Landon Anderson

People

2012-01-20T11:31:00.000-08:00

Look at your life and see how you have filled emptiness with people. As a result they have a stranglehold on you. See how they control your behavior by their approval and disapproval. They hold the power to ease your loneliness with their company, to send your spirits soaring with their praise, to bring you down to the depths with their criticism and rejection. Take a look at yourself spending almost every waking moment of your day placating and pleasing people, whether they are living or dead. You live by their norms, conform to their standards, seek their company, desire their love, dread their ridicule, long for their applause, meekly submit to the guilt they lay upon you; you are terrified to go against the fashion in the way you dress or speak or act or even think. And observe how even when you control them you depend on them and are enslaved by them. People have become so much a part of your being that you cannot even imagine living a life that is unaffected or uncontrolled by them.

Anthony DeMello, The Way to Love (New York: Doubleday, 1991), 64.

Tranformation

2012-01-06T17:30:00.000-08:00

Robert was beginning a new life. As the director of a weapons laboratory that would integrate the diverse efforts of the far-flung sites of the Manhattan Project and mold them quickly into a usable atomic weapon, he would have to conjure up skills he did not yet have, deal with problems he had never imagined, develop work habits entirely at odds with his previous lifestyle, and adjust to attitudes and modes of behavior (such as security considerations) that were emotionally awkward and alien to his experience. It is not too much of an exaggeration to suggest that in order to succeed, at age thirty-nine, Robert Oppenheimer would have to remake a significant part of his personality if not his intellect, and he was going to have to do all this in short order. Every aspect of his new job was on a fast-track schedule. Very few things - including Oppenheimer's transformation - could meet that impossible schedule; yet it is a measure of his commitment and willpower that he came very close.

Kai Bird & Martin J. Sherwin, American Prometheus, (New York: Vintage Books, 2005), 205.

There were few things that changed & impacted life in the 1940s more than the work designed and developed in the so-called Manhattan Project. Not only was the impact felt in the enormous cost and amount of man-hours poured into the development of the atomic bomb, but in the obliteration of the two Japanese cities and the ushering in of the nuclear weapons era. For Robert Oppenheimer, it was the opportunity of a lifetime - one that would dramatically increase his social stature while simultaneously leaving an imprint upon his soul. However, before he reached the point of his personal battle in his contributions to a legacy of death, he faced a the challenge of leading something he was fully incapable of leading outside of his superior intellect.

That he succeeded, there can be no doubt. The bomb(s) was built and the cities in Japan were destroyed. The situation elevated the power of the United States while exploding the tension that would brew the Cold War. His leadership helped bridge the gap on questions, talents and personalities that all needed to be figured out in order for success to be found. He discovered administrative skills and work abilities that prior to the 40s had been either dormant or non-existent within himself. And he did it all while having the military, FBI and US government consistently watching, observing and looking for ways to trap him in a mistake. The pressure he must have felt cannot be explained or even imagined. Yet it is in that moment that all of the potential & ability of Oppenheimer was on display for (soon) the world to see.

So where does that leave us? Many of us will never face a situation even remotely close to that of directing the activities of the Manhattan Project. However, I would argue that we have much to gain from what Oppenheimer put on display. The first is found in his commitment and willpower. I face challenges on a daily basis: upset parents, lazy students, high educational standards, a family that needs time/attention, personal desires, previous commitments, and a variety of other lesser pulls upon my time, energy and resources. When pushed to the breaking point, it is easy to see why quitting is such an attractive offer for so many people. These are the moments when willpower & commitment are severely tested. Seeing my way through - even halfway successfully - is determined by how much I am willing to fight for it. It requires training, control, and steadfast refusal to give up. In the end, it was the daily showing up that made Oppenheimer so successful. Perhaps, the same could be said for myself in all that I face.

Reinvention. Its a popular topic for self-help gurus and yet at its core is the challenge to be willing to become someone you either currently aren't or quite possibly never have been before. Its the replacement of poor habits, development of new skills, and adjusting to the unfamiliar and certainly uncomfortable. It certainly requires you to deal with stuff you never saw or thought about before. In other words, its becoming a new you. That is not to say that the old you is bad, broken or useless. But if we want to tackle the world - we have to become people able to handle the challenge. Oppenheimer was not born supervising construction of the atomic bomb. And his previous 38 years did not adequately prepare him for the new challenge. And yet he superbly managed the task by changing, adapting and creating a new self. Can I do the same in my own life in order to take on the challenges on my horizon? What is coming into view that I know I am not capable of currently doing - but that with positive changes & reinvention will become possible accomplishing tomorrow? The awkward feelings & fears of failure are real. They refuse to leave or quiet down. And yet without being able to adjust - I'll never meet the challenges or will simply fail them in the same familiar patterns of my past.

And finally we can see that Oppenheimer did all of it in short order. He was put on the "fast-track schedule" where delays not only put himself in jeopardy but potentially the entire U.S. military strategy. The time crunch, though, was not his enemy. The real adversary was the human condition to take it slow & easy. You and I do not have enough time. And although there is some good in taking a minute to simply enjoy things - the challenges we face and will face in the future are not going away. They don't shrink just because we dawdle in taking them on. Maybe the best thing for us would be the same pressure to perform at a high level in an unrealistic amount of time. Sure its stressful - but when you feel the heat of a moment it will either force you to rise to the top or show you the strength you need to develop for your next "opponent."

The success & challenge that faced Robert Oppenheimer awaits you and me. We either fight forward against the overwhelming odds and find some definition of success or we simply let the challenges defeat us and allow us to wallow in self-pity. We don't make names for ourselves by accomplishing the small. We leave legacies when no trial is too hard to take on.

Driven To Try

2012-01-02T15:41:00.000-08:00

Robert later recalled that he still had 'very great misgivings about myself on all fronts, but I clearly was going to do theoretical physics if I could...I felt completely relieved of the responsibility to go back into a laboratory. I hadn't been good; I hadn't done anybody any good, and I hadn't had any fun whatever; and here was something I felt just driven to try.'

Kai Bird & Martin J. Sherwin, American Prometheus, (New York: Vintage Books, 2005), 55.

Robert Oppenheimer had an interesting life. He seemed to be destined for a life in the sciences - in particular with the study of physics. In his pursuit of knowledge & career he came across a dilemma when he realized that laboratory research (experimental physics) was not as fun as theoretical physics. His life hit a major wall at this point, and he suffered from depression, frustration, and high anxiety over where it was heading. As a result, he decided upon a path in pursuit of that which filled his cup as opposed to the standard one of working in a lab and doing that pro-typical "fit" for work in physics in his era. There were no guarantees in this choice - in fact he realized there were serious potential pitfalls to it. However, the alternative was to do something which wasn't fun, he did not feel particularly good at, and wasn't really beneficial to anyone in his mind. Even a crash & burn seemed a better option than simply sticking with the standard route. He was simply 'driven to try' that which excited him most.

