My World Issue

The main cause worth fighting?

World Stupidity. Collective stupidity, which breeds fear, violence, and apathy, is the main cause of almost all the shit I think needs to change with the world. To gain self-knowledge is to gain knowledge about how everything else should fit into the world. And if you don't have an understanding of yourself and your values, you are extremely susceptible to someone else convincing you to just follow them, to buy into someone else's dupe. The people in control don't want to change (why would they, they're in control?) and the people who aren't have been convinced that someone else is supposed to be taking care of stuff. And the people who acknowledge this situation either turn away in disgust or respond with violence. The number of people I know who deeply care but expect someone else to do something about it while they sit at home and complain staggers me. Instead of doing something, people sit down at a computer and write some stupid blog. whoops/.

We walk alone, but not lonely

Bernie Winterson said...

The hardest step in a thousand mile journey is the first. You should let your readers know that the journey doesn't have to begin alone. That's why some really like your music. The reason for the journey is often the same. Your songs reinforce that. The encouragement that solitude is not solipsism. Though at some point in the journey, you and I know it must inevitably be walked alone.

I just couldn't agree more. It's easy to push the idea of how much we all need to make this journey ourselves, and forget how difficult, how scary a process it is. But there are a lot of people trying to do this, and it's in everyone's interest in this process to help each other out. We all must walk alone, but that doesn't mean that people can't help us along the way, even if it's just telling us that it's worth our time and that the issues faced while doing it are things that other people have gone through.
It is such a tragedy to me that the way so much is structured in our society, it is so difficult to make this first step. So much is pushing in the opposite direction. You need to not only have a desire and an inclination to find your own path, you must also have the strength to go in the opposite direction, the will to say yes when everyone else says no.
Some people will be able to do this process no matter what. Some people will never have any interest in this process. But there are so many people who could do it if they had the chance, if there wasn't so much pressure to stay where you are.
We all walk alone, and the moment we realize that, we can all share in it together.
Thanks for understanding, Bernie

A Political Dupe

While we all know that to some extent we are being duped by the powers that be (politicians, media, etc.), it recently occured to me that maybe one of the ways is in the very myth that is perpetrated about what a politician actually is.
In spite of all the controversy, corruption, back-stabbing and other stuff that goes on in politics, on some level we are still presented with the image that most politicians are smart people who care about the interests of the country. Maybe not more than their own self-interest, but that at least the majority of them are smart and care about how our government works.
That is, until I saw a Daily Show recently in which they interview a representative from a rural section of Georgia (I don't remember the exact area or person's name, but that's not really important). The guy was an absolute idiot. I mean, an unbelievable idiot. That didn't even have to do anything to make him sound funny.
So, I started thinking. What if, rather than most politicians being smart and passionate, most of them are in fact dumb. As in below average intelligence. Because, to be honest, the people I know that have all the qualities I would want in a political leader have absolutely no interest in being in politics, by and large. The intelligence, honest, integrity, broad-mindedness, dedication, and humility (it is called for public servant for a reason) needed, in my mind, to make a great leader, rarely adds up to a person wanting to run for office.
In fact, what I find the most necessary qualities are a bull-headed dedication to follow your team, a willingness to play dirty to ensure that you win, and the ability to pounce when you smell blood. I don't even think intelligence is a necessary quality in a politician. Probably a useful one, probably one that would allow to you to succeed over others, but not a necessary one. And integrity, dedication to the country and its best interests? Pretty clearly not necessary (or no longer necessary).
What I'm saying is that it's entirely possible that most politicians are the people who were bullies in high school, or maybe the second- and third-in-command to the main high school bully. People who are used to fighting for their self-interest, bullying others to make their own role more secure, and a willingness to follow whatever keeps them in their rung on the ladder.
I definitely don't mean to say that all politicians are stupid bullies. In fact, I very much think that some of the people currently running for the "Big" office are in fact quite intelligent and qualified (although not all of them). Just that maybe we've all been convinced that politicians are supposed to be noble, smart, and dedicated, and it's just the few that ruin it for the rest. Maybe it's the opposite. It certainly provides an interesting perspective on the whole process.

