theory

So here's a thought: When God saw in Genesis that it was not good for man to be alone, sin had not yet entered the world. Maybe now, with the presence of sin, it is better for the fleshly man to be alone.

True, I look around and see a lot of happy families, lots of love. I see people helping others, being nice to others, saying kind words. I do not dispute the genuineness of human love or happiness in the social context. But with the inherent sinfulness of man comes distrust, jealousy, anger, vengeance, bitterness, and the list goes on. Did God really intend for the fleshly man to partake in society? Such a man has a huge capacity to inflict pain and hurt on others. War aside, it is in the company of others that lustfulness and covetousness must occur. I wouldn't want a massive diamond rock on my finger if no one else had or wanted one, or if no one else saw it. I would have no one to compare myself to, no Joneses to keep up with (or beat). If we were lonely creatures, no one would be around to hear us slander others or be its target. With our tongues, we commit unmeasurable damage and evil. They are the original weapons of mass destruction capable of great deceit and hurt. And I don't want to skirt physical damage; again, aside from war, there are diseases that transmit from person to person, accidents caused by other people, and crimes that assume the presence of other people such as burglary, murder, kidnapping, adultery, heists, and -gasp-terrorism. And let's also mention suicide--I don't know what the leading causes are, but I'm sure a handful or more had something to do with the pressures of society, feelings of not measuring up, guilt, and the like.

I take an earnest look at myself and my relationships with others, and I readily confess that they are all imperfect. But in my defense, I am only human. This is my point, that humans are incapable of having perfect relationships. This must be in the definition of "human" somewhere, that we are fallible. We are not fit for company. Not the way we are now, at least, with our selfishness. We can certainly strive to be the way we will be, though. Nevertheless, this striving is not the way it was intended at all; we were intended to already be. Humans are not inherently faithful, generous, kind. Our Good Samaritan moments are just shadows of how it will be in Heaven after the Second Coming.

something to read

for later

EDIT:

"I hate that God lets you suffer like this," I said.

"Oh," he said, taken aback, "God suffers more."

-2009

reflections from my freshman self

To remind myself of what I thought before on libertarianism.

John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty” expresses his opinion that liberty is the chief political value. He wrote this book to encourage others to exercise their liberty rather than conform, which has become the easy thing to do in a modern society wherein rule is determined by majority consent. Mill advocated that individual liberty should be preserved at all costs unless its preservation harms others or takes away their liberty. The liberty about which he wrote is civil, or social, liberty rather than liberty of the will. He was concerned with the power of society and government to oppress individual liberty and, through this book, sought to define the limits of the power that society can legitimately exercise over the individual. Mill believed that liberty of thought and feeling, liberty of tastes and pursuits, and liberty to unite are the essential liberties with which society must not interfere; “[n]o society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government” (Mill 55).

In previous ages, the struggle between liberty and authority was comprised of the struggle between subjects and their governments, in which subjects fought for protection against the tyranny of their rulers. Today, in democratic societies, the government is no longer independent of the people. Temporary elected leaders rule for the people and according to the will of the people. However, the people are still not free from tyranny; this is because the “will of the people…practically means the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people” (Mill 46). The majority can manipulate public opinion to coincide with its own, hence exhibiting tyranny through silencing the minority’s voice. The minority must be protected from the “tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling” or else its liberty is denied—particularly, its freedoms of thought and speech. Mill strongly believed in the sanctity of these freedoms and that they should never be violated; “[i]f all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind” (Mill 59). Stifling one man’s freedom of speech would rob the human race of a potentially right opinion and prevent a possible truth from being revealed.

According to Mill, man can interfere with another’s liberty of action only in the pursuit of self-protection or the protection of others: “[T]he only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others” (Mill 52). Mill based this idea on his opinion that liberty is the most important thing to be attained, even more so than what is wise or morally right. I can encourage a friend to do what is right, but unless the consequences of his actions are harmful to another, I cannot force him to do so. This is because the “only part of the conduct of any one, for which he is amenable to society, is that which concerns others. In the part which merely concerns himself, his independence is, of right, absolute” (Mill 52). The liberty of every man with the capacity to act rationally must be preserved, and his wishes respected.