How many people take a serious look at their lives and ask the questions of how much fun they are having, how good they are at what they are doing, and how beneficial it is to those around them? I truly believe people need to get more self-focused when choosing a job and vocation. To what benefit is it to give up dreams to simply choose the easiest, most comfortable, or most standard path? What has happened to our 'driven to try' mentality in this country?

I resonate so deeply with Oppenheimer's thoughts as I faced a similar crisis in my own life. I had hit a wall working for the church in which I found myself not having fun, not succeeding (at least on the definition of the leadership - which quite frankly is the only definition that matters in a job), and really not helping anyone. The option was to do something new - even though that meant a year of living with my inlaws & the real potential of not landing a job (one job opening had over 50 highly qualified people submit applications). Talk about having misgivings!! The funny thing is when I told my boss I was done - I felt completely relieved. I walked away from security to pursue that which was personally most exciting. And the reward on all 3 fronts (fun, performance, and giving to others) has been clearly seen, felt, and heard.

So what are we waiting on? Its time for a self-examination to see what we should do from here. Because the world is not bettered by people simply doing jobs for the sake of work. The world needs people that are driven to try in order to pursue their own self-interest that then rewards the environments around them.

Does Being "Nice, Gentle & Kind" Still Count?

2011-08-16T18:33:00.000-07:00

"He is the nicest, gentlest, kindest guy you will ever meet … to everything except the baseball, he still hits that really hard." -Michael Cuddyer on Jim Thome

Jim Thome (see articles by Tim Kurkjian and Jayson Stark) hit his 600th homerun last night. Only 7 guys have done it besides him and 3 of those (Bonds, Sosa, and Rodriguez) have all been linked to steroid usage. He is one of the greatest power hitters of all time, and certainly deserves to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. Remarkably he has not received a lot of press, more than likely because of his temperament and the fact that Cleveland and now Minnesota are not exactly big markets. But what seems to be most incredible about the guy is how other professional baseball players view him.

How many people are genuinely known to be nice, kind and gentle? To be more blunt, how many men are known for those characteristics? Today's American culture desires strong men, powerful men, and men who have "it" - whatever it might be. Rarely do you hear people seeking a nice guy. In fact the nice guy is at an all time low in terms of desirability. And yet here you have a prominent major league slugger who is known for his gentleness in personality if not his ability to hit a ball 500 feet. Teammates, opponents, coaches, members of the media, clubhouse workers, and the casual fan all encounter a guy who is so genuine and caring they are left deeply impressed. It might not get him front page press, but in the end he is the type of guy you want to be around, you want to emulate and you hope your kids turn out like. Perhaps its time we start re-evaluating our priorities and tastes in America. We need more men like Jim Thome - who recognize that being nice, gentle and kind is a helluva lot better than being an asshole...even if you lose out on publicity.

Aaron Rodgers

2011-08-15T15:10:00.000-07:00

"I think if you're depressed about the current state of athletes - their greed, their ego, their selfishness - spend some time around Aaron Rodgers. He's what's right about sports."

-Peter King

(P.S. I loved his "People who live in Wisconsin and Minnesota must have a mandatory high school class in Pleasantness" comment as well!)

The Inspiration of Trenton

2011-08-14T11:35:00.000-07:00

His 2,400 Americans, having been on their feet all night, wet, cold, their weapons soaked, went into the fight as if everything depended on them. Each man "seemed to vie with the other in pressing forward," Washington wrote.

"The troops behaved like men contending for everything that was dear and valuable," Knox wrote to Lucy.

John Hancock said that the victory at Trenton was all the more "extraordinary" given that it had been achieved by men "broken by fatigue and ill-fortune." [He continued with] "But troops properly inspired, and animated by a just confidence in their leader will often exceed expectation, or the limits of probability."

David McCullough, 1776, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2005), 280, 282, 284.

The story of Washington & his troops crossing the Delaware River on Christmas 1776 has always been riveting to me. George Washington is a near mythical being in American history and the story has many legendary & fanciful elements to it. That a group of soldiers near death with nothing more than inspiration to live on could surprise and defeat a group of 1500 trained mercenaries is incredible. Though small in stature, the skirmish would be a catalyst for belief in the movement of independence. McCullough does an excellent job at creating the culture of fear & disappointment that dominated America in light of the power the British showed throughout most of 1776. One small victory (two if you count Princeton) would foster growth & trust in the American vision. What is critical for us today is to take historical events and not only remember their great significance to the shaping of today's world but how we can profit from their lessons as well. Here are a few things I am pondering in light of my recent reading of the battle.

The American soldiers were in a dreadful state. They were without hope & utterly destitute in their belongings and physical state. Yet despite their awful state - they pushed forward as if they could make a difference. They believed in rest on their shoulders to win and so stopped at nothing to make it happen. Do I believe this of myself? Do I push forward in my own role in the mission carved out for my life as if it depends completely upon me to make it work? If I do - then it doesn't matter how bad things get, I will push forward because I believe it is absolutely necessary for me to do so.

Next, the soldiers were fighting for the "dear and valuable" in their minds, lives, and world. The incredible lengths they went to were done without thought because it would have been insane not to. Quitting is not an option when you are fighting for what you believe in. I need to reorder my priorities to make sure I am constantly focused on the dear & valuable. It is when those goals are my focus that I will find the fight within me to put it all on the line. It is not possible to give it all when you don't believe in the end result. If I find myself not giving my all, I must question whether my intended goal is either not dear and valuable or whether I have lost my priorities.

Finally, the troops "exceeded expectation, or the limits of probability" because of inspiration. This has two parts to it in importance. The first deals with the ability to exceed expectation. It is easy to set limits on what can happen based upon the probability of such happenings. The problem is when we allow those limits to then set the bar upon which we will not seek to climb higher. In other words, once we have hit the target we stop pushing beyond. I must not allow myself to simply hit the finish line - I must desire to move beyond. Goals are great - but we need to believe we can continuously accomplish so much more than we believe. The second part deals with finding the inspiration to encourage. This either comes from the cause we are fighting for itself or the leaders we choose to follow. Mentors play such a huge role in life. The more inspiring the mentor, the more likely they will help us move beyond the finish line. Therefore it is absolutely important to pick & find causes and leaders that constantly get us to stretch ourselves beyond what we think we are capable of doing. When we have confidence in that which is biding us to push forward, we will not limit ourselves even when, like the American soldiers, we lack the "necessary tools & abilities" to do so.

Meet the Packers Mr. President

2011-08-12T16:41:00.000-07:00

One of the perks of winning the Super Bowl is getting a tour of the White House & meeting with the President. What makes it even better is having the Bears fan President Obama having to congratulate the Packers. Looking forward to another football season. Go Pack Go!

