is smoke and mirrors designed to distract all of us from the continued erosion of our rights in the name of this "war on terrorism" that started with 9/11.
If you think this technology has not already been used to monitor the activity of Occupy, and other lawful protest organizations, then you are being naive.
I predict that if we capture Snowden, we will have a very public trial, where his character will be torn apart and his motives made suspect. Failing this, we will continue to excoriate him in the court of public opinion with the media and the usual suspects presiding.
We will destroy the leaker, and distract from the leak. When Edward Snowden is turned into an effeminate weakling who runs to Venezuela like the coward he is, you'll know that your fourth amendment rights are safely non existent.
Monday, June 10, 2013
Perfect Tyranny
The patriot act, hastily enacted after 9/11, was a huge turn away from policies which had at least put some policy control on domestic espionage.
In an atmosphere of fear and a ramp up to war, we allowed a hastily put together and Byzantine piece of legislation to be passed, in the hope that it would help our government keep us safe from harm.
What we gave our government is what any government would need to make it's citizens safe from an enemy which can strike from within.
The right to surveillance of all communications, which technology makes easier and easier. In our new age of all is digital, that surveillance, coupled with the increasing use of cameras allows for the monitoring of an ever increasing fraction of our lives, and with an exponentially increasing efficiency.
The control of encryption technology insures that citizens will not have an ability to prevent this.
The use of this technology will inevitably make it's way into law enforcement and intellectual property protection, making law enforcement more efficient.
And it will be abused. Because perfect law enforcement and absolute control of a society by its government has other names, and none of them have anything to do with freedom.
So if you don't like what's going on right now, and you think that blowing the whistle on it was the right thing, then please remember what we are really saying..
Which is: I will take my chances with crime and terror. With the possibility that a bomb may go off, and I will deprive my government of these tools to keep me in perfect safety because perfect safety is not worth it.
Perfect safety is a rubber room.
Providing any government with the tools of perfect tyranny, regardless of the intention goes too far.
Freedom is the ability to act without oversight, without being watched.
Freedom from fear ends with all of us in a controlled, monitored compound cowering in fear of our assailants and those who guard us from them.
Free societies require courage.
Not the kind that picks up a gun.
The kind that speaks truth to power, and votes, and says "not in my name".
The kind the NSA whistleblower displayed.
Call your representatives and tell them what Ben said...
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
In an atmosphere of fear and a ramp up to war, we allowed a hastily put together and Byzantine piece of legislation to be passed, in the hope that it would help our government keep us safe from harm.
What we gave our government is what any government would need to make it's citizens safe from an enemy which can strike from within.
The right to surveillance of all communications, which technology makes easier and easier. In our new age of all is digital, that surveillance, coupled with the increasing use of cameras allows for the monitoring of an ever increasing fraction of our lives, and with an exponentially increasing efficiency.
The control of encryption technology insures that citizens will not have an ability to prevent this.
The use of this technology will inevitably make it's way into law enforcement and intellectual property protection, making law enforcement more efficient.
And it will be abused. Because perfect law enforcement and absolute control of a society by its government has other names, and none of them have anything to do with freedom.
So if you don't like what's going on right now, and you think that blowing the whistle on it was the right thing, then please remember what we are really saying..
Which is: I will take my chances with crime and terror. With the possibility that a bomb may go off, and I will deprive my government of these tools to keep me in perfect safety because perfect safety is not worth it.
Perfect safety is a rubber room.
Providing any government with the tools of perfect tyranny, regardless of the intention goes too far.
Freedom is the ability to act without oversight, without being watched.
Freedom from fear ends with all of us in a controlled, monitored compound cowering in fear of our assailants and those who guard us from them.
Free societies require courage.
Not the kind that picks up a gun.
The kind that speaks truth to power, and votes, and says "not in my name".
The kind the NSA whistleblower displayed.
Call your representatives and tell them what Ben said...
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Thursday, April 25, 2013
Principles, pesky principles
The problem in America today is that no one understands what a principle is anymore.
Principles are guiding beacons. They are intended to define who we are, and they are rarely if ever compromised.
Principles may be expressed or implied in law, but they are not laws.
The principle of free expression may be codified in the first amendment, but the first amendment is not the principle of free expression.
Principles are awkward. They can force us to do things we don't want to do, like letting the nazis march in Skokie Illinois.
The principle of free expression demands that we defend the rights of others to express the ideas we hate the most.
Bringing in the law often provides wiggle room around these principles..for example perhaps finding some ordinance about the park or neighborhood to prevent the march.
The law allows the wiggle room to go around the principle when we find it to be inconvenient, while still patting ourselves on the back for the legality (rightness?) of our actions.