I agree with Mill that liberty is a good thing which should be preserved, that it has a positive impact on society. Although his idea that a person’s liberty should be interfered with only when his behavior harms others sounds pleasant to the ear, I’m not sure how practicable it is. Mill believed that the preservation of liberty is more important than ethics, but I believe that society’s duty to act morally is more important. Mill’s reasoning is not based on an absolute scale of what is right and wrong, but on liberty as the principal good. Although I recognize that liberty is extremely important, I think more important things do exist. Suppose that I have a friend who has no family or any other friends excluding myself. If he arbitrarily decides to kill himself and I discover his plans, should I stop him? This would harm solely him, as it would not cause me or anyone else to harm anyone. According to Mill, I cannot force him to refrain from killing himself, as “the individual is sovereign.” However, I believe that I am morally coerced to do all I can to prevent him from taking his life. Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but liberty over happiness, and life over liberty.

fiction

Do words craft the person or does the person craft the words? You can be anyone you want by choosing your words that way. They're tricky, these words, especially when scrawled or typed. With the written word, there is a sense of detachment that the spoken word does not allow for. You can always link spoken words to a voice, at least. With the written word, you don't always know who the author is, unless it has been made explicit. And even then, who knows? that person may not even be the true author. The words may be stolen goods.

Books will never go out of style, even if print media does. As much as people like to hear themselves speak, they also like to see themselves in print. The thoughts you form in your head sound somehow more intelligent when you write them out than we you say them. Somehow you become a more substantial person as a writer of thoughts than a thinker of the same. Somehow there is accomplishment in writing, even if no one but you reads it. Plus, there can be ownership of the written word in a way not afforded by its spoken brother; attributed to can now be definitively authored by, or just, sweetly, by. And people are vain, they like to leave legacies. In an internet age where memory fades fast due to constant replacement of preoccupations, we crave all the more desperately for something lasting. Ironic, then, how easily the lasting can be destroyed, or--worse--stolen. No matter how much you pour into your writing, no matter how long you spend deliberating over the right words to put forth, there remains the anonymity that invariably comes with separation of the writer from his physical voice.

But maybe that's not the point of the written word at all, the authorship. Maybe the point is the argument, no matter what it derives from, or where. Moreover, the miracle of writing is that stories don't have to be autobiographical; they aren't limited to the scope of the author's experience. You can be anything, when you write about anything.

my Saturday

Woke up late, went to KC for lunch with mom and sister, then Home Depot for new light, sink, and spray paint, arrived at home to spray paint medicine cabinet/touch up some trouble areas around house with white (but green!) paint/do laundry, caught up on some TV, ate Joyce's yummy Trader Joe's dinner, surfed the web, went bowling at Stelton, then came home and cleaned/painted some more.

Pretty good day, minus the getting sick and not doing any school work parts. I love working on my house! Can't wait to throw house parties when the fixing up is all done.

little linguists

A new study shows that babies cry in their mother's tongue... Them little ones are smart!

everything becomes political..

but not for them.

dating for the First Couple

only a matter of time

before scientists agree that humans and chimps did not share a common ancestor. is ardipithecus ramidus even a human ancestor? i think it's as scientific to affirm that as it is to do the opposite

delusion

delusion is a happy trap. you can truly convince yourself of anything if you believe it hard enough. like that you had a happy childhood. and you can seriously go through life thinking this way. so much of a person's history boils down to memory, a thing so highly dependent on psyche, and others' memory. what a pot of gold. what an electrical wire. but when it comes to individual lives, most of the time delusion doesn't matter much, if you're insignificant enough -- that is, if you believe in insignificant people at all. what i mean is, individual "mis-memories" can be harmless if they don't impact many others.