What is the role of Congress?

2011-08-11T18:00:00.000-07:00

When it comes to the government, I think the President often gets more blame & more credit than he (some day she) ever deserves. The real questions for me center on the role of Congress. A lot of our issues with the ineffectiveness of Washington center on the Senate & House. With that in mind, its critical we understand a particular passage of the Constitution. Over the course of the next few weeks I will be examining a few parts of Article 1, Section 8 dealing with the powers of Congress. For now, here's a look at what exactly Congress is "expected" to do...

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imports and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

Military-Industrial Complex

2011-08-10T11:52:00.001-07:00

"A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction...

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence — economic, political, even spiritual — is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together." -Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961-

Dr. No

2011-08-09T15:19:00.000-07:00

Ron Paul is growing on me.

Scott Adams on the Budget

2011-08-08T14:17:00.001-07:00

Here are the thoughts of Scott Adams (creator of Dilbert) on the new budget plan. Pure genius.

Congress allegedly agreed on a budget plan last night. The great thing about this plan is that both sides can blame the other when the economy continues its long march into the crapper. Conservatives will say we didn't cut the budget enough. Liberals will say the decrease in government spending will choke off growth and make things worse. Who's right?

Democrats like to point to the Clinton era as proof that the economy can flourish even as taxes are increased. But how would things have fared in the Clinton years without the Dotcom bubble? Beats me. You don't know either.

Economies usually find their direction from large, unpredictable events, such as wars and other disasters, moving from communism to capitalism, huge demographic shifts, and irrationality that leads to economic bubbles. For any given ten-year period, luck is the biggest driver of a nation's economy. But what single factor is most predictive of, say, a nation's fifty-year economic direction? I think it's the L-to-E ratio (lawyers-to-engineers).

My hypothesis is that the best indicator of long term economic health is the number of engineers a country produces relative to the number of lawyers. A country that is cranking out more engineers than lawyers will trend up. A country that is moving toward a lawyer-heavy economy will grind to a stop.

This idea is nothing more than a wordy way of saying, "To a man who only has a hammer, everything looks like a nail." Engineers build stuff and lawyers sue people. If we assume both professions like to stay busy all the time, you need more engineers than lawyers to create net growth. And I think you'd agree that the countries with the best engineers also win wars and survive disasters the best.

I tried and failed to Google some statistics to back up my hypothesis. Anecdotally, the idea seems about right. I can't think of a country with a strong economy that isn't also known for its engineering prowess.

Some of you will argue that education in general is the biggest predictor of success. But I think you'd agree that if everyone started majoring in English, we'd all starve to death with impeccable grammar.

My take on the budget compromise is that any budget that doesn't kill us right away will be good enough. Our economic fate is primarily in the hands of engineers. And when our collective cynicism reverts back to its baseline, maybe we'll be lucky enough to have another economic bubble. I hope so. I enjoy those while they last.

Bill of Rights

2011-08-07T14:54:00.000-07:00

I bumped into a guy last week while working my landscaping job. He was putting in new flooring at a cabin and we got into a conversation. I discovered quickly that he was a product of guys like Rush Limbaugh who make a living tell people what to be afraid of and who to blame for that fear. He was convinced the United States was on the verge of collapse and would soon be controlled under the regime of a guy like Hitler. Although I was not impressed with his theories, he did bring a valuable point in terms of the Constitution. He asked whether or not I could name all 10 amendments in the Bill of Rights. I did not answer him but truth be told I was not sure of all ten. The more I thought about it that day the more disappointed I was in myself. After all, the Constitution was only ratified by the original states because of the limitations on the National Government specified by the Bill of Rights. In other words, these ten precious amendments were required before people would even consider allowing the national government to form and replace the Articles of Confederation. If we do not know what they are, how are we suppose to know when/if the federal government violates them? So without further ado...

1st: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

2nd: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

3rd: No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

4th: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

5th: No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

6th: In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.

7th: In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

8th: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

9th: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10th: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Objects of Confidence

2011-08-06T21:56:00.001-07:00

But Nathanael Greene was no ordinary man. He had a quick, inquiring mind and uncommon resolve. He was extremely hardworking, forthright, good-natured, and a born leader. His commitment to the Glorious Cause of America, as it was called, was total. And if his youth was obvious, the Glorious Cause was to a large degree a young man's cause. The commander in chief of the army, George Washington, was himself only forty-three. John Hancock, the President of the Continental Congress, was thirty-nine, John Adams, forty, Thomas Jefferson, thirty-two, younger even than the young Rhode Island general. In such times many were being cast in roles seemingly beyond their experiences or capacities, and Washington had quickly judged Nathanael Greene to be "an object of confidence."

David McCullough, 1776, (New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2005), 21.

It has been my experience in life that more often than not things that are deemed a "young man's cause" are often derided as foolish, naive, and not based upon sound judgment. With age comes experience & a better ability to make decisions the rationale goes. As a result, young people must "wait their turn" before getting heard, approached or in some cases considered. How many ideas of youth get flushed down the toilet as a result of this harsh treatment? Now to be fair, many ideas or causes of today's youth are roiled with rashness, stupidity and are clearly not well thought out. Despite this, though, we must remember how many times history has shown the idealistic nature of young minds and their impact on the shape of the world today.

The key then becomes learning how to become, like General Nathanael Greene, "objects of confidence" for the world around us. I struggled with this concept when working at the church, and became embittered by the lack of trust or dependency upon my ideas. My experience & capacity were deemed to be small and I was never really trusted to do or lead beyond the small realm of seemingly indestructible ministry. Looking back I can see where blame might be needed for those leaders with small vision above me, however, even more I can see my own failure to become that object of confidence. If I believed in myself as not being just an 'ordinary man' - I needed to make sure those around me (and especially above me) saw the same thing. My skills, character, and attributes needed to be honed, developed and then allowed to shine. Certainly this would not (and even today will not) guarantee success. Older people have a sense of entitlement that they have paid their dues, have their experiences and trust their 'sounder' judgment. So it is my duty to not get acrimonious but instead show an example in all I do and say that develops confidence.

The world is a broken place. Many systems are breaking down and confidence is waning in every sector. What is needed is for the capable to step forward and show their ability. It is then, despite the potential obstacles of longevity in experience or proven capacity that trust will be developed or at the very least initially bestowed. And when that happens, much like Nathanel Greene, we will become objects of confidence.

Dilbert

2011-08-05T12:40:00.001-07:00

I happen to think that Dilbert is one of the funniest comics of all time. Much like an episode of Seinfeld, it feels as if Scott Adams is able to illustrate scenarios straight from life. He has a blog on his website that is pretty darn good as well. If you feel as if you just need a laugh from your typical life - check out the site & blog. Well worth your time.

