Am I the internet's tumor? Or is it mine?

(This is the world's largest meatball. It is relevant to this article because it looks like a tumor and the guy who made it seems pretty happy about it)

I'm pretty sure the internet has latched itself onto my brain. It has done so incrementally, and what seemed like a symbiotic relationship may have become a parasitic one: a tumor. However, it's hard to say which is the tumor, the internet or me. Fortunately there is Arnold Schwarzenegger's famous line from "Kindergarten Cop" that reassures me, "It's not a tumor." If only I could pretend and be that little kid who hangs out with the ferret and brings his toy to the carpet.

But this little boy may never make it back to the carpet. He has found far too many toys and cannot decide (And, he also seems to have continued to speak of himself in third person for far too long). Really. I am writing this revelatory blog entry after 1:00AM.

Some of you might come to my defense and say, "Aw that's nothing man, you're fine. I stay up until 3 or 4AM." Others of you might be appalled. Others of you stopped reading a while ago due to the fact that you don't stay up this late, or just have short attention spans.

Well, I tell myself all the time that I'm going to go to bed earlier EVERY night. And, every night I always find some movie to watch, article to read, friend to chat to, place to go, etc. to etc. Tonight really is no different. Sure I could blame it on the fact that often times my shifts end at 9PM or even close to 11PM or beyond and I still have to make time for exercise. Then I have to clean myself up, eat, veg out, and/or pretend to have a life beyond work.

But I don't have to do anything. I just do.

I also tell myself things would be different if I were married and had a job with normal hours. Maybe so. But who's to say? Maybe I'm just caught up in being caught up for no reason other than a subconscious curiosity or at least some sort of deeply rooted dissatisfaction with the present moment. Or maybe I just want to prolong the moment and live each waking hour as long as possible.

Well that last idea cannot be. I tend to sleep in when I can. But even that's a precarious assumption. Often when I think I get to sleep in I get woken up after being in bed a mere 3 or 4 hours, and then have to pretend like it was 8, and trying to get back to bed is never the same. The dreams, the REM, the beautiful tapestry of synthetic subconscious reverie sifts like sand through my finger tips.

What is the solution? Probably eating more, staring more out the window, and watching Judge Judy reruns. Yeah.

America Alone

Today I was sent a very interesting link to a lecture given by Mark Steyn in July of 2008. He was giving the lecture to promote his book, America Alone. I am definitely intrigued and am going to buy a copy. In the book and the lecture Mr. Steyn talks about the inevitable decline of the west and how it has been precipitated by a societal belief in not having children and as well as self-loathing in regard to core western principles (freedom of speech, democratic institutions, etc.), which are no better than any other culture's ideas (relativistic multiculturalism) and were only made possible by horrible injustice and oppressive expansionism.

Here are the five parts:



(This first part has an introduction that last 4:45, so you can skip that)

Chatting on the Road Trip: Freedom and Equality

(Berlin Wall Coming Down)

Now, you may have noticed that I have not written anything for four days, which, while unfortunate, hopefully did not cause any lasting damage to anyone's worldview. I had a good discussion yesterday while driving back from San Francisco to Provo. I cannot say my excuse is that I was having a four day long conversation in the car, but I will say that camping out on California beaches is not particularly conducive to blogging. Our conversation was expansive and we talked about government, the economy, freedom, purpose, and life in general. I wish you were all there. You probably would have learned something. We had some interesting view points from all sides. The two people who led the conversation were me and my friend from Hong Kong (so this was not just a domestic politics discussion, but became international as soon as my friend opened his mouth). Another contributor lives in Utah but was raised in Oregon. So, while not all demographics were equally represented, I think we dug pretty deep when it came to what really matters.

But, that being said let me just say something that might shock you. THE GOVERNMENT OWNS YOUR SOUL. Some might find that ridiculously unfounded and over the top. In some ways they would be correct. In other ways perhaps not so much. Nothing is ever as superficial as it seems. Other than the fact that the government has spy planes watching your every move, and puts mind controlling drugs in our water supply, the government is not just about politics. And, even if they were, politics is invasive (Like a root canal that somehow turns into open heart surgery).

The government in the US, and in any country for that matter, is supposed to provide some sort of semblance of order and provide basic protections for individuals, families, and groups. But, unfortunately, the government quite often does a fairly shoddy job. Part of this stems from the efficiency-corruption continuum, and part because of how democracy and bureaucracies work. In the efficiency-corruption continuum you have on one side the most efficient form of government, a dictatorship, but with the possibility that it could be entirely corrupt and affect changes that completely annihilate human virtue. On the other side you have a socialized democracy that has so much red tape that it never gets anything done, but does not do so much damage if it is corrupt because there are so many voices and none can do more harm than another. Neither case exists in the US. We have a melange of the two that leans both ways. But here's the catch. You don't have to lean just one way. It's not really a continuum. 

As Alexis de Tocqueville pointed out in his famous book Democracy in America, democracy's greatest tendency is towards centralization, bureaucratization, and consolidation of federal power. This is because in a modern democracy the desire for equality supercedes the desire for freedom. That is because democracy tends to flatten people. Not literally, but spiritually. In a democracy without any aristocratic vestiges like juries, courts, religion, free associations, or high ranking people to look up to, people tend to look in three directions. They look to themselves for guidance, the majority for guidance, or history for guidance. All three lead to the same conclusion. "I am insignificant and I am just a grain of sand awash in an endless sandstorm, therefore I follow the sandstorm." Instead of people finding something substantive to back their desire for equality like human virtue or God, they only want freedom to express an undefined vision of themselves that is defined by history and the majority. It is equality by default. Equality for the sake of equality. "What is good for me is good for me, but not necessarily good for you, and we can both be equal because no one's opinion matters more than anyone else's - they're all good!" It is simple relativism.

So what is the solution? How can we prevent people who, in their weakened self-deluding state, give the government more power over their lives because they want equality at all costs? How can people find meaning and purpose in their lives? Well, there is no simple equation. There is no all-encompassing theory. And guess what? That's okay. In a general sense we can see a need for aristocratic freedom. Rights have value because we are all human and there is something transcendentally good within us, whether you believe it comes from God or elsewhere. We need to believe in a foundation. And, we should all get involved, form groups, associations, coalitions, and provide some vertical lumpiness to our otherwise flat and unguided democracy. We need lawyers, judges, juries, newspapers, federalism, God, and upstanding strong-willed and morally ethical citizens to look up to. We need to believe that there is value in tradition and in the past while looking open to the future. However, we cannot sacrifice meaningful freedom and equality with the mantra of "change" or "progress" for the sake of progress and change. There must be purpose. 

This is an analogy that should help it all settle a little better for you. Let's suppose you have a house. But the house has no walls, no doors, no windows, no roof, no yard, but is just a vacant lot. To have freedom in that home is meaningless. What are you free to do? You are free to be free, but without any stairs, chairs, or doors, there are no real possibilities of exercising freedom. So, your house must have furniture, rooms, walls, windows, and maybe even a nice garden. With substance you have real freedom. With substance you have real equality. Without it you have relativism.