USA Unites Over Sports and Little Else

Fair warning to any and all readers. This post is a tad more cynical then usual. 

The modern political division of the United States arguably began with the Nixon-Kennedy election in the 1960s. Hippies vs. Workers. Left vs. Right. Pro-choice vs. Pro-life. Liberal vs. Conservative. Thanks to our government, political parties, and the mass media this is how most, if not all, questions are framed. There are only two sides to every issue. Rarely, especially over the last decade, do both sides come to a consensus and/or compromise.

Yet there are moments of unity. The people gave a collective cheer for the moon landing. Watched the Berlin wall crumble together through televised broadcasts. They worked as one during the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and took to the streets celebrating the death of Osama bin Laden ten years later. Most recently sports fans, from all parts of society, decried the NFL behemoth for failing to negotiate with the professional referee union.

Take a look at the last paragraph. It speaks volumes to the value system we have in this nation. There are a host of issues, both domestic and abroad, that require action. There is unrest in the Middle East. The EU is in dire trouble, and Europeans are rioting in the streets. The recession may technically be over (the GDP has not declined for two or more consecutive quarters), but the aftermath is still baring down strong on the American people. Infrastructure and education are still in decline. Unions are losing their collective bargaining rights. Minorities face new discrimination in the guise of voter ID laws. Debates continue about women's reproductive rights. We can't even agree if health care is a privilege or a right.

The nation has a hell of a time uniting to tackle any of the above, but can rally with the best of them once their precious sport is jeopardized. People flocked to social media sites like Twitter and Facebook. The mass media jumped on this story as if it was a cure for cancer. Both candidates for President chimed in as well. All agreed that the professional referees were preferred over the amateurs, and that the NFL should do what is needed to make that happen.

We can agree about referees in a multi-billion dollar industry, but we can't form a consensus about numerous issues that are infinitely more important. Even recent events, like NASA successful landing of Curiosity on Mars, seems insignificant to the masses when compared to the fervor over NFL refs. Americans will unite in times of war. We will marvel at our own progress. And we will most definitely have a fair and balanced football game every Sunday. Everything else is open to endless debate.

People Pay for Pike's Pepper Spraying

On November 18th, 2011, Lt. John Pike peppered sprayed non-violent protestors at UC Davis for blocking a campus road. Below is the video that captured the chaotic scene.

A few months shy of a year later, two relevant events have recently unfolded.

First, the Yolo County District Attorney's Office stated that it will not seek criminal charges against Pike, or any of the other officers involved. Their report concluded, "Viewing the incident through the totality of the circumstances, there is insufficient evidence to establish proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the use of force involved in the November 18, 2011 pepper spraying was unlawful and therefore warrants the filing of criminal charges."

The report also claims that although Pike's actions were, "not objectively reasonable," they acknowledge that he "believed that they and their prisoners were surrounded by a hostile 'mob,' and that the pepper spraying was necessary to clear the pathway so that the officers and their prisoners could leave the Quad safely."

Second, the University of California has agreed to pay a million dollar settlement to the victims. $730,000 will be given to the plaintiffs, and $250,000 will cover the attorney fees.

To summarize, Lt. Pike is not being persecuted, and the tax payer gets to pay for the legal fallout. The only repercussions for his actions was the loss of his job at the University, and the tainting of his reputation from the viral video. I believe this is not enough.

Look at the video above. The hostile mob is not violent. The chaos occurs after Pike sprays down the protesters  Yes. The officers have a difficult job, but the moment any side shows violent behavior their argument is cheapened. As hard as it may have been they could have lifted the protesters up and out by hand. Use as many cops as needed, but do not attack them with pepper spray, rubber bullets, or tasers.

An officer caught using excessive force is nothing new. Cops during the civil rights movement infamously attacked protesters with high pressure water cannons and attack dogs. In the 1990's, Rodney King was beaten by a number of officers who also escaped criminal charges. More recently in Oakland, an officer shot and killed Alan Blueford under very suspicious circumstances. Will we ever see a government maintain a police force that doesn't abuse their power?

Pike, and his bosses at UC Davis, violated the first amendment rights of the protesters to assemble peacefully. If the students had turned violent, then my sympathy and anger would not be so acute. But they didn't. They were sitting and chanting. Pike is seen crossing over the protesters multiple times then casually unleashes the pepper spray. Until police are held accountable, this incident and thousands like them, will continue to destroy peoples faith in law enforcement and government.

Untied States of Hodgepodges, Mishmashes, and Miscellanies

The ever ridiculous Sarah Palin, and other less nutty individuals, like to argue that the Founding Fathers goal was to form a Christian nation when they signed the Constitution. Today we have lost sight of that ideal, and according to supporters of christiannation.org this country must return to our religious roots.

