Justice, Propriety, and Righteousness

Early yesterday morning at the screening of the new Batman movie a deranged man went on a killing spree.  This tragedy cannot be overstated, nor any requisite expression of condolences made to the family and friends of the victims, or the victims themselves.  My heartfelt sympathy goes out to all of them.  

With that said, I have seen a couple things that have happened in the subsequent 24 hours that I feel compelled to speak out on.  The first has to do with a statement made by the chief of police in the following article (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/police-press-motive-denver-area-movie-massacre-232932177.html)

"The most important thing is that there is justice for these victims, and justice will occur in a courtroom."

Of the myriad of statements I heard, this one stood out to me.  The main reason goes to the grander point of justice and the way we as a society and as select individuals must balance it.  When I think justice, I think about a moral and/or legal re-balancing of the scales.  Someone breaks into a car, they pay for all the lost items, fixing the window, etc.  Basically they make the victim whole again in terms of financials.  Then they pay a debt to society that has been deemed sufficient.  In the end what we are left with is that the victim and society get paid back in a sense.  That to me is justice.  But when we're talking about murder, and some other egregious crimes, there will never be justice.  Someone tell me that justice was served for Mark Klass.  Tell me that the scales can ever be rebalanced for him.  And yes, I'm against capital punishment, but that's is secondary to my actual point here.  If we're going to talk about justice I think we owe the victims of these crimes the respect of not tying the word only to our court system, and especially at such an early junction.  So please Mr. Policeman.  Stop talking justice at this point. 

Having sufficiently vented on justice, I want to move on to propriety.  In less than 24 hours, I have seen both sides of the 2nd Amendment argument come out trying to wedge this tragedy into a political point.  Worse than that fundamental point is the way in which they have done it.  I swear, sometimes I think people have preformed arguments just waiting for an incident to happen so they can just copy-paste the link and a picture into.  

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/523773_10151304716898902_792830919_n.jpg

Well, there's one now.  Where do I even begin on this?  Well, the bulk of my criticism will have to wait for a little later in this post.  But the important thing here is that we have a direct implication that this tragedy is due to the battle over the second amendment.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwqe0lNnUqI&feature=player_embedded

Holy immeasurable fuck.  Really Mr. Gohmert?  This is the atheists fault?  I mean, no manifesto, no evidence, just take a tragedy and use it to attack the secularists in society?  Ignoring the irony that the first two founding fathers he quoted in support of his position are widely considered to be the least religious (or at least most secular).  Is this what this situation needs?  Are the victims and their families benefiting from your attack on secularism?

Can we all just take a quick step back and recognize that when a tragedy like this strikes that instead of trying first to see a political advantage, we try and help?  Please?  Can we pretend for five seconds that there is some underlying sense of propriety in our society that goes beyond politics and starts with cohesion?  

Lastly, I want to touch on the sense of righteousness that way too many people in this country seem to have.  And I'm not pointing at any group here.  I'm pointing to anyone who can't think past their own views as though they hold some intrinsic value beyond the sphere of their own minds.  Truth is subjective folks, that's just the way of it.  Some truths are absolute, but more often than not, there will be a less objective criteria by which we might judge truth.  And in the event that our truth might come headlong into a collision with the truth that others hold, we need to set aside our pride and arrogance and try and see that there can be other valid points.  In addition, the further to the extreme our own positions might be, the more willing we need to be to accept that a functional reality is even less likely to align with our own points of view.  

Taking the second amendment as an example of this, I want to imagine two worlds.  One where there are no gun laws and in another there is absolute gun control.  One side is anarchy by proxy, and on the other we have the Orwellian world of 1984.  Please, can we at least acknowledge that neither of these models is likely to serve our nation?  That both are fundamentally flawed, and that implementation of either would result in a tyrannical nation.  The former would be at behest of the armed against the unarmed, the latter being of the government against us all.  What difference does it make?  So before we go off half cocked with either of these trains of thought, can we just take a quick step back and say that there is probably a middle ground that is in practice more feasible? 