when they do, or when your memories make up a collective, you're playing a different ballgame. this is why historical analysis is so important - because you can have 2 people with entirely opposite recollections of a single event, and when this occurs, both contribute but neither commands legitimacy. oral history only truly works as a retelling of factual events when there are numerous points-of-view involved (and of course, people know this - no one goes around believing every word of the Iliad was historical). don't trust the individual voice when it comes to history unless it is backed by documentation or other kind of evidence.

this is why being a historian, to me, is such a noble career. you have to really be a scholar in order to command any kind of unbiased historical expertise. love love love history. but memory fails me, which is why i suck as a history major. Joanna, what a dumb excuse.

back to my original topic. blogging can serve to alleviate time's distorting effects on memory. it can capture the author's feelings at the time they are being felt, events as they are occurring, etc. less room for error on a test when you just studied the material, right? this does not preclude the many negative effects of blogging, though, such as feeding blogger narcissism and reader hostility, and especially general inanity. wow, what am i doing here? haha

little emperors

China is too big for Communism

excitement

One of the best games I've had the pleasure to beat is being turned into a movie! Too bad the movie will never live up, but still. That the movie's plot won't be a thing like the game's is to be expected, but hopefully Disney makes it work. The prince in Sands is my favorite out of all the games (mostly because he isn't 2D and not yet ridiculously dark and brooding), despite the fact that his fighting skills leave much to be desired.

Prince Of Persia

The online versions aren't the funnest (mostly because they are 10 times as hard), but here is the original Prince of Persia game.

why is google so hip?

I am totally never using Firefox again if I can help it.

Currently: Drowning myself in Milka. Ouch, Twitter-style. My coolness factor just dropped into the negative.

EDIT: Apparently, cool 404 pages are all the rage now. I am so behind the trends.

reality at night

So I was watching Reality Bites and got to the part where Lelaina and Michael talk about stars and couldn't help thinking that was a conversation I've had many times. Too bad I'd rather have any other conversation in the movie. Anyway, Atwood put it nicely in a passage I just read: "The moon is a stone and the sky is full of deadly hardware, but oh God, how beautiful anyway." The moon's a stone and we are dust. Perspective speaks bluntly. Anyway, can't help thinking I am in some kind of twilight these days, but I think the whole world is feeling it. Except for kids, and some aspects of the media, like Up, or David Bromstad. Not really much hope going on, more like understanding that the storm's got to be weathered and that it'll die down eventually. Holding out for later, or something. Later, I will change the world. Yes, we can, but is the call as urgent? Maybe I should start reading the news again? And so, I live the little moments and enjoy them briefly and dearly. Where is the end? Where is the pattern? The Goal? I think everyone's life is a little bit just like Reality Bites, only maybe not as perfectly.

I left my heart...

So I won't forget: an incomplete chronicle of our adventures in SF. (Yes, the meals were good enough to necessitate their documentation.)

Tuesday 8/18
Market and Powell Station & Trolley
Fisherman's Wharf
Pier 39
Ferry around SF Bay
Aquarium of the Bay
Lunch at Neptune's
Sea Lions
National Maritime Visitor's Center
Ghirardelli Square and awesome violinist guy
Great American Music Hall - Anya Marina and Emiliana Torrini
Dinner at concert

Wednesday 8/19
Muir Woods
Sausalito
Lunch at burger place in Sausalito
Sundae at Ghirardelli Square
Lombard Street as Candy Land
Market Street shopping
Union Square
Japan Town and Japan Center
Dinner at noodle place in Japan Center
Kabuki Theater for District 9

Thursday 8/20
Market Street wandering
Haight-Ashbury shopping
Lunch on Haight at Thai place
Golden Gate Park
California Academy of Sciences & rainforest
Japanese Tea Garden
Nightlife at California Academy of Sciences & planetarium
Dinner and cocktails at Pakistani place on Haight
Music venue on Haight - One Good Round
Became groupies and followed band to bar on Haight