The evidence that the United States is a Christian nation is razor thin. I much prefer the melting pot cliche. We are the Untied States of hodgepodges, mishmashes, and miscellanies. 

Stephen Colbert

Christianity is a huge influence throughout the history of the United States. However, it's hardly the sole driving factor for any action or event. Economic opportunity, for example, has tremendous influence throughout our nations history. People didn't go west to find God (well maybe the Mormons did). They went to find a lively hood that could support themselves and raise a family.

Also, Christians are not the only religious group in this great nation. Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Muslims, Star Wars nerds, and more all worship in their own way; often with less violence than other nations. To ignore this diversity is unacceptable. It's a part of our country, and it's not going anywhere.

A number of the Founders were Deist. They believed in a God, but had a hard time with pre-destination and religious organizations. This doesn't mean that there were no religious individuals at this time; there were plenty. But for the first time in western history there were people predominately using science to explain the world around them. This Era of Enlightenment had a huge impact on many of the Founding Fathers and the formation of the Constitution.


Below are a list of quotes from some of our famous Founders. I believe they denote skepticism of religious influences in government. The quotes also indicate an acute awareness of the churches bloody history. They give a clear indication that a number of the Founding Fathers were not attempting to form a nation based on any religion. 


--------------------

Franklin:

"Lighthouses are more helpful than churches." -in Poor Richard's Almanac

"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." -in Poor Richard's Almanac"

"When a religion is good, I conceive it will support itself; and when it does not support itself so that its professors are obliged to call for the help of the civil power, 'tis a sign, I apprehend, of its being a bad one."

"I looked around for God's judgments, but saw no signs of them."

"In the affairs of the world, men are saved not by faith, but by the lack of it."

Madison: 

"It may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the Civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points.  The tendency to unsurpastion on one side or the other, or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them, will be best guarded agst. by an entire abstinence of the Gov't from interfence in any way whatsoever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order, and protecting each sect agst. trespasses on its legal rights by others." -James Madison, "James Madison on Religious Liberty", edited by Robert S. Alley, ISBN 0-8975-298-X. pp. 237-238 .

"What influence, in fact, have ecclesiastical establishments had on society?  In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of the civil authority; on many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny; in no instance have they been the guardians of the liberties of the people.  Rulers who wish to subvert the public liberty may have found an established clergy convenient auxiliaries.  A just government, instituted to secure and perpetuate it, needs them not." - "A Memorial and Remonstrance", 1785

Adams:

"As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation.  But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"      -letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816

"I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!" -letter to Thomas Jefferson

". . . Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind."

Washington:

"Religious controversies are always productive of more acrimony and irreconcilable hatreds than those which spring from any other cause.  Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by the difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be depreciated.  I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society." - letter to Edward Newenham, 1792

"Gouverneur Morris had often told me that General Washington believed no more of that system (Christianity) than did he himself." -Thomas Jefferson, in his private journal, Feb. 1800

Historian Barry Schwartz writes: "George Washington's practice of Christianity was limited and superficial because he was not himself a Christian...  He repeatedly declined the church's sacraments.  Never did he take communion, and when his wife, Martha, did, he waited for her outside the sanctuary...  Even on his deathbed, Washington asked for no ritual, uttered no prayer to Christ, and expressed no wish to be attended by His representative." [New York Press, 1987, pp. 174-175]

Paine:

"The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church" -The Age of Reason


Jefferson:

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government.  This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose." - to Baron von Humboldt, 1813

"No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever."

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was, a part of the Common Law."    -letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, 1814

"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity.  What has been the effect of coercion?  To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites.  To support roguery and error all over the earth."       - "Notes on Virginia"
--------------------


This list shouldn't be considered all encompassing. Our ancestors beliefs and ideals evolved throughout their lifetime. Franklin, for example, gets more religious as he ages (which isn't unheard for any individual). There are also other Founders who wanted a Christian nation, but didn't have enough support to make it so. Palin, and other liked minded people, should recall that even in the beginning we were the Untied States of hodgepodges, mishmashes, and miscellanies. 

Good Stuff

Thought I share a recent Facebook conversation from the other day. Good stuff.

Starts off with me:

I think we are all too complacent--myself included. As outraged as I get at the current state of government (especially in CA and the Federal level) I do not protest. I do not care to loose my job, or possibly go to jail. I have a roof over my head and food in my fridge. My family is safe. I don't want to jeopardize this.

So what do I do? I write to government officials only to receive the standard reply letter. I vote for the same two parties, who's been bickering with each other for decades, hoping that this time around things will be different. Then I act surprised when events continue to move in the same direction they've always gone.

I'm starting to wonder if there is anyway to change this country. Those in power have figured out this game very well. We'd need something unprecedented. Like the entire population of a city or state refusing to pay taxes or to work until their government gets to work. This probably won't happen though because we are all too comfortable and we don't want to make the sacrifices needed for such an act.