So please, all you gun control folks who think that the answer to gun violence is to make it more difficult for law abiding citizens to own a gun, can  you please just acknowledge that there are bad people out there, and they will always do bad things.  And to all you 2nd amendment absolutists out there, can we please accept that there can be restrictions in place to help dampen the severity of whacko's gone wild and still let us protect ourselves?  The more we polarize, the more we patronize, the further we get from a real solution.  

Speaking of polarizing, let me go back to that picture I referenced above.  

Two Similar Stories - Just like "Of Mice and Men" and "Thelma and Louise" are two similar stories.  The only thing similar about them is that they both involved bad guys and guns

Two Different Endings - Well no shit.  

Beyond the simple concept that correlation does not in any way imply causation, isn't this just about as stupid as it can be?  To imply that the endings could/would/should be related is laughable...if it wasn't for the tragedy involved.  So, two guys walk into a cafe with the intent of robbing the place.  Note, that their intent wasn't to slaughter, but to rob.  They are met with a random citizen happening to be carrying a weapon who then confronts and drives them back.  Compare that to a determined killer with an intent to kill.  Not to rob, not to threaten, and by extension to use the threat of force to intimidate.  He came to kill and he did.  How could these two situations not have had different outcomes.  One has the people coming in without firing a shot.  The other is a guy who just started spraying.  Then there is the inclusion of the "concealed weapon" caveat to really cloud the issue.  In Florida the guy was carrying, in Colorado nobody else was.  So this must obviously mean that only the laws of Colorado stood in the way of this killer right?  Except that's a flat out lie.  The laws in CO and FL are actually pretty similar.  It's just a tragic set of different circumstances that led to the outcome disparity.  And I just know, I FUCKING KNOW, that it's only a matter of time (probably already has happened) that the "gun control" lobby will prop this up as a cornerstone of why we need stricter gun control with an equally fallacious quippy poster.  

I wish there was a graceful way of summing up this post, but if there is, it escapes me.  All I know is that this is a tragedy and perhaps the only thing worse than what happened is the way the media, the system, and the political advantage folk will embrace it as an argument first, and a tragedy second. 

Can't We All Just Get Along

Maybe I'm naive.  Hey, I said maybe.  But here's something that I just can't square with my own views on the political climate in our nation these days.  This isn't going to be a condemning welfare queens, or a "we need to raise taxes" post.  Today I want to understand why in what seems to be a system of greater polarization why it is that we are so hostile toward the other side as if they were somehow the enemy.  I'm not a spring chicken, but I'm not that old either, and maybe this has been going on a lot longer than I am aware, but what really got me thinking was this. 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/hank-williams-jr-president-obama-hates-america-20120711

I respect the right of every American to use the first amendment protection of free speech, but really Hank?  The president HATES AMERICA?  I can't square this statement in any way.  If he had said that Obama's policies were weakening the economy, I get that.  I disagree with it, but I at least get it.  If he had said that soft policies on terrorists had made us less safe, same thing.  But he hates America?  I can't.  My brain rejects that statement on the same level as any other non-sequitur.