Friday 8/21
Palace of Fine Arts & Lagoon
Exploratorium
Lunch at Exploratorium Cafe - local CA food
Got lost on buses and roamed around
Fort Mason & beach
Ghirardelli Square again
Dinner at Columbini - Italian
Show at Comedy College on Mason

Saturday 8/22
Pier 33 and ferry to Alcatraz
Alcatraz audio tour
Late lunch at Butterfly - Asian fusion
Castro District
Mission District
Dinner at Luna Park in Mission
Bookstores in Mission
Hotel lounging and Slide at night

Sunday 8/23
Sonoma & Cheese Factory
Napa Valley & wineries - Madonna, ??, ??, and Sutter Home
Lunch at BBQ place in Napa
Dinner at Thai Express in Nob Hill
Hotel at night

Monday 8/24
Yerba Buena Gardens and MLK Memorial
SFMOMA
Lunch at Chinatown
Cable Car Museum

I Lift My Lamp

Beside the Golden Door

Who doesn't appreciate a good history story?

daviana and estefania

!!! always wanted to sponsor a child. am already dreaming of visiting nicaragua and honduras

sponsor your own

Picture News

My favorite medium for news has gotta be photography.

overcoming in the Gaza Strip!
unsurprising - Hey, Gerald Ford used to model. Why can't Putin be Indy?
werd.

I've always loved British news, and not just for the reporters' pleasant accents. Somehow it comes off as more world- and scope-conscious than the evening news at 5, if you know what I mean. (Traffic and weather, we belong together like traffic and weather - Fountains of Wayne.) This is not to discredit American reporting, which can be great(est), just the type of news that permeates.

I also love NYTimes slideshows.

Origins

Gonzo

Obama’s Agenda for the Middle East

I made this outline of Obama's 6/4/09 speech last week, but I didn't get a chance to post it until now. I really wish this blog would allow indents! Please bear with the ugly formatting.

Issues to address:

1) Violent Extremism
a. Protect American security
i. Commander-in-Chief
ii. 9/11
b. Afghanistan and Pakistan
i. Suppress violence
ii. Help install stable governments
iii. Bring American troops home
c. Iraq
i. US entered war by choice
1. Saddam Hussein
ii. Iraq for Iraqis

2) Arab-Israeli Conflict
a. Urge, not force peace
i. Stop Israeli settlements
ii. Stop Palestinian violence
b. Establish 2 states
i. Only workable solution
ii. Stable government for Palestine

3) Nuclear Arms
a. Peace with Iran
b. Disarmament for all nations
i. Even US
c. Peaceful nuclear power available for all nations
i. Even Iran
ii. Must follow Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty

4) Democracy
a. No American nation-building
b. Self-determination for all
i. Governments must be elected
ii. Governments must rule for the people

5) Freedom of Religion
a. Islam has a tradition of tolerance
b. Should all strive for tolerance

6) Women’s Rights
a. Equal opportunity for education
b. Equal opportunity for employment
i. Micro-financing

7) Opportunities within Globalization
a. American partnership with Middle East
i. Education
ii. Economic development
iii. Science/technology
1. Healthcare
2. Greening projects

The Greatest Slavery

Charles Peguy, The Portal of the Mystery of Hope--

He who loves places himself, by loving,
By that very act, from then on, into dependence,
He who loves becomes the slave of the one who is loved.
It's normal, it's the common lot.
It's inevitable.
He who loves falls into slavery, consigns himself, puts himself under the yoke of slavery.
He becomes dependent on the one he loves.
And yet it's this very situation, my child, that God made for himself in loving us.
God has designed to hope in us, because he wanted to hope for us, wait for us.

hard to please

Women are less happy now than they were 30 years ago, according to a recent study by Penn/NBER researchers. This is a silly study to begin with, as happiness is impossible to measure objectively. But suppose their methods and findings are legit... I wouldn't be too surprised if their findings were true. With the empowerment of women comes increased burden. We have much more economic, social, and political responsibility. In other words, life is more complicated for us females, and isn't happiness the simplest of all states?