High Fructose Corn Syrup, the campaign

I recently saw this tv commercial that just blew my mind.
The commercial opens with two mid-30s/40s moms. One is pouring a drink out of a big jug of purple drink. The other mom watches and then says, “I guess somebody doesn’t care what goes in her children’s bodies.” And the other one says, “What do you mean?” The first mom says, “That drink has high fructose corn syrup in it, you know how bad that is!” The second mom says, “Oh yeah, and what’s so bad about it?” When the first mom stammers, the second mom continues, “That it’s made from corn? That it’s all-natural?”
Then the commercial tells you about it’s website, HFCSfacts.com, telling people to go find out for themselves.

The basic idea of this commercial is, you’ve been told stuff from a bunch of different sources, but do you really understand it? If you don’t, then maybe you’ve been duped. The fallacy of the argument, “if you don’t understand something, then it’s probably a lie,” is such an insulting statement that has gone on in a number of different directions. I’ve heard the same thing about global warming (can YOU prove it? Oh, you don’t have any specific facts? You’ve bought in to the lie of global warming), and a general methodology of republican ad campaigns (does this guy seem too smart? Do you not understand what he’s doing? Come vote for the regular guy, the guy you understand already, the guy you could go have a drink with- sound familiar?).

On a brief sidetrack, why would you want someone to be in a position of leadership over you that you don’t think is smarter than you? If they are, wouldn’t it make more sense for you to be the leader instead? So, anyone feel like they are qualified to be president?

Basically, this whole thing is predicated on the idea that most people don’t really have any information of their own, they get all of it from someone else, so they have no foundation to launch any sort of counter. The pro-HFCS woman didn’t say, “Who is your information from? Mine is from here. Let’s compare.” She said, “You don’t understand your information? Wherever it came from, it must be wrong.”

Go out and find your own information on the subjects you talk about.

So, then, I thought I would research HFCS a little further, and provide some websites for people to look from.
The basic idea, as I’ve seen it, is that there are two main problems with HFSC-

1- HFCS contains a higher percentage of fructose than does sugar, fructose has been proven to be bad for the body in a whole number of ways, some of which include increases hunger and the desire for more fatty and sweet foods. In this way, HFCS as a substance is directly responsible for its health affects.
2- HFCS is not particularly any worse than sugar is as a sweetener. The problem is that it has been used to increase the sweetness of given items. As in, companies have decided to put much more of it in than used to be done with sugar. And, because of its form and ease of use, it can and is used in a number of foods that didn’t use to have anywhere near the same quantity of sweetener before (like bread). In this case, the problem is not HFSC in particular, it’s the amount that it is used and the pervasiveness with which it is used.

There seems to be quite a bit of debate on this subject. Quite a bit of the debate that agrees with point 2 is funded by such groups as the Beverage Institute (go figure). Either way, everyone agrees that the increased amount of sweetener is one of the main causes of American obesity, among other health problems.

Point being, at best (for HFCS), you should avoid goods that contain it because they will be so comparatively sweet that they can lead to health problems. At worst, you should avoid goods that contain it because at least one of the ingredients in it will make you fat, sick, and possibly give you cancer.


Here are some websites.

http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v11/n11/abs/oby2003179a.html (an article about the increase in sweetness in our diet)


http://www.hsibaltimore.com/reports/nutrition_cereal.html?gclid=CKHu6-yI1ZUCFQK2Ggod80yjXw (an article from the health sciences institute about the health dangers of high fructose corn syrup in breakfast cereals)

http://www.ehealthforum.com/health/topic117606.html (an article on why HFCS is bad and in fact causal for people with fibromyalgia)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2004/02/18/FDGS24VKMH1.DTL (an article from the SF Gate that gives a good overview of the health problems)

http://www.nature.com/oby/journal/v12/n11s/abs/oby2004277a.html (an article from the obesity research journal on how different types of sweetener affect obesity)