Purple sounds for dog the basket

I want desperately to think that it's all a coincidence that the first "non white" president is the one who has to keep proving his citizenship, and is called un-American, muslim, etc.  I want to believe that there is not some significant portion of this country (a minority, but not an insignificant one) that has decided that fundamentally Obama can't be a good president because he is...BLACK.  The reality is however that I can't recall a president who has been under such attack from day one.  'W' stripped more Americans of their liberties than any other I can recall.  He and Cheney (et al) decided that waterboarding...aka TORTURE...was okay so long as the ends justified the means.  They botched (repeatedly) our invasion and subsequent actions in Iraq.  There were no WMD's.  They put a two-front war on the credit card, all the while cutting taxes.  All this, and so much more, and at worst we call them stupid, or corrupt.  But not once have I heard their patriotism questioned.  But Obama comes into office, inheriting a TBQH shitty situation.  He pushes for the things he ran on (Healthcare, Banking Reform, etc.) and is met with headlong resistance from the right every step of the way.  Then he caves to a series of conservative ideals (extending the Bush tax cuts, goes after pot dispensaries, etc.) because the political "will" wasn't there to challenge them.  He kills Bin Laden, backs the overthrow of Quadaffi, imposes sanctions on Iran, and closes down the active part of the war in Iraq.  And yet somehow he's the most socialist president ever.  I don't get it.  It forms a cognitive dissonance in my brain that just doesn't stop.  How can so many people on the right hate the guy for what he's "done" and his base feels alienated by what he "hasn't".  No equal rights to gays.  A watered down health care bill (ironically basically the same one Repubs proposed a couple decades ago).  A toothless financial reform that didn't really do much.  Gitmo still open.  So many fundamental things that he should have pushed through, and yet didn't.  Honestly because he was playing politics...but more on that later. 

I get it, I really do.  There are two different platforms politically and they are on the surface pretty much diametrically opposing constructs.  One side wants to tax and spend, the other wants to reduce taxes and spending.  Ultimately it's all about balancing the checkbook, regardless of which approach we take.  'W' spent like a madman and then lowered taxes.  Wait, what?  That's like buying a new Ferrari and paying for it by asking your boss for a PAY CUT!!!!!!  And then old Hank wants to bitch about how we're passing our debt onto our grandkids.  Well yeah.  Funny how when you spend and don't bring in money that tends to happen.  And sure, the economy took a shit...in a BIG way.  And yes we collectively had to do something to fix it.  But somehow along the way we adopted this notion that the only thing we needed to do was cut spending (deep cuts) to fix it.  Someone please tell me how degrading already diminished school facilities makes long term sense.  Yes, there is waste that we need to root out, but if we're already so far behind it all, why aren't we looking at EVERYTHING.  Military, welfare, etc.  Why don't we look into marginal improvements into the tax structure, and <gasp> maybe ask the wealthy to help shoulder the burden that they can without taking food off the table in a short term solution.  But no.  It's all or nothing.  There is no compromise.  There is no political will to be the guy who says "enough is enough...we need to fix this...politics be damned".  This concept actually will be covered in a different post to come, but for the here and now, why is it that we are settling for a more and more divergent attitude in our government.  How is it that we are okay with the casual "bark but no bite" policies that seem to flow through DC like a river?  $15 trillion and counting in the hole, and last I checked any and all actions going on from the government are to continue to shore up the economy which in turn keeps us going negative. 

So what is my point?  As I'm sure many of you are bored to tears after reading all this.  Simply put, I think it's time we stopped thinking so oppositional to the "other" side and start thinking logically about what sorts of solutions need to happen regardless of politics.  Recognizing that every action (raising or lowering taxes, or spending) will have far reaching impacts should we let this concept continue to paralyze us?  Great, the DOW is back to nearly 13,000.  Corporate profits are at record levels.  The economy is in great shape.  Except for all the people who are making a living.  Investors, and the uber rich are doing great, but the rest of the people are still dealing with nearly 10% unemployment.  Firefighters are getting their pay cut to minimum wage.  Schools are crumbling, teachers are bailing.  At what point do we say fuck it, and demand that as a collective, our society band together...help the needy, close the gaps in policy that allow for abuse, get our asses out of the global police mode, and get back to our roots?  We have it in us to be the greatest nation this planet has ever seen.  We actually WERE that nation a half a century ago.  Can we just stop fighting and name calling just long enough to get some real traction on our situation and start sacrificing in the now, to make for a better tomorrow?  For the love of God....can't we all just get along?!?!?