EDIT: Of course, female unhappiness is much more complicated than what I explained above. Factor in the effects of media and consumerism, for example, and our misery is compounded. And what about secularism?

Abshir Boyah: Confessions of a Somalian Pirate

Mr. Boyah, who lives in a simple little house, explains: “Don’t be surprised when I tell you all the money has disappeared. When someone who never had money suddenly gets money, it just goes.”

He claims that his estimated take of several hundred thousand dollars disappeared down a vortex of parties, weddings, jewelry, cars and qat, the stimulating leaf that Somalis chew like bubble gum.

Also, because of the extended network of relatives and clansmen, “it’s not like three people split a million bucks,” he said. “It’s more like 300.”

Oh, Mr. Boyah added, he also gives 15 percent to charity, especially to the elderly and infirm.
“I’d love to give them more,” he said.

Over all, he seemed like a man on a genuine quest for redemption — or a very good liar.

“We know what we’re doing is wrong,” he said gravely. “I’m asking forgiveness from God, the whole world, anybody.”

-NY Times

So maybe not all pirates are such terrible people after all...? Haha.

Wonderlust

She’s always more confused than she was before
where to put her left foot down.
Lost in action doesn’t get her far.
This world will not wait long for stragglers,
no such thing as a time-stopper.
That’s too bad, just too bad for wanderers.

Lost sight of the road,
hidden beneath her own junk.
Vagrancy isn’t as romantic as it sounds.
Let’s hope it’s north.
Let’s hope it ends.
Let’s hope she gets there before it ends.

words to brighten up my cube

This life, therefore, is not righteousness,
but growth in righteousness,
not health but healing,
not being but becoming,
not rest but exercise.
We are not yet what we shall be, but we are growing toward it;
the process is not yet finished but it is going on.
This is not the end, but it is the road.

-Martin Luther
_____________________________________________

Usually the thought of travel or exertion makes me tired, but this gives quite the opposite effect. Thanks, Joyce, for giving this quote to me.

pandora

Pandora is my happiness at work. Just started this account--the music genome they constructed is pretty cool.

One thing work has done is allay my music-deprivation. So big shout out to work.

John W. Gardner

So, you may (not) have been wondering who this John W. Gardner fellow is that I've quoted on my blog. I had no idea either -- I just liked the quote. Turns out he was this crazy important civil chairperson under the LBJ administration who championed, among other things, the institution of Medicare. As I was googling him, I found another quote that made me think:

"A movement to wake up America would have to be like the nation itself--not monolithic, not hierarchical, not dependant on a powerful charismatic leader rousing the masses, but leaders dispersed through all segments of society and down through all levels of the society, and upon an even greater number of vital and responsible citizens who don't necessarily think of themselves as 'leaders' but are in fact sharing leadership tasks. It cannot be centrally directed or tidy. Local effort is essential. Local responsibility is crucial... This is such a time. The next America will be forged 'out there' in America's communities."

President Obama has agreed with this principle, stressing time and again the importance of national service. You don't have to join the military, he said, to give back to your nation. You can do something as simple as clean up your neighborhood basketball court. He realizes he cannot fulfill his vow to change America by himself. I'm not sure how many Americans realize this, that change must be first a local effort. I think some people expected that America would automatically be a better place when he was elected, and the subsequent level of corporate jubilee reflects this. But remember what Gandhi said, that you must be the change you want to see in the world? I think many of us are just waiting around for the change to come to us. I know I'm guilty.

So, back to localized revolution. There is an element of localization in every revolution, isn't there. A one-man revolution doesn't bring about much change unless he garners followers who commit to his principles. The most successful revolutions begin with a group of people who share some discontent. It doesn't even have to be popular discontent -- just look at aristocratic revolutions like the Meiji Restoration and the French Revolution (oh wait, um, that wasn't exactly successful). The idea here is that many people have to work together in a causal effort to bring about a large-scale effect, and it begins on the lowest of levels. Top-down revolutions have to be disguised as bottom-up revolutions in order to be successful. What Nazi didn't think that Hitler's problems were his own?