Germany Invades Belgium

2011-08-04T17:06:00.000-07:00

On August 4th, 1914, Germany invaded Belgium. Although not the technical start to WWI, this action would help plunge Europe into the Great War. Eventually all of the world's major powers would be involved and over 9 million people would be killed. Europe would never be the same again. The world would never be either. And even in the aftermath with the Treaty of Versailles & the rise of the League of Nations; we could not find peace and had to fight yet again.

"Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events." -Sir Winston Churchill-

The Forest

2011-08-03T11:58:00.000-07:00

But Victor Frankl whispered in my ear all the same. He said to me I was a tree in a story about a forest, and that it was arrogant of me to believe any differently. And he told me the story of the forest is better than the story of the tree.

Donald Miller, A Million Miles in a Thousand Years, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 2009), 198.

I finished reading Miller's book this morning. I had bought it when I went to hear him speak at my church down in Arizona, but had never taken the time to actually read it. [Side-note: Its ironic how many books I have purchased but never gotten around to reading.] It was a quick read and pretty enjoyable. I have always thought Miller has the ability to tell a solid story, so a book about life in stories makes sense for him. My personal favorite from his remains Searching for God Knows What. Not sure why really, I just really loved it at the time I read it.

In regards to this book, I think the part that stuck out to me the most was his idea of the story of humanity being compared to that of a forest. A forest is made up of many trees - each being unique in and of themselves but still being part of the overall forest of trees. The story is about the forest. It has to be about the forest. No matter how tall, wide, green, or strong a particular tree might be - the forest as a whole is still more important. This speaks so strongly to my tendency to get caught up in my own world & life. I fall easily to the false belief that the forest (humanity) is not as critical to God or myself as the individual tree (myself). Its selfish & highly egotistical and often causes me hurt & frustration as I lament over God "letting me down" when things don't go my way. How much easier would life be if I didn't get so focused on my own journey and realized the larger story God was trying to communicate through everyone else? Its as if God is whispering the classic "don't miss the forest for the tree(s)" in that He desperately wants me to see the larger picture. My journey and the details of my life are very important to Him (what is man that thou art mindful of him) and yet the larger story is of far more importance. My story as an individual tree should be focused on contributing all that I have to offer to overall story of the forest. Its in doing that, that I will find joy & contentment in life.

Miller's book is certainly not a "life-changer" type work. However, I think it communicates some great ideas on story & life. If for only one illustration, the book was highly worth the read for me.

The Grindstone

2011-07-23T11:52:00.000-07:00

But with this change in condition comes inevitably adaptations to the change. What, unless biological science is a mass of errors, is the cause of human intelligence and vigour? Hardship and freedom: conditions under which the active, strong, and subtle survive and the weaker go to the wall; conditions that put a premium upon the loyal alliance of capable men, upon self-restraint, patience, and decision.

We are kept keen on the grindstone of pain and necessity, and, it seemed to me, that here was that hateful grindstone broken at last!

H.G. Wells, The Time Machine, (Public Domain Books, 2006), Kindle Locations (400-403) & (409-20).

The Victorian Era for the United Kingdom uniquely coincides with the Gilded Age of the United States. Both periods, for their respective countries, were marked by their increase in prosperity as well as technological advances making life "easier" in a lot of regards. Of course, rapid urbanization lead to pockets of high poverty and horrible slum conditions, but overall the period is well known for its descent into decadence for those at the "top" of society. It was during this era that H.G. Wells' masterpiece, The Time Machine, was written and published. Like many of the great 'classics' of English literature, The Time Machine combines solid writing, good story telling and intriguing social commentary into one nifty package. As a result, while reading it you not only are entertained but you get the real sense of life in that society.

I can recall seeing the 1960 film version of the The Time Machine when I was a kid, but until this week I had never read the novel. Needless to say, I was quite impressed with it and look forward to reading more H.G. Wells. Without going into the story line too deeply, the 'Time Traveler' is the protagonist who communicates the story throughout the book. He had built a time machine to travel through the fourth dimension which he explained was time. In traveling forward to the year 802,701 he comes in contact with an advanced age society of which most of the book discusses. In his first attempt at explaining one portion of that future society (the Eloi) he observes the laziness and lack of hard-work by the 'people'. It is from this observation he made the quotes as I posted above.

Hardship & freedom. Pain & necessity. I am blown away by Wells' keen observation of how critical these things are for humanity. In particular, the ideals of hardship & pain stand out as critical factors that are often overlooked. Much like the Victorian Era or Gilded Age, modern society has pushed the envelope of technology further and further while increasing the luxury and comforts for the high end social classes. Life has, in many ways, never been easier. And yet much like the Time Traveler's initial views of the Eloi, this should not immediately give us comfort. What is the cause of human intelligence and vigour? It is hardship. Pain. Self-restraint. Patience. Solid decision making. Doing things only out of necessity. The results of the 'active, strong, and subtle' pushing forward. And yet, it is hard to see these characteristics anymore. More and more they are thought of as archaic as modern conveniences and luxuries have made us loathe the difficult and embrace the easy. In many ways, the idea of effort has dissolved. This is especially seen in the younger generations which I am very much a part of.

So is all hope lost? That becomes the question. The picture we have seen and continue to see is certainly bleak. However, that being said, I still believe that anything is possible. Change will take time and the push-back on hard work will always exist. But human intelligence and vigour are needed as much today as they were in 1895. And if we believe in them still then we must fight forward with the very same weapons of hardship, pain, self-restraint, patience and solid decision making. The future is ours to make - what it will actually look like depends on the here and now.

Failure of Purpose

2011-07-05T10:02:00.000-07:00

The first campaigning season was a great disappointment; the departure of Alcibiades left the venture in the hands of a leader who did not believe in its goals and who had no strategy of his own to achieve them. Plutarch described the situation as follows: "Nicias, though theoretically one of two colleagues, held sole power. He did not stop sitting about, sailing around, and thinking things over until the vigorous hope of his men had grown feeble and the astonishment and fear that the first sight of his forces had imposed on his enemy had faded away" (Nicias 14.4). Since he still dared not leave Sicily, Nicias and his men would now be compelled to face the main enemy at Syracuse without a clear plan of action.

Perhaps the oversight was more a failure of purpose than of judgment. Nicias, as we have seen, never wanted to attack Sicily, and forced to take part in the campaign, intended to pursue a minimal course that would avoid any serious engagement. He had probably refused to consider any step as serious as an attack on Syracuse until circumstances made it unavoidable and then found himself without the forces to carry it out.

Donald Kagan, The Peloponnesian War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 274, 279.