Jim Throws Down Life Lessons As Though He Were A Blind Donkey, Playing Pin The Tail On The Thought Process

 *****EXPLICIT LYRICS BE FOUND WITHIN*****

BLOG Formerly Known as “Fuck Conformity”

So here’s a question.  Why is it that we (collectively) have decided that choices in our life seem to be most often in black-and-white.  Even if we concede that there isn’t a particular side that is inherently good or bad, we tend to think in terms of the extreme, or at least a diminishment of any gradient along the line.  Republican or Democrat.  Fat or thin.  Blonde or Brunette.  Etc., etc., etc.  Sure, people on either side of the polarity there are apt to view the “others” with some level of either disdain, or at the very least distinction.  But where does this drive to conformity to polar norms really lead us to?  We shooting for a Morlock-Eloi relationship as our societal target?  A scary thought for me is to think of Orwell (1984) and think that these arbitrary societal “norms” really are nothing more than a political tactic whereby one side gains support of the grays in the middle by forcing the issue not into a what you want, but what you don’t want.  It’s not enough to be a libertarian, dangling between the fiscal and social issues, hopelessly stranded betwixt the parties.  No, no, no.  You have to choose.  You have to BE a liberal or a conservative, otherwise that (socialist/anarchist) will do X, Y, and Z.  So we’ve degraded the greatest government concept EVER within 250 years to a populous that is 25% “white”, 25% “black” and 50% “who couldn’t fucking care less”.  Eventually isn’t it at least conceivable that our society fractures to the point where people 99% the same, who want the same things, but have different ideas about how to get there start pointing guns at each other and declaring them the enemy?  And god forbid if we get just complacent enough to let the government start telling us who the enemy is.  Yeah, Orwell was right. 

So again I ask.  What the fuck is so special about conformity?  Isn’t it just a way to ball as many people into one of two groups, strip their individual (dissenting) identities until at last you have an army of loyal citizens who all toe the line?  And isn’t that really just militancy.  <<<ALL MY MARINE BROTHERS, ALL DUE RESPECT FOR THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE(S)>>>  We don’t train Marines from day one to fundamentally question things.  A Marine in the line of fire that spends time pondering the justness of their cause, or the morality of killing, or anything else is not an effective weapon.  They are broken down from the start and built into soldiers that are committed to their mission and loyal to it, some might say to a fault.  But they “toe the line”.  In the heat of battle, they’ll level their weapons and kill “the enemy” because their duty to loyalty is central to their being.  And that view is critical in time of war.  And it’s especially true for brothers in arms bonded by God and Country.  But society isn’t war…or at least it can and should operate on a different field than guys with guns.  A democracy even more so.  Twenty marines on a firing line with incoming fire are NOT A DEMOCRACY.  Twenty random citizens on the street in America right this instant ARE.  Or at least they are in concept of our “free” nation.  The reality is more like five of them are shoved into this circle, another five are shoved into another circle, and the final ten are either told to fuck off (no, you can’t register to vote today…sorry) or tell the system to fuck off (Obama and Romney?  Those are my choices…Where’s my beer?).  But yeah, that’s democracy circa 2012.  The good news is that if we have a war.  Like I don’t know, whip the public into a frenzy over weapons of mass destruction (that aren’t actually there) you can at least grab those other ten and get them close to the line in the name of patriotism.  God I love shotgun democracy.  And fuck the person who already coined that phrase, my children just lost $5 million in T-Shirt slogan money. 

Toe the line folks.  Stand up and be counted.  Well, unless you’re poor, brown, have tits, are against the war, blah, blah, blah, ad nauseam.  And yeah, all those are social liberal stances that I picked.  Sue me.  But in a country that has always been dominated by rich, white, men.  I can’t really help to see the residual angst on behalf of the oppressed when there are still ignorant oppressors out there.  The KKK, people against DOMA, you know…people who will never see this country and its citizens as fundamentally the same regardless of any characteristics.  Son-of-a-bitch I can’t stay on topic.  I was going to call this thread F*!% Conformity.  Now I’m thinking something like aimless babble. 

But yeah, fuck conformity.  “Keep Austin Weird”.  “Keep Portland Weird”. 

“The only people for me are the mad ones, the ones who are mad to live, mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time, the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn like fabulous yellow roman candles exploding like spiders across the stars.”