For historical perspective, the nazi party in Germany took the trouble to change the laws to make rounding up the Jews legal.
Apparently, they had a principle problem.
When we walk away from the basic principles we have as a culture, pay attention to how the laws change.
Pay attention regardless of whether you like or dislike the group it applies to, because when we abandon a principle for one, we can abandon it for all.
Our laws should reflect our principles, not the loopholes we need to create when we find them inconvenient.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Principles are guiding beacons. They are intended to define who we are, and they are rarely if ever compromised.
Principles may be expressed or implied in law, but they are not laws.
The principle of free expression may be codified in the first amendment, but the first amendment is not the principle of free expression.
Principles are awkward. They can force us to do things we don't want to do, like letting the nazis march in Skokie Illinois.
The principle of free expression demands that we defend the rights of others to express the ideas we hate the most.
Bringing in the law often provides wiggle room around these principles..for example perhaps finding some ordinance about the park or neighborhood to prevent the march.
The law allows the wiggle room to go around the principle when we find it to be inconvenient, while still patting ourselves on the back for the legality (rightness?) of our actions.
For historical perspective, the nazi party in Germany took the trouble to change the laws to make rounding up the Jews legal.
Apparently, they had a principle problem.
When we walk away from the basic principles we have as a culture, pay attention to how the laws change.
Pay attention regardless of whether you like or dislike the group it applies to, because when we abandon a principle for one, we can abandon it for all.
Our laws should reflect our principles, not the loopholes we need to create when we find them inconvenient.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Gun control ...terrorism.. This week in America.
In a week where the senate shutdown progress on background checks for guns, we were attacked by two terrorists at the Boston marathon.
We are apparently willing to pay the social safety price for defense of the second amendment, exactly as written. It goes without saying that the butchers bill for this is orders of magnitude higher than the terrorism body count, inclusive of acts both foreign and domestic.
So now, the 24 hour news cycle and partisan debate, along with politicians attempting to score political points will whip up the usual fervor of fear and patriotism..and perhaps we will prevent or undermine immigration reform as a result.
Throughout the debate and rhetoric, the recurring question will be, "How can we be sure that nothing like this will ever happen again?" The truthful answer is that we can't. There is a price for a free and open society, and that price is that we can be attacked from within.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin
If you have the courage to drive a car, cross the street, own a gun..leave your house..take a shower...you are already engaging in behaviors that put you at higher risk than terrorist attacks.
The focus and the fear we generate agonizing over this lessens us and gives strength to those that commit these acts. They are simply criminals, and unworthy of our attention apart from the effort required to remove them from our society.
Our courage and determination to remain a free society in the face of attack is the bulwark to defend and the ground we should stand on together.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
We are apparently willing to pay the social safety price for defense of the second amendment, exactly as written. It goes without saying that the butchers bill for this is orders of magnitude higher than the terrorism body count, inclusive of acts both foreign and domestic.
So now, the 24 hour news cycle and partisan debate, along with politicians attempting to score political points will whip up the usual fervor of fear and patriotism..and perhaps we will prevent or undermine immigration reform as a result.
Throughout the debate and rhetoric, the recurring question will be, "How can we be sure that nothing like this will ever happen again?" The truthful answer is that we can't. There is a price for a free and open society, and that price is that we can be attacked from within.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Ben Franklin
If you have the courage to drive a car, cross the street, own a gun..leave your house..take a shower...you are already engaging in behaviors that put you at higher risk than terrorist attacks.
The focus and the fear we generate agonizing over this lessens us and gives strength to those that commit these acts. They are simply criminals, and unworthy of our attention apart from the effort required to remove them from our society.
Our courage and determination to remain a free society in the face of attack is the bulwark to defend and the ground we should stand on together.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Thursday, March 21, 2013
The Mythology of Gun Ownershp
Before I begin this little discussion, let me say one thing. If you own a gun, and you hunt with it, then this discussion does not apply to you. If you own a gun and you shoot targets or skeet with it, then this discussion does not apply to you. If you own a gun for that weird sport where you ski cross country and then shoot targets, you're a weirdo, but this discussion does not apply to you. This post is also not about recommending laws or legislation, although I support gun control. This post is an appeal to you to consider gun ownership in the same way you evaluate other behaviors - in terms of risk/reward.
This discussion is for those of you who own a gun specifically with the idea of defending yourself against other humans, or for you batshit crazy people who think owning a gun is all that stands between freedom and tyranny in the United States. Yes, I said batshit crazy. That is the only plausible root cause for thinking that you and your little gun will prevent the US law enforcement and military organizations from creating a tyrannical society. Any rational person would point you at Syria and Libya..and their military and law enforcement is no where near as good as ours. How much do you think gun ownership is helping the rebels fight armor, heavy machine guns and air support?