Nicias, 470-413 B.C., was a politician/general/leader for Athens during the Peloponnesian War. He was known for his character and virtue, and by all accounts seemed to be a guy that the Athenians liked and admired. He was a watered-down version of the great Pericles, mostly being like him in that he did not desire war and conflict with Sparta. In fact, it was under his leadership that lead to a brief moment of potential peace in 421 B.C. between Athens and Sparta. The Athenians responded well to his leadership and had consistently placed him a position to make decisions. Despite a lack in military success, Nicias' endearment to the people kept him in power.

Unfortunately for Athens, a crisis came about on the island of Sicily in 415 B.C. As a result it pitted Athenian interests against those of Syracuse (allied with Sparta). The Athenians voted for bold action and war in Sicily, of which Nicias was strongly against. Despite his repeated attempts to avoid the conflict, Athens jumped into it with Nicias as the key leader. A variety of mistakes would follow ending not only with the defeat of the Athenians, but also with the death of Nicias. Athens was ill-prepared for battle lacking man-power, strategy, and even the drive to win. Nicias committed folly after folly ending with a decision to refuse withdrawal simply to protect his name. The Sicily was an absolute disaster for the Athenians and seemingly the end of the war.

Failure of purpose. That was the crime of Nicias in the Sicily campaign. His heart simply was not in the conflict. He did not believe in its aims or even necessarily its goals. He was just going through the motions while attempting to maintain his position and prestige. He could not plan, develop strategy or even make solid decisions in the moment. Without heart, he could not pour himself into the mission. I think we see this very issue in a lot of people today. On a regular basis we see people failing or at the very least failing the organization they are a part of because of a failure of purpose. Having character, a solid skill-set and even leadership ability do not matter without heart. It does not make a person a bad person - it simply means they are not in the right position for themselves. You have to believe in what you are doing if you have any hope of succeeding. Even if some form of success is seen, chances are likely the person is simply a hollow version of what they could be if they truly believed.

So the question becomes - are you like Nicias? Are you going through the motions hanging onto some position or place of leadership simply because you don't have the guts to step down and pursue that which you desire to do? Are you struggling to succeed not because of inability but lack of purpose? The end result for Nicias was death by execution. What will be your end result if you stay mired in the same place you are in now?

The Power of the Xymbouli

2011-07-02T14:27:00.000-07:00

The xymboulos Pharax was obviously thinking ahead to consider the political ramifications of the battle. To destroy the aristocratic elite of Argos when most of the ordinary, democratic Argives had escaped would guarantee the continued alliance of Argos with the other democracies, but if the Argive elite returned home after the great defeat of the anti-Spartan policy, they could gain control of the city and bring it into a Spartan alliance, striking a death blow to the enemy coalition. The vengeful, inexperienced Agis, determined to recover his honor, could not foresee this in the heat of the battle, and the Spartans' decision to appoint advisers to him proved to be a well-considered idea.

Donald Kagan, The Peloponnesian War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 240-241.

The Spartan King Agis II was a poor leader and awful strategist. His poor decision making, inexperience in leading during battle, and overall lack in inspiring confidence had left him in a precarious position of leadership. In addition, Sparta continued to lose prestige within their sphere of influence while Athens seemingly kept gaining. The situation was getting dire and any further loss by Sparta or Agis would seemingly cripple the Spartans and their hegemony within the Peloponnesian Alliance. Some form of success and victory was absolutely imperative. In 418 BC, in response to a situation in the Tegea/Mantinea area, Agis was given one final shot at proving himself in the Battle of Mantinea against the Argive Alliance.

History has a way of repeating itself as people tend to not change their habits, behaviors and ways of thinking. To say that Sparta was headed for doom under the ineffective leadership of Agis is not inappropriate. What made the Battle of Mantinea unique, however, was the decision made by the ephors (leaders who shared power with the Spartan kings - based upon election) that Agis had to be placed under supervision by advisers known as the xymbouloi. These 10 men were responsible for helping Agis make better decisions - specifically in the realm of military leadership. It seems that this would have been humiliating for a king and a tremendous check upon his power. Whatever the king's emotions must have been in regards to the decision, the ephors' decision held firm. So when the Spartan-lead alliance headed off from Tegea to Mantinea, the king was surrounded.

To avoid too much detail, the battle ended in Spartan victory. Multiple times within the execution of the battle Agis was saved by the decision making of the xymbouloi - including both prior to the battle beginning and after the battle was finished. In a nutshell, Agis (and Sparta!) were saved by not only the brilliant fighting ability of the elite Spartan warriors, but by the solid decision making of the men giving advice to the king. Although the battle did not guarantee anything for the future, it was absolutely critical to Sparta and would have a significant impact upon the Athenians and power of democracy within ancient Greece. Advice saved the day.

It is in these moments of history that I truly see the wisdom of Solomon come alive. As he wrote in Proverbs 11:14, "For lack of guidance a nation falls, but many advisers make victory sure." How easy it is to be like Agis and simply continue forward in my own stupidity and ways of thinking. Trapped in my own inabilities, I make the same mistakes repeatedly which then prevent my future success. Pride refuses to allow me to see those blind spots and I stumble forward into a wavering future. And yet the answer lies in front of me much like it did for Agis. Advisers. Do I have people in my life that are consistently checking my power and decision making? Am I humble enough to see the need for my own set of xymbouli - who could very well be the determining factor in how bright my future might be? They mattered to Agis and the Spartan empire as a whole - the question now becomes can I learn from that situation and apply it to my own life.

The Leadership of Pericles

2011-06-28T12:10:00.001-07:00

The death of Pericles deprived Athens of a leader with unique qualities. He was a military man and strategist of stature, but even more a brilliant politician of the rarest talents. He could decide on a policy and persuade the Athenians to adopt and remain committed to it, to restrain them from overly ambitious undertakings, and to encourage them when they lost confidence. The restored Pericles might have had sufficient power to hold the Athenians to a consistent policy, as no other Athenian could have. In his last recorded speech Pericles enumerated the characteristics necessary in a statesman: "To know what must be done and to be able to explain it; to love one's country and to be incorruptible" (2.60.5). No one had these traits in greater measure than Pericles himself, and if he made errors, he of all Athenians was most likely to put them right. His countrymen would miss him sorely.

Donald Kagan, The Peloponnesian War, (New York: Penguin Books, 2003), 97-98.

The ancient world of Greece required its leaders to be both politicians and military strategists. If a man was to rise to the top he had to be able to effectively lead in both arenas. Decisions had to be constantly made and then explained in such a way that the people would either agree to them or at least give support based upon allegiance to their home. Pericles was an interesting leader that had a place of significant leadership in democratic Athens at the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War with the Spartan Alliance. Being a moderate, he developed a strategy based upon deterrence and defense which at best would have prevented war. The lack of offensive strategy was a stark contrast to the Greek ideal of honor and courage which required him to explain it in such a way that would receive support. Although his death would curtail him from effectively making a long term impact upon the war, his ideals and principles remain a shining example of leadership today.