                                                                                                                -Jack Kerouac

God damn right.  The mindless drones, the soldiers of politics, the black, the white, and the consenters.  You are not America.  You are slaves to an ideal that in all reality doesn’t give two shits about your ACTUAL ideals.  If you’re absolutely certain about anything in this world, you’re absolutely wrong.  Certainty is complacency. 

“The true value of man is not determined by his possession, supposed or real, of Truth, but rather by his sincere exertion to get to the Truth.  It is not possession of Truth by which he extends his powers and in which his ever-growing perfectability is to be found.  Possession makes one passive, indolent and proud.  If God were to hold all Truth concealed in his right hand, and in his left only the steady and diligent drive for Truth, albeit with the proviso that I would always and forever err in the process, and to offer me the choice, I would with all humility take the left hand. ”
                                                                                                                                - Gotthold Ephraim Lessing

                What is it about truth and certainty that we crave so greatly?  And how in hell, in this time of discovery and enlightenment, do we dare to stand before the universe and smugly think we KNOW anything.  Well, anything of certainty anyway.  Isn’t insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?  “The world is flat”.  There was a time when everyone believed that statement.  It made sense, because we didn’t have the perception to see that it was false.  It is only through analysis and discovery that starts with a boundless assumption that we could ever get to the truth.  If every single explorer had just accepted that the earth was flat and never bothered to try and find the edge…we’d still believe it.  And we’d still believe that Zeus causes the lightning.  Or that the sun is drug across the sky by Horace.  Or that….damn!!!!!!  Off topic again.  Well, at least the mystery of the title is cleared up.  Jim Throws Down Life Lessons As Though He Were A Blind Donkey, Playing Pin The Tail On The Thought Process.  And that shit my friends is an original, and is going on a shirt today.  Q&A, I just saved your futures. 

                Where was I?  Fuck conformity, some stuff about truth, and wisdom…oh yeah.  Fuck conformity.  Be a gray and be proud of it.  Stir the pot a little.  If America was founded as a melting pot, a crucible of people and personalities, with this our CORE SLOGAN:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.

                Why are we so damn determined to separate those metals now and divide them. 

Give me your poor?  So we can just put them into the inner city ghettos and ignore their plight until they steal some rich guys’ car.

Yearning to be free?  Free so long as you fit the mold of what we say free is.

Lift my lamp beside the golden door?  Please.  What lamp?  What door? 

                Best I can tell, the American Dream which used to mean so many things has become writing on a men’s room stall.  Or worse, a cloak of patriotism that the people in power use to jingle our allegiance bells whenever we start to rise up.  Anyone out there doubt what a war does to our country?  Anyone actually believe that the masses don’t get up to “support the troops”, and are susceptible to any exploits in the name of patriotism?  We don’t have to be truly just, as long as we can convince “the people” that this war is for them, or their children.  It isn’t until years later that we learn that <putting on my tinfoil hat so the “watchers” don’t read my thoughts> the government would lie to our faces to justify an unjust war.  Gulf of Tonkin anyone?  They WANTED to engage in that conflict, so they cooked up a story that the nation bought hook, line, and sinker.  And all to avoid the backlash of the people who would say no.  To energize enough people that they (the government) wouldn’t have to fear the discourse because…..  The protesters are all UNPATRIOTIC.  Yep, the people that say, stop sending our children to some God forsaken jungle to be killed, and to kill women and children, who will come home scarred for life and most likely kill themselves (with Jim Beam, or a Smith & Wesson) all because of a phantom event that never actually happened, they are now the “bad people”.  But go on America.  Put your little sign up in your shop window.  “Support the Troops”.  I am so sick of that fucking phrase.  WE ALL SUPPORT THE TROOPS YOU FUCKING SHITS!!!!  Wearing a cross doesn’t make you a Christian.  And putting that sign up doesn’t make you a patriot.  Those things make you an advertisement to a cause, and often it’s a cause that somebody somewhere should do a reality check on the REAL issue behind it.  The next car I see with a “Support the Troops” and a “Die fags die” type bumper sticker on the same vehicle, I’m gonna rage at.  A profanity laced tirade that ass face probably couldn’t imagine.  And so I have another t-shirt idea.  Or better yet, I should make bumper stickers and slap them on the windows of these cars I see. 

