Thoughts from Oklahoma

I've had a very introspective day. I've spent the day working on the house on our farm. 160 acres, a quarter section, that was originally the property of my great-grandfather and the house that sits on that land was built by my great-grandfather and is the birthplace of my grandfather. It's in a state of most disrepair. My job today was to patch up the outside walls so that the weather couldn't come into the house through all the cracks. I didn't end up getting all that done, but I did get the backroom of the house cleaned out. It's been boarded up back there and there was a bunch of interesting old things in there, including a Dr. Pepper bottle that has the old 10-2-4 logo. (Dr. Pepper's recipe used to include prune juice and was originally marketed as a drink to keep you "regular". Read: laxative).

Between working with this old house and being on the farm, my thoughts started meandering toward the lifestyle I currently lead. There's been much talk recently about the price of oil and the cost of gasoline and so forth and so on; the kind of talk I've been hearing (and believing) the large majority of my life. I've also happened to hit an economic low of my own (lower than I've ever previously been, which, if you know me, is saying something). I've been thinking of ways to live that are cheaper than common way. Heating with wood, having only one room in the house that uses electricity, I was even thinking today (because I saw an old breadbox) about the possibility of food storage by vacuum rather than refrigeration. And I started thinking once again about the, as I see it, inevitable end of "modern living". I presume that as oil runs low, machine usage will decrease due to cost and lack of availability of lubricants, and that this will in turn increase the cost of electricity. My thinking hasn't really gone beyond that, because oil and electricity are probably the two aspects of modern living that I rely upon the most. I don't think that there will be any significant change in lifestyle for this country during my lifetime, except perhaps towards the end of my life, but I do think that in the lifetimes beyond my own, reasonably shortly after my own, there will be significant lifestyle changes.

So, I started thinking: what would I miss the most? I can tell you that of the three things about modern life I love the most: cars, stereos, and refrigeration, I'll miss music the most. It's almost impossible for me to imagine a life in which I cannot turn on a device and hear music. The few times I have had to go for any length (like a week) without electronically reproduced music have left me rather depressed. It's the one thing I go out of my way to ensure availability of. If I'm going anywhere for any length of time, a means of listening to music is a must. Ipod, stereo, Discman, computer, Walkman, whatever, I've got one. I don't worry about food or transportation nor money hardly, but music is right at the top of the list. I always have a way to listen to music with the highest quality I can reasonalby muster.

So... here's a list:
Can you imagine lifestyle where the only time you hear music is if someone in your range of hearing is creating it?
Can you imagine lifestyle where there are no electric lights? Once the sun goes down, candles and fire are all you've got.
Can you imagine a lifestyle where there are no cars? Not just because you can't afford one, but because nobody can. You're not jumping a ride with a friend, or taking the bus. It's bicycles, horses, and feet.
Can you imagine a lifestyle without fast food? Without grocery stores? No, you can't get strawberries year-round?

I could go on but I won't. The point is not to scare, nor to educate either, but more to point out that the lifestyle I take for granted, poor as I am, is luxurious in the light of history, and, I think, destined to be short-lived. And when this luxury becomes economically unfeasible, what will it be like? I completely take for granted all kinds of "basic" things that are, in fact, amazing luxuries. (Hot showers... I'll miss them when they're gone, even if I'm in the grave, I'll miss hot showers...)

And I think that's more the point of what I'm saying:

These things that appear to me as "normal" are in fact totally exotic and amazingly luxurious. It's the lack of appreciation for the profound luxuries we have managed for ourselves that astounds me. The lack of people saying: "Yes, these are luxuries." I don't have a problem with luxuries, per se. I love Pizza Hut. I love hot showers. I love, love, love, being able to record and playback music. I love electric lights and the way the dashboard on a car lights up when you turn it on. I don't think they're bad things. I wouldn't even necessarily say it's bad to take down a mountain for its coal so we can have all these things, as long as we're agreed that we're willing to live with the consequences. It's like Halloween when I was a kid: I always ate all my candy quickly. I would run out in two or three weeks. My older brother would always eat his slowly and long about Thanksgiving, he'd still have some. That was okay with me. I enjoyed my candy up front, leaving nothing for the home stretch. That's a perfectly legitimate choice. Use all you've got now, live with the nothing you leave for yourself. But you should realize that is what you're doing, and nod your head in approval and say, "Yep, I'm willing to live with the consequences."

Resources are limited, and it's okay to choose how you want to use them, but acting like they are unlimited is not okay. Somebody's children are going to do without oil, unless you use oil at a lower rate than it renews itself (which it does... takes millions of years, but it does...). And that's okay. There have been people who lived prior to the mass use of oil and there will likely be people who live after the mass use of oil. It's just like passenger pigeons or dodo birds. We don't have them anymore because people used them up at a rate greater than their own renewal rate. That's a resource choice. I don't know how to evaluate whether that was a responsible choice or not, I just now I've never seen a passenger pigeon or a dodo bird. And there are going to be people who never see a car driving down the road, or who never turn on an electric light.