In particular, I am smitten with the ideas Pericles enumerated in his final recorded speech. Simply knowing what must be done in a given situation or leadership moment distinguishes those with even a clue of how to lead. However, it is the next crucial step that helps illuminate those who want to lead from those who have the actual ability. As Pericles stated it, you have to be able to explain the why behind a leadership decision. It is not enough to simply recognize and choose the right decision - those who follow want to know why...especially in light of a potentially polemic issue. The explanation cannot be just a simply restating of the decision with an emphasis on it being right. Instead, it must help the follower understand, grasp its vision, and find a way to support it. Do not tell me you made a decision and I have to live with it. Help explain why it has to be this way and how it benefits me to be on board with it.

As if this is not enough, Pericles goes on to explain that loyalty and integrity are also critical. Loyalty is often an abused virtue by leaders. Whether it is mocking patriotism by extolling the need for American flag lapels or incessant demand that followers blindly accept that being dished out to them, loyalty is easily misunderstood. At the end of the day, I don't care about what you say in terms of loyalty, I want to see you bleed for that which you claim to lead. Do you so firmly believe in that which you lead that you consistently do what's best for it and not yourself??? Integrity, or being incorruptible as Pericles puts it, might be the hardest of all. How firm are you on morality? Can you be bought, swayed or simply mislead? What would it take for you to compromise on "right"? Or even better - how do your followers know you are not corruptible?

The reality is we lack leaders with the ideals that Pericles put forth. We desperately want them and often lionize those who embody them. But simply recognizing that which is critical to effective leadership helps us as we move forward in the search of those who can bring us to where we need to be.

IN HOC SIGNO VINCES

2011-05-21T16:49:00.000-07:00

The Vision of the Cross - assistants of Raphael

Though it would only become apparent later, the battle of Milvian Bridge was a major turning point in history. By wielding the cross and sword, Constantine had done more than defeat a rival - he had fused the church and the state together. It would be both a blessing and a curse to both institutions, and neither the Christian church nor the Roman Empire would ever be the same again.

Lars Brownworth, Lost to the West, (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2009), 14.

What really happened the night Constantine prayed before his battle with Maxentius? What words did he say? What god did he pray to? Did the God of Christianity truly reveal Himself in the sign of a cross? Did Jesus actually encourage him to proceed behind the cross as a means of protection and, dare I say, guidance? Did God want Constantine in charge and did God really want church & state together? These are questions that swirl in my head as I think about that fateful event in history that would catapult Constantine to leader of the Eastern Roman Empire and, as Lars Brownworth pointed out, fuse the church and state together. The reality, as best as I can tell, is that Constantine simply saw the advantages of Christianity against paganism for the growth of his power and empire. Whether or not he ever truly understood the faith or believed in the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus is hard to tell or prove. But he understood the power and prestige he stood to gain and throughout the rest of his life he would exploit the church & state relationship.

Uniquely, I think we see that continued today within the United States. Much like the emperor of antiquity, leaders in the United States see the sign of the cross as a means to "conquer" the political, social and spiritual realms of power. The cross/church have become a base of power & foundation to build upon in order to accomplish the goals of the individual. Republicans, Democrats, and a variety of groups such as Focus on the Family truly believe in the power and authority they can receive through the use of the cross. Political leaders, megachurch pastors, social leaders, and even media powers use the cross as a method to gain access or publicity to their cause. I wonder if the idea of divine leadership has gotten lost, though, in the search for human authority. Conquering continues - but does so at the loss of anything resembling that of Jesus. Boasting of church allegiance, sacrificial giving, and good morality become tossed around like useless trivia. When one accomplishes their goal - an "honorary" call out to God is given as if divine favor truly rested upon their accomplishment. But what does it all mean?

In the end, it seems as if our boasts of in hoc signo vinces are much like Constantine's. We may or may not conquer our goals...but our focus, much like his, is simply upon our own glorification.

Great Book!

2011-05-11T09:15:00.000-07:00

Education is one of the most valuable aspects of American society. It plays a critical role in the foundation of our country. There are not many people who would argue against the need and value of solid education. Despite this, though, there are many problems plaguing the education system with a variety of beliefs on how to fix them. Diane Ravitch has written a masterpiece on the problems and issues of today's American education system. She writes like a good historian and explores issues with a simple candor & straight-forward approach. For anyone interested in exploring the issues of the American school system as it stands today, I highly recommend getting your hands on this book. It was a very enjoyable read & one that has made its mark on my thinking & philosophy.

What is accountability?

2011-05-05T14:12:00.000-07:00

One problem with test-based accountability, as currently defined and used, is that it removes all responsibility from students and their families for the students' academic performance. NCLB neglected to acknowledge that students share in the responsibility for their academic peformance and that they are not merely passive recipients of their teachers' influence. Nowhere in the federal accountability scheme are there measures or indicators of students' diligence, effort, and motivation. Do they attend school regularly? Do they do their homework? Do they pay attention in class? Are they motivated to succeed? These factors affect their school performance as much as or more than their teachers' skill.

Similarly, the authors of the law forgot that parents are primarily responsible for the children's behavior and attitudes. It is families that do or do not ensure that their children attend school regularly, that they are in good health, that they do their homework, and that they are encouraged to read and learn. But in the eyes of the law, the responsibility of the family disappears. Something is wrong with that. Something is fundamentally wrong with an accountability system that disregards the many factors that influence students' performance on an annual test - including the students' own efforts - except for what teachers do in the classroom for forty-five minutes or an hour a day.
Diane Ravitch, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, (New York: Basic Books, 2010), 162-163.

Only lazy people argue against accountability. Accountability is the single most important factor in a person's life. It is what makes a person work hard, do their best, accept responsibility, learn from mistakes, grow in knowledge/ability, and become a better overall person. It can be painful and at times the exact opposite of fun. However, in the right framework and with the right prodding, it can be the difference between mediocrity and excellence. All of that being said, accountability must be in place to help people and systems improve. The goal of it should not be for punishment but for profit. Excellence is not achieved by tearing people or systems to shreds over mistakes, errors or lack of top level talent.

The issue in education is that teachers are getting held to high standards based upon faulty logic and tests. The mistake the general public falls for is that high test scores equate to solid education. Of course the mistake teachers make is that accountability is evil and should be left outside the school. Both sides take stances on either side of the fence which encourages mistrust and a major lack of cooperation. As a result, education gets stalled and society as a whole does not benefit. In addition, students are left out of the picture as talking heads argue back and forth about who is responsible for the broken system. The primary goal of education must be the preparation of younger generations for leadership and contribution to society. What has to happen is the development of a system of accountability to ensure that primary goal.

