The past year has been pretty much one long heated debate about....well, everything. The US is at a crossroads of the same epic proportions as other historical debates: taxation without representation, separate but equal, minority rights, globalization, and yes, health care reform.
The fact is that our culture is evolving but there are decisively opposing segments of the population; they are in direct conflict with each other. It's time to take a look at the real issues - and it's not health care.
The fundamental issue is how we view access to basic needs and the role of government in relationship to those needs. Rousseau's (Jean-Jacques not the crazy jungle woman from LOST)Social Contract Theory says that humans originally lived freely in nature alone until the population grew enough that old ways of satisfying needs had to change; people began to live in communities where divisions of labor developed which freed up people's time for leisure and of course they began to make comparisons between themselves.
But Rousseau focused on the invention of private property and the development of social classes, an institution that eventually bred greed and inequality. Therefore, he argued, government was invented to protect people's private interests from those who may choose to violate or confiscate, i.e. a social contract, providing equal protection of all. But Rousseau's reasoning pointed to a darker motivation: "the contract, which claims to be in the interests of everyone equally, is really in the interests of the few who have become stronger and richer as a result of the developments of private property. This is the naturalized social contract, which Rousseau views as responsible for the conflict and competition from which modern society suffers" (see Internet Encyclopedia from University of Tennessee).
So in theory government is really an invention of the strong to maintain their power even though they originally gained power by joining a community to satisfy basic needs. In the American "experiment" of government of, for, and by the people, we have embarked on a series of movements to balance the power between the powerful and the weak; Thomas Jefferson warned of the wrathful "power of the majority".
Every major sociopolitical act has been bred through grassroots movement of someone disaffected, someone without, someone in direct conflict with someone else in power. And although the reasons for someone to be disaffected is for another post, the end result is the same: we are all trying to satisfy our hierarchy of needs that Abraham Maslow discussed. And as our society evolves, we will focus on better ways to efficiently, collectively satisfy those needs.
So the fundamental issue is how to satisfy basic needs and the role of government in that process. The current debate really stems from the fact that our society, and increasingly the world, functions with commodities to be exchanged - but the base of exchange sits in the seat of power with the ones who can exchange, not those who can not exchange. Our irreconcilable differences are because there are segments of the population who view health care as a luxury commodity, not as a basic need. Maslow argued that health and safety are second only to food and shelter!
The role of American government has faced the lack of representation and equal rights of citizens, and developed safety nets for disadvantaged in terms of basic needs, such as food stamps, subsidized housing, and safety within our societal borders, yet there is severe riling up over opening access to another basic need.
The issue is not whether government should be equalizing power to access need satisfaction because clearly government was created to protect and balance power among all members of a community when surviving alone was no longer feasible. The issue is whether the community has evolved enough to realize that; only then can we move on.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Irreconcilable Differences
Friday, February 26, 2010
Slash to the Future
There have been numerous discussions of late about school districts slashing budgets with everything from strings to teachers. And although I can understand the lack of adequate funding (even during non-recession periods), I can't understand how things are determined.
I have yet to hear trully groundbreaking cuts and supportive arguments for line items on the chopping block: yes, teachers aides, a few small extra-curriculars, perhaps some bus drivers and no pay raises for anyone. But teachers should be the very last thing considered to go; they are the key component of the institution.
How infuriating that sports are rarely ever eliminated; a few assistant coaching positions does not cut it (pun intended). If kids really want to play a sport for the enjoyment of it, they can join a local youth league or play with friends. In this budget era, no school can justify paying a head varsity football coach the equivalent of a college semester of tuition (in-state).
Other Suggestions:
One final thought: Try all of the above simultaneously. I know, I know, I'm such a radical. Leia Mais…
Thursday, February 11, 2010
We Are Not Alone
No, this is not an entry about aliens but something much scarier: our virtual identities.
Most people under 25 don't much care about such a pesky thing; those 25-33 are wary but have jumped on the bandwagon; those older than that are still figuring out Twitter and Facebook. But nearly all people on the planet have at least 1 email address, social network account, and random snipets of identity easily googled at any moment. Increasingly, these things are meshing together.
A CNN article today claims that Google Buzz will catch on, mostly because the networking platform is already solidly established. Buzz essentially allows Google email users to blend status and postings elements similar to Facebook, Twitter and messaging. It already has a cross agreement with AIM and our favorite, Blogger! Add these types of self-posting forms with expanding online public records and you've got a hot mess of data zipping around.
This leads one to consider what the ramifications might be. How can one possibly keep secrets for business strategy, security, or personal gain? Will trail evidence need to be expanded (especially if one "confesses" online)? Will the concept of lying be eliminated? Will we eventually have one online identity that records every minutia? Will our social circles meld with our professional ones?