If you really want to be capable of stopping tyranny enforced by our own law enforcement and military, you'll need helicopters, heavy weaponry, surface to air missiles, and a whole heap of satellite, surveillance equipment..oh yeah, and training, etc. Better go get started on all that.
As I try not to engage in conversation with crazy people, the focus of this discussion is on the rational people, who believe they own a gun because criminals have guns, and therefore they should have guns, in spite of the fact that we have very well funded and trained law enforcement, who have guns, and who our tax dollars go to to catch criminals with guns. As the United States has the highest per capita rate of incarceration in the first world, I believe our law enforcement must be pretty good - maybe too good at their jobs.
First let me give you a very rational, fact based reason you should not own a gun for this reason, or for reasons like "guns are cool". You are over three times as likely to kill yourself with it versus killing someone else.
Having a gun in your home does not make you safer. You are also (in addition to suicide) at higher risk for homicide and accidental death due to gun ownership, and so is everyone who lives with you.
Statistics on successful self defense with weapons is lacking, but we do know that in 30 years, NOT ONE MASS SHOOTING has been prevented by an armed citizen, despite the fact that we are one of the most heavily armed citizenry's in the world.
1% of gun owners report defending themselves with their weapons. However, on further review, it was found that in reality half of those cases involved the the gun owner acting aggressively, and unnecessarily.
Women - here's a tip. Don't date a gun owner. You are six times more likely to be shot by your partner then you are a complete stranger.
So here's the thing. I started to think about why we are so heated up about this, and why people are so attached to gun ownership in the face of the facts. Its such a heated argument, that it reminds me of arguing with someone who has some sort of addiction. When you argue with someone who is addicted or obsessed, rationality goes right out the window, because they have built up an internal dialog that reinforces their rationale for the addiction.
I quit smoking a few years ago, and I can tell you that what did it was not taxation, law, or pictures of blackened lungs. It was getting rid of the lies I told myself about smoking. Lies like "I get lots of work done talking to everyone on smoke breaks", or "I really enjoy smoking". Once I was honest with myself, and realized that I was addicted, and that smoking is simply feeding an addiction, it became much easier to quit.
Smoking is a reasonable analogy for my next argument, but it is flawed a little bit. See, when you smoke, you do a stupid thing that kills you a little bit every day over a long time. There is the chance that you can stop, and even that your body will repair the damage you have done to it somewhat.
When a gun owner pulls the trigger, she does something that is likely to be irrevocable. It is the stupid thing that cannot be taken back. Ever. He will deny himself, or someone else, their existence.
I don't know about you, but there are like .. hundreds.. of times I have woken up in the morning, shaken my head, and thought..wow..that was really stupid...but it sure seemed like the right idea at the time. There were consequences to all these stupid acts, sometimes bruises, sometimes headaches, sometimes socially awkward ramifications, sometimes hurt feelings. As I recall, all eventually healed.
Owning a gun is a temptation to do something stupid, that will have permanent consequences and that is very unlikely, statistically, to be one you will live through, or want to live with.
So in the face of all this sound evidence against gun ownership for self defense, or because they're cool..here's my two cents on why you really want to own one.
Our mythology.
America idealizes the idea that one man with a gun can make a difference. That its all about cleaning up this town, this neighborhood, this city...to "make it safe", to protect or avenge those he loves. Its beyond movies or violent video games. It is the mythology of our culture..the undertone of who we are..the lone gunman who rights all wrongs. Its a cool myth, and it has made for lots of cool movies and lots of cool video games. The armed man is not impotent. He can change things, and most of all, he does not have to fear "the other".
But it isn't true.
One man with a gun is far more likely to be found with his head blown off, a half drunk bottle or half empty pill bottle next to him.
One man with a gun is far more likely to commit a crime and be incarcerated.
One man with a gun is more likely to come home and find that one of his children has been shot or has shot someone.
One man with a gun is more likely to kill a loved one in a moment of rage.
I could go on, but I think you understand. Yes, people kill people. But people with guns do it more often. It's the stupid idea that can never, ever be fixed, and it happens because pulling a trigger does not take enough time to make you think about what you are about to do. Its a split second that you will never have the opportunity to take back.
Guns are like smoking, people..they are bad for us. Help America kick the habit. You'll be joining the majority by the way. Gun ownership is already on the decline.