So how do we get back to focusing on the right goal? The first step is developing the right way to hold teachers accountable. Stop worrying about test scores and what looks good "on paper". Both of those can have meaning, but they fail to tell us whether or not our students are actually getting well educated and developed as young men and women. What we need is solid evaluations of teachers with the goal of pushing educators towards maximizing their ability to impact students in their subject knowledge, responsibility level, and critical thinking. Next, we need to figure out a way to get parents back involved in the education field. I strongly believe that parents are the most important ingredient to academic success. Teachers, schools, and communities must push strongly for parent involvement in the classroom. If parents are not involved, they will be hard pressed to actually hold their own children responsible. Finally, students need to be held accountable for themselves. Educators need to be able to effectively challenge students for their lack of initiative, effort and focus. Students need to learn that taking responsibility for themselves and their learning process is the single most important lesson in academics.

It is only when all three of these groups in the academic process are held to a higher standard that education will start to thrive. As of right now, society is content with looking at test scores and punishing teachers and schools as the key to academic improvement. As a result, we continue to flounder about with no real achievement or goals being grasped.

The Lure of the Market

2011-04-22T17:12:00.000-07:00

Market reforms have a certain appeal to some of those who are accustomed to "seeing like a state." There is something comforting about the belief that the invisible hand of the market, as Adam Smith called it, will bring improvements through some unknown force. In education, this belief in market forces lets us ordinary mortals off the hook, especially those who have not figured out how to improve low-performing schools or to break through the lassitude of unmotivated teens. Instead of dealing with rancorous problems like how to teach reading or how to improve testing, one can redesign the management and structure of the school system and concentrate on incentives and sanctions. One need not know anything about children or education. The lure of the market is the idea that freedom from government regulation is a solution all by itself. This is very appealing, especially when so many seemingly well-planned school reforms have failed to deliever on their promise.

The new corporate reformers betray their weak comprehension of education by drawing false analogies between education and business. They think they can fix education by applying the principles of business, organization, management, law, and marketing and by developing a good data-collection system that provides the information necessary to incentivize the workforce - principals, teachers, and students - with appropriate rewards and sanctions.
Diane Ravitch, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, (New York: Basic Books, 2010), 11.

Very, very interesting argument regarding using market-based reforms and ideas to solve the woes of education. Can ideas aimed at cut-throat, bottom-line, make a dollar goals truly help educate young men and women into the adults we desire them to be? Education is more than simply getting kids to pass tests. It is about developing their thought process, helping them socially connect with a variety of peers, challenging their personal beliefs, developing their work ethic, building character, and learning about subject matter that is crucial to their overall well-being as citizens. Market based thought eliminates this, though, and makes test scores the only authority on success within the classroom. As a teacher in that system I become far more focused on test results than student care. In the business world, the customer and their needs does not matter. What matters is that I make money - generally speaking by any means necessary. Pushing that type of thought process into education might produce higher test scores but cuts short on our development of tomorrow's generation(s).

In addition, how do incentives and merit based pay help make me a better educator? I guess the answer to that question is tied into your stance on what education should be doing. If I am only trying to get a test score, tying my pay up into the level of those scores seems like a great idea. I will push and push and find whatever means necessary to get the test results to boost my salary. However, if my goal is to produce more well-rounded citizens...I quickly lose sight of that goal when it becomes obvious that I am not being measured on it. There is some validity to encouraging teachers through incentives - however, it must be tied up into how well a teacher is producing the type of student and young adult we want to build the future of America upon. So what is your view of what success in a classroom is? What type of student do you want to see? And do you believe the cut-throat mentality of the corporate world will somehow, someway produce those results?

Do oil companies care about ordinary citizens?

Rational Thinking

2011-04-22T17:07:00.000-07:00

What should we think of someone who never admits error, never entertains doubt but adheres unflinchingly to the same ideas all his life, regardless of new evidence? Doubt and skepticism are signs of rationality. When we are too certain of our opinions, we run the risk of ignoring any evidence that conflicts with our views. It is doubt that shows we are still thinking, still willing to reexamine hardened beliefs when confronted with new facts and new evidence.
Diane Ravitch, The Death and Life of the Great American School System, (New York: Basic Books, 2010), 2.

It is fun (and at times painful!) to look back at my life over the past 10 years or so and see how much I have changed, adapted, and grown. My beliefs, ideas, politics, and overall outlook have all been subject to change and development. I have read and examined articles and books which have had tremendous impact upon my development. In addition, I have been fortunate to have spent time with some great thinkers who have challenged me to continue to claw forward in examination of my idealogies. Ironically, I have also been encouraged to think and develop by those I have found to be incredibly close-minded and irrationally tied down to certain beliefs, stereotypes and ways of thinking.

Diane Ravitch starts her latest book off with a great statement on doubt, skepticism and rationality. I think it is a great reminder that no matter how much I learn there is always room for new ideas and potential changes to my beliefs. As a human, I am constantly limited by my own experiences, bias, and pre-determined worldview. My limitations constantly seduce me into small-minded thinking and irrationality. I will cling to beliefs and ideas simply because I cannot think outside of my own personal box. Thoughts, opinions, and beliefs formed in that box have a very minute chance of being successful or valuable to myself or my community. However, when pushed and prodded to move beyond - I can gain such valuable insight. The goal then, as Ravitch explained, is to continue to doubt, examine, and be skeptical while remaining open-minded. New facts, evidence and/or opinions should impact my thinking. I should be different tomorrow in other words. Is that a sign of a flip-flopping person? No. That is rationality at its best.

The goal now becomes to continue to think, learn, and grow. May the person I become tomorrow not be worried about being "right" so much as being a willing participant in the game of growth and knowledge.

56

2011-04-22T15:27:00.000-07:00

If there is life on Earth but none yet observed on any of the other planets in our solar system, can we make a guess as to the probability that alien life is thriving somewhere out there in the cosmos? Who could possibly say? We only know that there is life on Earth. And when it comes to baseball and to hitting streaks, there is at least one thing that we can say for sure: Through the end of the 2010 season 17,290 players were known to have appeared in the major leagues. Only one of them had ever hit in 56 straight games.

Kostya Kennedy, 56: Joe DiMaggio and the Last Magic Number in Sports, (New York: Time Home Entertainment Inc, 2011), 343.

I just finished reading Kostya Kennedy's new book on Joe DiMaggio and his 56 game hitting streak. It was a great & highly entertaining read on one of the more remarkable streaks/stats in baseball history. He did a wonderful job at detailing the streak, Joe DiMaggio and the culture of 1941. One of the book's strengths is simply moving along the story without ever getting bogged down into overwhelming details. On top of that, Kennedy does a great job at looking at side stories such as Pete Rose, the luck of a hitting streak and the odds of a hitting streak such as DiMaggio's even happening. Along the way I picked up some interesting facts and enjoyed learning more about the streak overall. I give a high recommendation to the book - especially for baseball fans.

Cut Defense?