If these things happen I hedge a bet that getting a job will be much harder...as well as a date (who wants to date a neo-nazi with a Kabbala interest?). We should all remember what our mama taught us and be on our best behavior...
You never know who's watching....(cue scary music)
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Online Comments
I love reading the comments section of online news stories, particularly from local news sources. Granted I feel slightly dumber after reading them than I did before, but they are entertaining nonetheless. Part of me is proud to see so many individuals taking the time to practice literacy and debate, two cornerstones of a thriving democracy with free press, but there are times when I seriously doubt the level of literacy ability and whether debate is merely a means of soapboxing.
I have come to the conclusion that the "participants" of my state are a mostly embarassing self-selected group. I am still amazed that Indiana swung to the blue side almost a year ago, not that you could ever tell by the comments posted on any given news story. It seems quite often that the comments are spewed hatred of President Obama, illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, Congress, China/India/Iraq/North Korea/Mexico/etc, any multi-million/billion dollar business and other such "destroyers of the American way". Now mind you these topics often have very little to do with the actual story but commentors connect them regardless, usually in some argument contrived on a conspiracy theory to stick it to the little guy. Needless to say, sarcasm abounds....as well as blatant disregard for proper English language usage.
Occasionally I contribute my two cents (but only if I can do so anonymously - I have no patience to be setting up user accounts willy-nilly) in some thoughtful fashion to stir debate but I do realize in the end nothing is throughtfully debated.
But I feel better afterwards, soapbox or not, and perhaps that is the ultimate purpose of such a "section".
Saturday, August 15, 2009
"Network Deprivation"
This article by the NY Times really hit something on the head and I found myself amused and cringing.
The bottom line is most Americans jump online the second they wake up and spend a better part of the remaining day doing so until they crawl back into bed - accurately termed "network deprivation" - and even ordinary "chores" such as eating breakfast, walking the dog, and family time are now dismissed or severely limited in lieu of texting, Facebooking, and blogging ;)
I have to admit I am quilty, quilty, quilty.
I wake up, take care of necessary functions, pop some bread in the toaster and settle down with my laptop. Unless I have to go to work, I come up for air around lunchtime, settle back down and finally break myself by midafternoon. By then I am competing with someone else for computer time and I do realize there's more to life than whatever is online (even though that may be everything now!). Intermittent doses contine until my "network deprivation".
On the occasionally rare days where my "network deprivation" spans an entire day (wha, wha, what?!) I will usually squeeze in a 5 minute check up on email and Facebook. I know that's really disgusting; I could at least check the weather forecast or jobs ads.
Come to think of it, why are you even reading this right now? Go take a good ol' walk with your dog instead; you might even find a few seconds to verbally talk!
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
Is fashion a new Presidential requirement?
Perhaps I missed the presidential oath that swears to uphold the latest fashion standards on that cold January afternoon six months ago. Perhaps I wrongly assumed "mom jeans" were for...moms. And perhaps I missed the band wagon for the skinny jean rage (for the record I adamantly oppose such fabric!).
Seriously, give the man a break.
He inherited the world's richest country (only it's not so rich anymore), right-wing conspiracy theorists are out to get him, and he's only worked at his job for six months. Why shouldn't his jeans be a little loose?
But let's not go crazy and call them "mom jeans" - those are reserved for a very unspecial design of stretchy spandex demin fabric with a waistline sitting 4 inches above the navel and tapered leg that ungratuitously hugs every crevice within the vicinity.
Obama's jeans are loose fit, straight leg denim, albeit slightly grey. Their only disappointment is they are grey and every fashionista knows dismal denim colors are skanky; but Obama isn't a fashionista, he's the president - and male at that. Of course men don't like to shop and we should all be thankful that given our nation's plunging circumstances, the President has not found time to shop.
Though Presidential shopping could be the next economic policy. Take notes, Bernake.
http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzzlog/92832
Tuesday, July 7, 2009
Night Lights
This image is from NASA's Earth lights satellite composites. It's amazing that electricity was invented over 100 years ago (a blink in the span of time) and we've lit nearly every corner of the Earth (despite it being a sphere ;).
I wonder how big of a light it takes to show up on a satellite image? For instance, what is in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, just east of the US? Other things to notice: Russia has built an extensive network to Siberia; the Nile is a solid bright line; Australia - not as bright as one would expect; and Canadians apparently live mostly on the US border, but who can blame them, right?
The question is: is this a positive achievement or some disasterous consequence of urbanization?
Posts