This discussion is for those of you who own a gun specifically with the idea of defending yourself against other humans, or for you batshit crazy people who think owning a gun is all that stands between freedom and tyranny in the United States. Yes, I said batshit crazy. That is the only plausible root cause for thinking that you and your little gun will prevent the US law enforcement and military organizations from creating a tyrannical society. Any rational person would point you at Syria and Libya..and their military and law enforcement is no where near as good as ours. How much do you think gun ownership is helping the rebels fight armor, heavy machine guns and air support?
If you really want to be capable of stopping tyranny enforced by our own law enforcement and military, you'll need helicopters, heavy weaponry, surface to air missiles, and a whole heap of satellite, surveillance equipment..oh yeah, and training, etc. Better go get started on all that.
As I try not to engage in conversation with crazy people, the focus of this discussion is on the rational people, who believe they own a gun because criminals have guns, and therefore they should have guns, in spite of the fact that we have very well funded and trained law enforcement, who have guns, and who our tax dollars go to to catch criminals with guns. As the United States has the highest per capita rate of incarceration in the first world, I believe our law enforcement must be pretty good - maybe too good at their jobs.
First let me give you a very rational, fact based reason you should not own a gun for this reason, or for reasons like "guns are cool". You are over three times as likely to kill yourself with it versus killing someone else.
Having a gun in your home does not make you safer. You are also (in addition to suicide) at higher risk for homicide and accidental death due to gun ownership, and so is everyone who lives with you.
Statistics on successful self defense with weapons is lacking, but we do know that in 30 years, NOT ONE MASS SHOOTING has been prevented by an armed citizen, despite the fact that we are one of the most heavily armed citizenry's in the world.
1% of gun owners report defending themselves with their weapons. However, on further review, it was found that in reality half of those cases involved the the gun owner acting aggressively, and unnecessarily.
Women - here's a tip. Don't date a gun owner. You are six times more likely to be shot by your partner then you are a complete stranger.
So here's the thing. I started to think about why we are so heated up about this, and why people are so attached to gun ownership in the face of the facts. Its such a heated argument, that it reminds me of arguing with someone who has some sort of addiction. When you argue with someone who is addicted or obsessed, rationality goes right out the window, because they have built up an internal dialog that reinforces their rationale for the addiction.
I quit smoking a few years ago, and I can tell you that what did it was not taxation, law, or pictures of blackened lungs. It was getting rid of the lies I told myself about smoking. Lies like "I get lots of work done talking to everyone on smoke breaks", or "I really enjoy smoking". Once I was honest with myself, and realized that I was addicted, and that smoking is simply feeding an addiction, it became much easier to quit.
Smoking is a reasonable analogy for my next argument, but it is flawed a little bit. See, when you smoke, you do a stupid thing that kills you a little bit every day over a long time. There is the chance that you can stop, and even that your body will repair the damage you have done to it somewhat.
When a gun owner pulls the trigger, she does something that is likely to be irrevocable. It is the stupid thing that cannot be taken back. Ever. He will deny himself, or someone else, their existence.
I don't know about you, but there are like .. hundreds.. of times I have woken up in the morning, shaken my head, and thought..wow..that was really stupid...but it sure seemed like the right idea at the time. There were consequences to all these stupid acts, sometimes bruises, sometimes headaches, sometimes socially awkward ramifications, sometimes hurt feelings. As I recall, all eventually healed.
Owning a gun is a temptation to do something stupid, that will have permanent consequences and that is very unlikely, statistically, to be one you will live through, or want to live with.
So in the face of all this sound evidence against gun ownership for self defense, or because they're cool..here's my two cents on why you really want to own one.
Our mythology.
America idealizes the idea that one man with a gun can make a difference. That its all about cleaning up this town, this neighborhood, this city...to "make it safe", to protect or avenge those he loves. Its beyond movies or violent video games. It is the mythology of our culture..the undertone of who we are..the lone gunman who rights all wrongs. Its a cool myth, and it has made for lots of cool movies and lots of cool video games. The armed man is not impotent. He can change things, and most of all, he does not have to fear "the other".
But it isn't true.
One man with a gun is far more likely to be found with his head blown off, a half drunk bottle or half empty pill bottle next to him.
One man with a gun is far more likely to commit a crime and be incarcerated.
One man with a gun is more likely to come home and find that one of his children has been shot or has shot someone.
One man with a gun is more likely to kill a loved one in a moment of rage.
I could go on, but I think you understand. Yes, people kill people. But people with guns do it more often. It's the stupid idea that can never, ever be fixed, and it happens because pulling a trigger does not take enough time to make you think about what you are about to do. Its a split second that you will never have the opportunity to take back.
Guns are like smoking, people..they are bad for us. Help America kick the habit. You'll be joining the majority by the way. Gun ownership is already on the decline.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)