The most interesting reply:

Have you looked inside to see what can change?

My reply to the most interesting reply:

Inside myself? I can attempt to be more proactive and less complacent. I can join existing organizations to see if I can make an impact, or even run for office. Josh the lobbyist! 

Inside the system? I can only guess at what needs to be changed. Resources and research would be needed to make a truly informed argument. Of course that won't stop me from typing the rest of this fun rant :)

From my limited perspective I think there is tons of room for improvements in education and infrastructure. The tax code needs an overhaul, and there could be better oversight of government aide programs. The healthcare system is equally expensive and horrendous. I believe everyone should have the right to healthcare, and I'm open to suggestions on how to make that happen.

The defense department needs to stop chasing the imaginary dragon (aka big air/sea war with China), and focus more on projects like AFRICOM and COIN. It also be nice if we stopped propping up dictators/terrorist that eventually come to hate us. Mexico should be our highest priority. Creating a united North American continent would be a historic milestone, and could solve many of our current immigration "issues."

Alternative energy solutions must be explored and executed (Presidents since the dawn of television have been making this empty promise). There are also many environmental issues that could use greater attention. Politicians should wear jackets with patches indicating who's funding their career--like those NASCAR guys. Citizen United is one of the worse Supreme Court decisions in this countries history.

At the state level CA needs to get rid of the way laws are written. Having every law go to vote is bogging down everything. Most voters don't have the smarts to balance their own pocket book let alone balancing one of the worlds largest economies.

Geez I could probably keep going, but I'll stop here. Good questions Mr. Houston. Got me thinking, and I like that. None of these issues are simple, and the solutions are obviously complex. Please don't take any of the above as the right answer. These are only thoughts and opinions from one slightly buzzed man. (I am pretty awesome though.)

A reply to my reply to the most interesting reply:

Perhaps the most sensible reference I can reply with would be Gandhi's famous quote, "Be the change you want to see in the world." Simple, and incredibly useful. 

It's not my desire to change your perspective ... at the very least, I would hope my comment can shed light on the potentials that lie within you and the rest of humanity. Believe it or not, you have more power than you realize. YOU are the one you've been waiting for.

If joining a movement is where you feel your energy would best serve, then my thoughts would say to follow that inclination. The same goes for voting, paying taxes, and doing everything else a sensible citizen of a nation in this world feels obligated to be doing ... but definitely realize that submitting to these issues and giving them power by believing that there is no way out leaves you powerless.

Know your potentials! Know yourself! and also, don't take it all so seriously ;)

I love well thought out mature conversations. A rare gem found in the dung pile that is the internet. 

Indiana Diamond & The Crusade Against Agriculture

Jared Diamond is an intriguing individual. His novel, Guns Germs & Steel, is a must read for anyone interested in the history of civilization. His ability to blend multiple disciplines provides a convincing, and often more complete, perspective of the past.

Ten years before GG&S, Diamond wrote an article for Discover Magazine entitled, The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. In this piece he argues that human history has not been a "long tale of progress." He believes that, "hunters-gathers practiced the most successful and longest-lasting life style in human history."Agriculture lead to, "the gross social sexual inequality, the disease and despotism, that curse our existence."

Diamond argues that one of the pinnacles of modern society was a huge mistake responsible for the horrors of life today. Specifically he states agriculture begets bad health because of diet, crop failure, and disease. He also blames the adoption of farming for the development of class division. The myopic outlook found in these four pages threw me for a loop--especially when compared to his later work. The points of interest are all over the place with a clear bias towards hunter-gather societies.

One of the authors arguments is that H&G's (hunters and gatherers) are "better off" then farmers because of the amount of hours worked. Hadza nomads of Tanzania only work about fourteen hours a week for their food. Other bushman range from nine to twelve hours a week. The author fails to mention the amount of time the average farmer works in seven days for that region.

Why not include the amount of hours worked on a farm? What century of farming are we talking about? Do modern farmers toil in the field like our ancestors, or do they use ever advancing technology to minimize labor? A more objective argument, with clearly set parameters, would go a long way to legitimizing the authors' point of view.

Diamond continues his article by praising the diet of H&G tribes, and rightfully argues that farming staples alone do not provide the necessary nutrients for a healthy lifestyle. He also mentions the devastating effects of crop failure giving the Irish potato famine as an example.

Yes. Consuming corn, wheat, and other staples alone will result in a number of health issues. Fortunately agricultural societies are often accompanied by robust trading economies. There are also modern organizations that provide disaster relief to areas effected by crop failure. This minimizes starvation, and trading helps diversify our diets. Diamond keeps the farmer in an isolated bubble, and fails to mention the various interactions that occur in any segment of human history. He also makes the assumption that nomadic societies had little to no issues with starvation. Hard to prove either way without written records, and a limited amount of archaeological data.