I'm not suggesting that resource management is outside of the realm of morality. I simply don't know how to determine the morality of resource management and so I'm suggesting that at least making responsible choices and accepting the consequences is the only appropriate decision.

I am now going to deflate my discussion and go see if I have any messages on Myspace. And then I'm going to open up the frig and cook some food and go downstairs and work on some recorded music, all the while electric lights blazing like miniature stars.

Postal for Mail

I just mailed something to Finland! It was every bit as exciting and thrilling as I expected. I think I might try to send myself to Finland soon. Heck, it's got to be the cheapest way to travel.

Also, Postal for Mail is my new band. We're going to rock the new-wave/alt-country tip. It's going to be awesome.

Quotes from Dad

The world isn't really as simple as they make you want to believe. That's only so the students can work the problems. -Omer Prewett

Coookie Crisp!

So, two days ago, I finally fulfilled a life long dream and bought a box of Cookie Crisp. I'm not joking either. When we were kids, our parents wouldn't let us have sugar cereals, so we had Ralston instead. Awesome. Kix were about as sugary as we were allowed and if you've had Kix...well, you know they're mother-approved. So, between growing up without sugar and being broke for the last eleven years, I've never managed to eat any Cookie Crisp.

I finally bought a box. And ate the contents. It was good.

A New President

Well, CNN just projected Obama as winning the presidential election, meaning should he in fact win (which he will), he will become our new president-elect. I'm glad for this, I think. I think the country needs this for it's own sake. For people to feel involved again in politics, that their vote and their voice matters, that the future is possibly better than the past. The hope generated by those who supported Obama will hopefully be infectious.

Whether Obama will actually make a good President remains to be seen. I certainly hope so, because we could certainly use one. He brings a freshness to the office and to politics in general that has been missing for far too long. I think the important question has always been, will he use his popularity and mental acuity for the whole benefit of the American people, or will he allow it to be siphoned in other directions, whether by other people or by himself? Certainly, he will not be able to enact all of the ideas he ran his campaign on. No one can do that. (Or, let's hope not!) But there is a chance that he can move the government and the people to make the changes that are best for both of them. This is never a popular thing, but it is the only important function of a leader. Doing what is best for those being lead. May he accomplish it and well.

There are a number of things I would like to speak on regarding the election. First, Obama was going to win this election. The news media did its best to portray the election as being winnable for either candidate, but in reality, Obama won this election a long time ago. And he kept winning this election. From the time the voting polls opened, McCain did not have a realistic chance. Move the voting date back or forward three months and McCain would still not have had a realistic chance.

Here are a few articles on the subject:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/04/pollster-calms-paranoid-d_n_140960.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/keith-thomson/the-most-accurate-electio_b_140181.html
http://www.eternalgambling.com/gambling-news/20081101-when-will-john-mccain-admit-defeat-in-presidential-race.html

Yes, two are regarding gambling. I got intrigued to know something about whether political betting existed and if so, what did they say about the election. It turned out to be very illuminating.

Here's Big Point Number One: with even a cursory look at the three articles I listed, it becomes clear that the general news media was not reporting what was happening in its actual context. They were reporting what was happening but not with any contextual accuracy. It is very easy to then believe that the news media was warping the news with the purpose of keeping you coming back for more. This is important. Many people have talked about the inacuracy of the news media, esp. in the right-wing, christian circles I'm familiar with. I've always believed that, but I've taken it with a grain of salt. This is, for me, very clear evidence of the what, how, and why of the news media. What are they doing? Selling you news-entertainment. How are they doing it? By setting up the scene so you come back for more. Why are they doing it? This is less clear, but my guess is that it is related to the fact that advertising pays their bills. The further issue here is that, at least as far as this presidential campaign is concerned, they have done it intentionally.

I can't say that I'm upset about this, but it certainly clarifies the attitude with which I accept the news given to me.

My only other gripe with coverage of this election is race. I'm glad Obama is African-American. If he wasn't, he wouldn't be who he is, and it's good that everyone be who they actually are and not somebody else. I have never really looked at Obama as being black. Thank goodness. The important thing to me is how he conducts himself and what he chooses.
Why is it then that the first thing the CNN people talked about after having projected him as President-Elect was his race? It's an obvious enough thing to talk about, certainly, and it is important to many people in this country and to the country's history and future, however, why such focus? I'm so glad they kept race out of their coverage as much as they did, do we have to now begin to cover that small aspect of Obama? The purpose of an election is not to elect a group of people, but individuals. If race is such a problem in this country, does it make sense to focus on race as an important thing? Is that helpful to the problem, to perpetuate the way of thinking that caused the problem in the first place? I will never discount or discredit someone's history and what went into that history. But there is a gradiation of importance, some things large, some things small. I don't think Obama won because he was African-American. So let's focus on why he won.