“Support the troops, as long as they’re not faggots”

                Kinda catchy, no?  And again, I’m off topic, but as that’s par for the course today, I’m not gonna bother trying to right the ship at this point.  Take your false patriotism, and your false message of love, and go stand in the corner.  We REAL Americans have work to do.  We need to get out on the street and make sure we don’t let a bill pass that requires women to be paid like men for the same work.  We need to make sure them damn gays don’t get married because if we let them, well that’s the same as letting a man marry a gerbil.  We need to make sure that Staff Sergeant’s death at the hands of a suicide bomber doesn’t filter into the media because “the people” might not like that.  It’s important that he dies over there though, because otherwise we’d have to fight them over here.  Wait a second?  No.  Back in the corner with you. 

                So I beg all of you.  Stop seeing the world through black-and-white lenses.  Stop looking at your neighbor as an opponent because he thinks welfare is a good (or bad) idea.  Stop using words like Socialist because they pack a punch.  Obama isn’t a socialist folks.  Really, he’s not.  He’s no more a socialist than anyone who uses ROADS, you know…those federally funded flat things that take your from sea to shining sea.  Socio – of society.  It’s US folks.  All of US.  We are the society.  In all its splendor and all its folly.  From the KKK, to MLK.  From Rosa Parks, to Central Park.  We are the collection of misfits and miscreants united under one banner.  The red, white, and blue colors of a nation of immigrants and dreams.  All unique.  All worthy and valuable.  What do the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Gettysburg Address have in common.  Each one has an allusion, or a statement that reflects the unity of the people.  We, us, our.  No qualifiers.  No “we Christians”, or “we whites”.  It’s we AMERICANS.  All of us.  The tired, the weak, the huddled masses.  We WANTED these people because a man(genderless pronoun please) cast from a society forgotten will never be so loyal as to the one who shelters him, and values him.  So conceptually if we were founded on diversity, and for 200 years were the lamp beside the golden door, what are we now?  What would the plaque say to the world about us?  Would a single phrase remain?  The statue of tyranny, bright neon sign that says “NO VACANCY”. 

You Are The Problem (And So Am I)

This will most likely be the first in a (LONG) series of rantings about my thoughts on the status of politics in America today.  This is gonna be a bumpy ride, but what the hell.  Let's do this.

Growing up the thing that always struck me as the fundamental construct of America that made us so strong was the "melting pot" society.  It was through our diversity that we gained strength.  Einstein said:

            "No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."

So what is there to gain by conformity?  Nothing.  It is the very nature of diversity, and the deeper and richer our society delves into it, the greater our collective consciousness becomes, and the more able we are to be able to do great things.  I know politics has always been a polarizing force, and maybe it's just my awareness that has changed, but it truly feels like we are starting to separate from one another.  We are thinking in terms of class, gender, race, religion, wealth, status, and a million other defining constructs above the sense of collective.  And the politicians seem to be gravitating further and further from the center.  But why?  That is the thing that has really stuck in my craw for a while now.  Why are they pandering further toward the fringe?  Does Romney really think that he's going to woo some percentage of the Obama base, by refusing to separate himself from the birther commentary?  Does Obama think that he's somehow going to win support of the tea party movement by caving to pressure to extend tax cuts?  I understand the need to keep the base energized, but isn't there a point where any gains from base stimulation are offset by centrist alienation?  Howard Zinn has pointed out that for years while we talk about decisive victories for candidate A, or B, the reality is that they only received marginally more than 25-28% of all the POSSIBLE vote.  Half of the voting populous have become so disenfranchised from the process that they don't even bother.  How is this democracy?  How is it that as special interests and fringe candidates have become the norm while the voice of the middle (the overwhelming majority) have become fodder?  An afterthought?  Well as the title says....