The lack of information is a huge problem with many of Diamonds' theories. He mentions breakthroughs in science. Skeletons can be used to determine age, height, gender, and can even indicate what diseases our past brethren have suffered. With enough skeletons people can deduce what an ancient society was like.

As amazing as these breakthroughs are they do not paint the entire picture. Can we tell if someone was blind or deaf? Suffered from the common cold, allergies, or had skin problems? Can we tell if they were happy in preliterate societies? Unfortunately we cannot accurately determine a societies overall level of health with the available data for much of our known history. This is why I have an issue with the authors overgeneralization. With the right evidence everything he knows today can be disproven tomorrow, and I believe the author does not make that clear.

Diamond also picks and chooses which data to compare. He looks at skeletons, and lifespans, of early farmers versus more experienced hunter and gatherers.

"Life expectancy at birth in pre-agricultural community was bout twenty-six years, but in post-agricultural community it was nineteen years. So these episodes of nutritional stress and infectious disease were seriously affecting their ability to survive."

Why is he comparing the novice with the well versed? I would imagine early nomads would have had their own issues starting out. After centuries of learning these groups would have figured out a thing or two about surviving. Comparing the experienced hunter-gatherer with the inexperienced farmer does not support Diamonds argument very well.

Also, the average age of agricultural societies today is much longer. Why not compare modern farmers to modern hunter-gatherers, and ancient farmers to ancient hunter-gatherers? A more compelling argument would indicate an initial dip in the quality of life before the advancement of agricultural techniques. Not a blanket statement about nutritional stress and infectious disease.

In regards to disease, the initial boom in infections (because of close quarters and domesticated animals) eventually creates a stronger immune system. As argued in Guns, Germs, & Steel, Native Americans were susceptible to European diseases because they lacked close contact with domesticated animals and past epidemics like the Black Death. In Europe, there were centuries of infectious exchanges between animals and humans, which eventually created an immune system strong enough to travel around the world. How does this improved immune system develop in a world of hunters and gatherers?

Health issues aside, Diamond is right that farming has produced the class system we know today. He is quick to highlight negative aspects like sexism, tyranny, and class division. Something that is well documented throughout our history. What he doesn't bring up are the advancements in communication, technology, and medicine.

Once again overgeneralizing leads to misnomers about nomadic and agricultural societies. The author makes it seem like these issues didn't exist until farming occurred. I highly doubt hunter and gatherers were free from assholes. No man ever judged a woman because of her gender before picking up the plow? No bushman sought to gain power through illicit means, or lead through power and fear? Hunter and gatherers were no less human then you or me. They were vulnerable to the same temptations and fallacies.

Then there is the positive side of the class system and agriculture. The advancement in technology, medicine, and communication is unheard of in pre-agrarian societies. Diamond mentions art, which is significant. Art, however, didn't put a man on the moon. Art hasn't eliminated polio from most of the world. Civilization itself came from farming, and I would argue the pros far out weigh the cons.


Jared Diamond brings up some valid points, but his theories are overzealous at best. He is too quick to demonize the farmer, and ignores the positive impact agriculture has had throughout history. These short comings, and his bias towards nomadic culture, hinder the effectiveness of his arguments. A more balanced approach to both H&G and farming societies is needed to truly understand the lessons of our past. 

Hiatus!

To my faithful readers!

Do not fret. Eventually I'll start writing again for both my blogs. Life has been rather busy--moving, work, nightlife--leaving little time to devote to digital ink. I do, however, have a few things on the writing "To Do" list.

For Videogames a'la Snerts, I am thinking about incorporating other entertainment based interests. I'm a huge Simpsons fan, and I do watch the occasional movie so don't be surprised to see posts along those lines. In general this blogs content will remain light and nerd-centric. The heavier topics will be found on my other blog.


The reason for this change stems from my personal goal to spend less on videogames each year. I haven't had Gamefly since November 2011, and I'm not about to start buying every new release like I did during college. This doesn't mean I'm abandoning the hobby. Just scaling it back. Expect to see posts about the DLC content for Batman, MW3, and Deadspace 2. I will also continue to write about trends in the industry.

Past to Present a'la Snerts will continue to feature more thought provoking content. Topics will range from the Arab Spring to energy development and local politics. This, however, may change has time passes. In general the goal is to write more on the topics that really make me think and are grounded a bit more in reality than the entertainment business.


There you have it. My excuse for avoiding writing, and some goals for 2012. As always any feedback is welcomed. The semi-great Snerts has opinions about everything. Send an email with topic suggestions if you so desire.

Stay awesome everyone!


--Snerts