It is also important to keep in mind that we were going to make history in this election with either ticket. A woman has never been Vice-President. I'm sad that today wasn't the day for that. I wish Palin had been on the Obama ticket, then we could really have had a historical sweep! Maybe in four years.

Thinking over what I've just wrote, I don't mean to sound unhappy that people celebrate the election of an African-American President. I'm pretty excited about that and what that historical event could mean for this country. Maybe now people with black skin or African heritage across this nation, and across this world, will feel like they don't have to prove themselves anymore. Maybe they will feel like they are just as important and valuable as anyone else. Because of course they are. Maybe we as a culture can put the nail in the coffin of the history and practice of our bigotry. Let us hope so. I just don't want race to be the important focus, because it should never be.

Well, whew! Glad we all got through today. Glad everyone voted (largest turnout since women's suffrage)! Cheers!

-mike

Afghanistan

I watched part of a Frontline piece on the war in Afhganistan. It's got me thinking again.
I'm glad to know that there are people in the military and government that truly understand the situation there. And they truly do. They've accounted for the economic and infrastructure and other life reasons why the Taliban is likely to beat back the US the same way the beat back the Russians. I'm glad that someone understands this. It makes me feel better knowing that at least some people are not blind eyes open.

It makes me terribly sad that Afghanistan is suffering continued conflict. They have suffered on and off again conflict for the last forty or so years. Their infrastructure, such as roads, buildings, etc. has been decimated to the point of non-existence mostly. And everyone has known war, from the youngest to the oldest. The only stable government they have had in recent memory, the Taliban, have been removed from power, but no stable government has replaced them. It is very easy to understand why the insurgency has gained strength. We do not have a presence in the country capable of winning the war and the longer time goes on, the more frustration will mount and the more the people will side with anyone who can make good on a promise for stability.

So once again, I am wondering why it is that I am again searching for a good paying job to settle my debts and provide me with things. It seems... imbalanced. Completely negligent. Ostentatious.

I suppose I have an obligation to pay off my debts. That is certainly true. That still seems to pale in comparison to the needs of a country besieged. It is the continuation of this American myth that disturbs me. Certainly we all get lost wherever we find ourselves. No one can be globally objective. But even the most basic elements of humility and compassion seem to indicate the necessity for not merely a change, but a completely revamped focus.

Perhaps I am being too...tangential. Perhaps I am looking off the edge of a curve into a darkness that doesn't quite exist. Still, one can't help but feel the weight of the disparity. I live in a country that has not known invasion in 200 years. We have two reminders of conflict with a foreign entity on our soil: Pearl Harbor and 911. These are but paper cuts by comparison to the world at large. We take them quite seriously, but they are not serious in any sort of global context. Our farms have not been mortared, our buildings have not been bombed, we do not carry the lasting limp of war. We have moved freely in the world as imperialists. Setting our tents in other places for periods of time, removing them at our will. But always retreating to the physical and economic island we call home. No one has had, nor now has, the economic might to send troops across the expanse of the oceans bordering our nation and onto our soil. The only nation that has the access and ability to mount such a campaign is Russia, and it is doubtful that they are unified enough to even attempt a full scale assault on America.

It is not a hopeful case for humanity that the richest, most powerful and freest nation the world has yet seen has so many internal problems. The list of internal violence, corruption, and discord within the wall of our house is rather substantial and I've yet to meet anyone not pricked by it. But we are a garden paradise in comparison on many, many levels.

Of course, I'll forget about all this tomorrow. I'll probably bemoan my state of affairs yet again. The stresses of living in a modern cosmopolitan society. Geez. Count your blessings.

-mike

Christianity versus?

I think I just figured out something, so here's the thing: I really believe Christianity is the truth, and often times christians try to come up with "Christian" solutions to life's problems, but the reality is that we're all very much trying to learn how to be human. I do think that Christianity correctly describes the relationship between God and humanity, but the relationship between one and oneself is not necessarily the fundamental purpose of the Bible (and thus, Christianity). It's not necessarily even the fundamental purpose of God, since even before the fall, God tells people to go and make something of the Earth. i.e., that's *your* job to figure out. In some sense, God may not even entirely "know" how we are supposed to be, if that is something that we have to discover. That's not to say that the rules of God don't still apply, because obviously they do, I'm just exploring a subtle thing here.

This explains something to me.