And let’s not forget the HFCS website, http://www.hfcsfacts.com
Incidentally, the only scientist referred to on their website, G. Harvey Anderson, has a articles written by and research funded by the beverage institute http://www.beverageinstitute.org


Oh, and for more information on corn's relationship to all of the things we eat, read "Omnivore's Dilemma" by Michael Pollan

Clarity, Alabama

So there’s this guy driving down the road in rural Alabama. It’s late at night, and as he drives, he looks over to his right and sees a long run of chain link fence and a sign on it that says:

Alabama State Psychiatric Ward

Well, that kind of flips him out, but he keeps on driving. He only gets a few feet further, though, when he gets a flat tire. He pulls over, gets out and starts to change the tire.

All of the sudden he hears something and turns around. There’s a guy on the other side of the fence, clinging to it, staring at him with wild eyes. And the guy doesn’t speak.

Needless to say, the guy is getting more and more worried. Enough so that his hands are shaking a little, so that when he takes out the lug nuts from the flat tire, he drops them and they fall down a grate.

So now he’s flipping out.

“Oh shit! What do I do now? I’m in the middle of nowhere, next to the Alabama State Psychiatric Ward, there’s this crazy guy starting at me, and I’m stuck without a tire!”

He thinks to himself. As he’s standing there, he hears a voice from behind him.

“You know, you could just take one lug nut off each of the other tires. Then you’d have enough lug nuts on each wheel to drive off. It might not be perfect, but it would certainly be good enough to get to the nearest town and get them replaced.”

The crazy guy says, still standing there with his wild staring eyes, clutching the fence.

“Oh, um, wow, you’re right. That would work. Thanks.”

“Well yeah, I’m crazy, not stupid.”

Sacred Cows - video

The Bloody Revolution of the Soul, Vol 2

It is really interesting to me that a good number of the comments in response to my blogs have been about how what I ask for of people is too difficult, too challenging, or too dangerous.

If you have any interest at all in exploring yourself, learning about yourself, finding your own freedom or happiness, you could you possibly be worried that the process is hard? Of course it's hard! About the most difficult thing you can do in this life. To figure out yourself, when no one gives you time and the sea of opinion is pulling in the opposite direction?

But who ever said life was supposed to be easy? Enjoyable, blissful, wonderful, all this stuff, absolutely, but easy? A cow's life is easy. You walk slow, you chew grass, you shit, you mate, you die. If you're lucky enough to not live in one of those corrals.
But humans? Sorry, but the lot we have given ourselves is the struggle to understand ourselves. To make things easy, to ignore this struggle, is to ignore what defines us as humans. We are aware of ourselves, we know the difference between what does and doesn't make us happy, and we have the ability to figure this out.
Ignorance is not true bliss, it is the equivalent bliss to a drug-induced coma. But bliss that comes from knowledge, understood bliss, well that's a whole other thing. What could be better than saying, "I have understood what true happiness is for me, and I have gone out and gotten it."

And I'm not saying that everyone should just forget everything that they're doing and go out on the road to learn themselves. Everyone has constraints in their lives, and these constraints determine the places in which we have freedom to move. Maybe you can go on a vision quest for a while- good for you. Maybe you can just spend a few hours a week to sort yourself out. What you do is not what matters, trying to figure this out is what matters.

This is the real purpose, the real question of life. So yes, it is a struggle. It is the struggle. It is why Buddha sat for 30 days under a tree, not eating or drinking. It is why Jesus wandered the desert for his 30 days. If you want to get to a further place of understanding yourself, it will take effort. It's just the most worthwhile effort you can take.

The Bloody Revolution of the Soul

I received a comment to my last blog (freedom response, vol 2) that I found intriguing and thought I'd respond to. And Adrian, please feel free to correct me if I misinterpret you.