The point of this entry, I guess, is that each of us is responsible. Every day is a day of personal reckoning. If I don't like the way something is, what have I done today to change it? If I want something, what have I done today to accomplish it? What do you think, should I become a motivational speaker? :) Anyway, that is the underlying theme of this blog, that we have been given days which are ours to use and ours to waste.

lost american dreams

The word America used to carry with it notes of promise and prosperity. People used to want to come here to find jobs, build their dream home, raise their families. This was the place, out of the entire world, to realize your dreams and make a fresh start. But now, for so many, America has lost its sparkle; our immigration rate is down because of the recession and illegal immigrants are regretting ever coming here. It's indisputable that many have lost their American dreams, but what about the status of the American Dream?

No, the Dream has not been lost. Our country has been through far tougher times, such as the Great Depression, and the Dream survived intact. This nation was born out of the concept of hard work -- just look at Jamestown, the Pilgrims, the American Revolution. It is the working man's land; you work hard so your children will have it better, and even then, your children will almost invariably want to work hard. People may not like Paris Hilton, but she does work, though maybe not as hard as she plays. In general, Americans play hard and work harder; so many people have multiple jobs (even yours truly) or are juggling work with study. If you have no job, your acquaintances sniff at you, your family prays for you, and your self-esteem plummets. If you do, your neighbors are jealous, your friends ask you to pay, and your self-worth rises. I think this is why, when people ask you to introduce yourself, the first thing you say, after perhaps your name, is your occupation. It is also why people generally don't come here to retire. One thing I noticed after watching a million House Hunters episodes is that retirees go abroad to buy houses.

No wonder this recession has made us frenetic, our panic increasing each time the media reports more job cuts. People are looking for jobs like crazy, even if they have one already, because their current one may not be secure. Life is for working; as Warren Zevon sang, "I'll sleep when I'm dead."

cheap atonement

Wow. I can hardly believe that indulgences, both partial and plenary, are coming back in fashion. Addessing why they are bringing them back, a Brooklyn bishop said, "because there is sin in the world." What an indulgence allegedly does is wipe away the consequences of sin. It clears away the punishment but does not address the source of punishment. So, it neither combats the problem of sin nor mitigates it. Though you remain guilty, you no longer have to FEEL that way because you "atoned" for it by offering up some Hail Marys or making a pilgrammage. This power grab by the Church masquerades as a holy quest of sanctification. Come to the Church, they say, and we will reduce your time in Purgatory. Come to us for help, and we may even eliminate all punishment after death. Sounds good, doesn't it, to people who are innately inclined to seek the easy way out. Unfortunately, not everything has an easy way out. The Church has claimed authority over something it just has no control over. Who has the power to determine punishment for sin? Only God.

EDIT: I don't mean to mislead, indulgences have been around forever, but it's just now they are experiencing a boom in popularity.
EDIT2: I'm not Catholic, so I don't know much about Purgatory. I think the Catholic Church said "just kidding," and now it no longer exists. That's according to my Middle Ages professor.

Gaza War a "Victory" for Both

this Arab-Israeli conflict really was very similar to previous ones. so inconclusive, with both sides claiming victorious in an uneasy ceasefire. it really leaves you thinking, was anything really achieved by it? well, now that it's over, i guess you could say that peace, at least by its political definition, is achieved. but that was already in place prior to the events. anyway, as Peter said, fighting a war for peace is like "f--ing for virginity," and isn't that why Israel launched its raid? at the end of the day, both sides have lost lives and accumulated fervor, and are ultimately as insecure as ever. victorious indeed.

EDIT: the war lasted 22 days; maybe they will call it the 22 day war? anyway, i like how my last post was at exactly the midpoint of the war, haha.