I BLAME YOU

AND I BLAME MYSELF

The collective consciousness of a nation that has failed to think and act rationally.  We blame each other.  We blame the "other guy".  We are so busy in our own spheres that we can't see the big picture.  <Insert something about forests and trees here>  Here's an example.  There was a time that "Made in the USA" meant quality.  Not only quality, but highest quality.  Yes, technology was more expensive (relative to average worker salary) and people had a sense that there were just some things that were either; beyond their affordable reach, or needed to be saved up for.  Anyone been in Wal-Mart lately?  How much does a new flat screen TV cost?  And a Blu-Ray player?  Not that I besmirch anyone for wanting to enjoy the finer things in life, but there is a progression here that we're missing.  Let me tell you about Mr. Sykle.

Mr. Sykle works hard but doesn't make a lot of money.  He gets by, but is by no means a wealthy man, nor does he have a lot of disposable income.  One day he sees an advertisement for Super Discount Electronics Warehouse.  Big sale on Blu-Ray players.  This weekend only $69.  Mr. Sykle is amazed by this bargain and sure enough Saturday morning he's at the store, and by that night he is enjoying the HD quality entertainment of his new player (and TV, because the salesman showed him how pretty it was).  Monday morning rolls around and his manager comes to him and tells him that the company is having some financial difficulty and they're going to be cutting everyone's hours, and even letting some people go.  Now his salary just got cut a little bit.  But that's okay, he can cut some corners.  He'll hold off on buying that new car he needs.  Or he just won't save up as much for his kid's education.  A few months later, word comes down that more hours are getting cut.  This time there is a rumor that the company is outsourcing jobs to China.  Mr. Sykle takes another pay cut, cuts a few more corners at home, and slowly his quality of life begins to dimish.  Eventually it isn't the excesses that get cut, it's necessities.  Standing in line at the super center, wondering why things have taken such a negative turn he has a moment of clarity.  In a flash it all makes sense.  His shiny entertainment center was made by the UberCheap company, based in Indonesia.  Sure, he saved $200, but that money meant that a domestic company had to make cuts to production.  Maybe they moved jobs overseas, like his company did.  Like his company did....but his company makes electronics parts for an American company.  Did he make this happen?  Was all of this his fault?  The long and short of it is yes and no.  Mr. Sykle forgot that the marketplace is connected.  He forgot that his persona as a consumer and as a producer were both parts of the same cycle.  (Sykle-cycle...get it?  LOL) 

While there is nothing wrong with international trade, or low price goods, we have to be aware that the effects of them can reach well beyond any one decision, or any one societal perception.  But I can't believe that there isn't a linear effect between these concepts.  That ultimately we're in a race to the bottom.  We buy from the cheapest option, thus the "quality" competition either has to cut costs (and quality) to compete, or go out of business.  Either option means that places that can undercut domestic products will do so, and eventually gross quality drops, and gross earning drops too.  We are all a part of this.  We are blindly going with the flow and not seeing the rapids ahead.  There is a VAST discussion to be had about upper echelon earners and greed to be had, but that will have to be another post. 

So yes.  I blame us.  All of us.  All of us who have forgotten what it means to be a participant in democracy.  All of us who aren't voting with our dollars.  All of us who aren't voting period.  All of us who have become passive spectators and fallen into the mindset that our little voices can't make changes.  Anyone want to wager that if all those "I just don't care anymore" folks came out en masse (every last one of them) and wrote in "Go f'k yourself" as their candidate that the very next day Washington wouldn't be in complete turmoil over the fear of the masses?  We deserve better folks, but we have to demand change.  Nobody is going to give it to us.  If you haven't heard of the freedom riders, look them up.  If you have heard of them, look them up again.  Take a stand against the system and it's established power structure.  Write your congressman, senator, or Governor.  Write the President.  Buy American.  Even the littlest actions can be the tipping point, and if you don't do it...and the next guy doesn't either.  We only have one place to look when we start assigning blame for the state of this union.  A mirror.