As I see it, the comment basically says that what I call for is a violent change, an internal revolution of the soul, and that without leadership to guide us, we will fall into an anarchy of the soul, a directionless, violent confusion. That the only beneficial path of internal growth is the golden rule- to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That this path is not loud, is an internal growth between yourself and the universe, and that no one particularly needs to know about your personal process.

Now, this made me think quite a bit, because on one level I agree. Revolutions are bloody, frequently providing no actual change, and that peaceful change sounds beautiful and harmonious.

But does that actually work? Can systematic, positive growth occur without it causing some sort of rupture? I would say probably yes, but in our modern world almost universally no. In an environment entirely conducive to personal growth, an environment encouraging people to push themselves and protecting them when they fall, a so-called "social health care system", yes that would probably be true.

But I don't think we live there. Anyone who feels that there is anything wrong with the direction we are going has to conclude that one of the things we most surely don't have is a society that is conducive to this process. If everything was happy and hunky-dory, I wouldn't be writing this in the first place.

To me the great injustice our society does is to block us from being able to listen to ourselves, to pressure us not to find ourselves, but rather to accept their model. The corporate model of society says that we should all fit into advertising niches. But I say we don't! That no person is just a collection of other people's ideas.

Here's the issue though- with rare exceptions, we have all been brought up in this system. To even allow yourself the time and mental space to really think explore your values is a break with what we've been given.

If we don't revolt against what we've been given, and what we've been given is slavery, then there is no way for us to find freedom.

And not all revolutions are bad. Some have been quite necessary, and have caused positive changes. The American revolution comes to mind. The emancipation of India from the British. The end of apartheid. To name a few. In all these cases, an external force was causing such a constraint on the members of the society that revolution was an appropriate response.

Perhaps, then, revolution can be positive when it is not providing a cycle of who from society is in power, but when it involves revolting against an outside force oppressing a local population. In other words, advertising's pressure on an individual's value system.

I wish that we lived in a world that allowed for peaceful development of the soul. But I don't feel that we do. And, unfortunately, the issues facing humans in the upcoming century have greater implications for all of us and the world as a whole than our problems ever have before. We don't have the luxury of waiting for people to slowly come to their understanding. I genuinely fear that if serious steps aren't taken now, the tide pulling us in a very bad direction will be too great.

We may have to get to an abyss to learn to fly, but if when we get there we haven't taken the time to build any wings, we're probably fucked.

Adrian Leverkahn said...

Andre- you made me think of the sincere challenge you're speaking of. Its contra-intuitive and its not loud.

I think it was Chairman Mao who said in a bolstering response to Marx: "A revolution is not a tea party. It is a violent insurrection where one party overthrows another."

A sick society is a reflection of ailing leaders and weary citizens. It sounds to me like you're calling for everyone to consider an internal revolution. A revolution of the human spirit.

But if history teaches us anything about revolutions, it is bloody and ugly. There always seems to be casualties.

As controversial as it is, Noam Chomsky poignantly remarked of our contemporary age "Terrorism is the voice of the unheard."

But I'm not sure that's where we want to go either with a revolution, externally or internally. Without foundation, without leadership, too many who try alone often are left to conclude at an anarchy of the soul.

You query two main things in your blog entry - 1) perspective ; 2) motivation. With perspective, simplified, it seems you get two different sides on the coin of motivation. Motivation being the real issue- a cost measured in golden rules.

Who is right?

The categorical imperative might be distilled down to the golden rule. Do onto others as you wish the universe might do onto itself. Alone. Yet sensible for everyone in the universe.

Without paradigm and idolatry, without bloody revolutions, quietly making choices, crossing currents, no one knows you are free, except you and the universe.

"Much madness is divinest sense
To a discerning eye;
Much sense the starkest madness.
'Tis the majority
In this, as all, prevails
Assent, and you are sane;
Demur,--you're straightway dangerous,
And handled with a chain."
-Emily Dickinson