11-day (so far) war in Gaza

It's a good thing I took The Modern Middle East last semester, as I now sort of understand the history of the Arab-Israeli Conflict. I wish I still had the course, though, because I'd love to hear some discussion on the latest war. One thing about this long-running conflict is that both sides have legitimacy. I'm sure other people have said this, but I will say it anyway. The Palestinians had occupied that land for a very long time and were forcibly displaced because of arbitrary lines drawn by European powers. The Israelis, on the other hand, had "fairly" won the territory with their superior military power. The trophy, of course, is LAND. Both countries can't get what they want, and so we have partition. Lines drawn to divide an already teensy lot of land. Neither country is satisfied, and neither will be, until they get a satisfactory settlement. But the thing is, they want the same thing, and from different ideological positions. So you have the underdogs, the embittered Palestinians under the Islamist Hamas who lash out saying the Arab world has deserted them. And you have God's people and America's pet, the Israelis, who will certainly not lose the war although they may not "win". The war will probably be short, as the others have been, but the "peace" that follows it will probably be artificial unless an amazing settlement is reached. What kind of settlement? I couldn't say.

i spend

So, this article talks about how American consumers are not helping their country get out of recession: "The idea that the American family will quickly spend us out of this recession is a fantasy. It won't happen." What is happening is that people are saving instead: "You look around, you see the closing stores, and you know someone needs to spend. Just not us."

People feel that they should save because their neighbors (haha) are losing their jobs. But if they aren't, and if their job is secure, maybe spending isn't such a bad thing. Right now, prices are generally low, so you get okay bang for your buck. Also, to save it for the short term wouldn't give you much return on your investment compared with historical savings rates; after all, the stock market is pretty dismal right about now. Not to mention you would be doing your country a (small) patriotic favor, and also the global economy.

This is what I've been doing, sort of, patriot that I am. Never have I shopped more online than I did in the past year. If you're a smart shopper, you will find some pretty sweet deals. And if you're not concerned about losing your job, you really aren't losing much. As they say in the housing industry, it's a buyer's market.

communicating

it isn't what it was meant. why does everything come out the wrong way? why are there forever gaps between people, between friends? You are the only one who knows it like it is.

if human beings are social creatures, why is it so hard to communicate with one another? no, you say, it's not hard -- we can just open our mouths to communicate. but from personal experience i know, as you probably do, that it is extremely difficult to communicate if you don't speak the same language. sure, you can get basic points across, like "i'm hungry" or "where's the restroom?" but what about more complicated ideas, such as feelings, dreams, things higher up on Maslow's Hierarchy? or concepts, plans, and philosophies? even if you speak the same language, simple sentences or gestures can be grossly misinterpreted and lead to gaping chasms between the closest of friends.

i think one of the reasons why it is so hard to communicate is because we are selfish in our natures. it's hard to put ourselves into other people's shoes because maybe you wouldn't think that way in their situation, but too bad, they do. it's extremely hard to be bigger than yourself, to emphathize. even if you do something nice for someone else, you can't take away the root of their pain. you can't heal others, though you can help the process along.

to more fully understand someone, you have to spend time with them or speak with them a lot. and people just don't have that kind of time to spend, not unless they really care about someone. and even then, there is always room for miscommunication because of our physical separation from others. you can't know everything about someone else's history, all their memories, their emotions and motivations. and so we have these barriers between us.

but then again, are these barriers really that much of a bad thing, as i seem to be hinting at? would life be as fulfilling if we could just meet people and 'know' them? and here, i'm not just talking about stereotyping, certainly a shortsighted though perhaps inescapable habit. i think the fact that you can't really know someone else completely, the fact that there will always be an element of the mysterious in everyone (assuming that people are not simple beings), no matter how well you know them, makes social interaction worthwhile and rewarding. so i've come full circle. we miscommunicate, but in the process of fixing the conflict, relationships are built up.