2011-04-18T22:43:00.000-07:00

"The single biggest threat to our national security is our debt."

-Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-

In fact, the U.S. spends about as much on its military as the rest of the world combined.

While the U.S.'s military spending has jumped from $1,500 per capita in 1998 to $2,700 in 2008, its NATO allies have been spending $500 per person over the same span. As long as the U.S. is overspending on its defense, it lets its allies skimp on theirs and instead pour the savings into infrastructure, education and health care. So even as U.S. taxpayers fret about their health care costs, their tax dollars are paying for a military that is subsidizing the health care of their European allies.

Thompson, Mark. "How To Save A Trillion Dollars." Time 25 April 2011: 24-29. Print.

My Own Reality

2011-04-15T16:26:00.000-07:00

I don't like work - no man does - but I like what is in the work - the chance to find yourself. Your own reality - for yourself, not for others - what no other man can ever know. They can only see the mere show, and never can tell what it really means. Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness, Kindle Location 535-37.

What does it mean to find yourself? Is is possible to do something and in the act of doing that particular task or job find yourself? In the same vein, is it possible to get so lost within a task or job that you lose track of who you even are? Does a job provide an opportunity for others to see who you are or does a job simply allow you to test yourself to see what's within you? I struggled nearly every single day I worked at the church. I was so frustrated, lost, confused, hurt, and often angry at my job there. I was bitter to my wife. I struggled to invest in my own kids. I felt parts of my own life ebbing away as if the days, weeks, months and years were being consumed by a beast I had no idea how to contain or control. Often times I wondered why I kept toiling at something that no matter how hard I tried never seemed to fit. Questions I asked never seemed to be answered. Those above me would always point out that I had issues that needed to be sorted out but that the job itself was fine. Those I encountered assumed the job was great for me and that it fit so well for my skills, personality, and experiences. I was lost amongst it all, not knowing what to do, who to turn to, or what the hell was wrong with me. Looking back I can see clearly now that I was searching for something that couldn't be found there. A job, in a myriad of ways, can never truly give identity or purpose. However, within a job one can experience the journey towards finding out who they are and what their reality is. The job in and of itself is not that critical. However, the job can either assist in the process of discovery or simply be a stumbling block towards recovery of oneself. Working for the church was never meant to be for me. Others could see the "mere show" and assume they knew what was best - but only I could tell what was going on. I was even accused of using the church to further myself as if somehow I wasn't providing enough return for the labor I put forth. Man that pissed me off. But in the end, who cares. What matters is that I ended up finally stumbling in a new direction of teaching & education. I have yet to find a job and reality in this economy doesn't speak too kindly to my prospects. But in the short time I have worked at a school I have found a vocation that has opened the floodgates of thoughts, feelings, and ideas welled up within me. Reality is at the end of the tunnel, and for a change, my job allows me to see it. I am finding myself on a daily basis now. Are there difficult parts to my job? Certainly. But it has provided me the opportunity to explore and experience life. I am finding a new me, and I really love it. The mere show others might see probably gives them an opinion or two on who I am. But now I don't care anymore. No one can tell, explain, or experience the depth of refreshment I have found in teaching. Reality is finally here and now I am not afraid of it.

Spectral Illumination

2011-04-13T17:47:00.000-07:00

The yarns of seamen have a direct simplicity, the whole meaning of which lies within the shell of a cracked nut. But Marlow was not typical (if his propensity to spin yarns be excepted), and to him the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze, in the likeness of one of these misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine. Joseph Conrad, Heart of Darkness, Kindle Location 60-63.

The idea of a seamen & ability to tell yarns is humorous enough, but in the case of Marlow we see a complex story of complexity and depth that speaks much to the condition of the human soul as well as the period of European expansion in Africa. As Marlow recounts his tale, we see a story filled with descriptions that have meaning far beyond that which he simply states. The joy of reading Conrad's book is understanding the depth of what he is trying to communicate. The above quote really showcases the book as a whole. Meaning is more than that which is found when a nut is cracked open - rather that which is outside of the entire nut. In other words, the entire picture of situation, person or scenario must be understood, studied and appreciated in order for it to be grasped. It is far too easy to just to conclusions and assumptions based upon what we can see and immediately understand. Much like when we crack open a peanut shell expecting to find a peanut, we quickly formulate ideas about people or situations based upon what we find to logically fit. Those false assumptions end up tainting our viewpoints, restricting us from seeing real truth. How much do we miss out by failing to see that which is only lit by the "spectral illumination of the moonshine" as Conrad states through Marlow? The story always contains more depth then meets the eye. Our goal as people ought to be the examination and study of people, situations and scenarios that yield the greatest amount of understanding and appreciation. It is only then that we can truly hope to limit the damaging destruction of our own willful ignorance and bias.

Terror

2011-04-10T08:00:00.000-07:00

As the rubber terror spread throughout the rain forest, it branded people with memories that remained raw for the rest of their lives. A Catholic priest who recorded oral histories half a century later quotes a man, Tswambe, speaking of a particularly hated state official named Leon Fievez, who terrorized a district along the river three hundred miles north of Stanley Pool: All the blacks saw this man as the Devil of the Equator...From all the bodies killed in the field, you had to cut off the hands. He wanted to see the number of hands cut off by each soldier, who had to bring them in baskets...A village which refused to provide rubber would be completely swept clean. As a young man, I saw [Fievez's] soldier Molili, then guarding the village of Boyeka, take a big net, put ten arrested natives in it, attach big stones to the net, and make it tumble into the river...Rubber caused these torments; that's why we no longer want to hear its name spoken. Soldiers made young men kill or rape their own mothers and sisters. A Force Publique officer who passed through Fievez's post in 1894 quotes Fievez himself describing what he did when the surrounding villages failed to supply his troops with the fish and manioc he had demanded: "I made war against them. One example was enough: a hundred heads cut off, and there have been plenty of supplies at the station ever since. My goal is ultimately humanitarian. I killed a hundred people...but that allowed five hundred others to live."

Adam Hochschild, King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa, (New York: Mariner Books, 1999), Kindle Location 2977-89.

Sick. Twisted. Morbid. Utter darkness. The absolute depraved condition of men is incredibly difficult to acknowledge and learn about. Just how far we as people are willing to go in our quest for wealth & power is beyond sickening.

Message, Audience & Self-interest

2011-04-07T11:59:00.000-07:00

Morel knew exactly how to fit his message to his audience. He reminded British businessmen that Leopold's monopolistic system, copied by France, had shut them out of much Congo trade. To members of the clergy he talked of Christian responsibility and quoted the grim reports from missionaries. And for all Britons, and their representatives in Parliament, he evoked the widespread though unspoken belief that England had a particular responsibility to make decency prevail in the universe. Adam Hochschild, King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa, (New York: Mariner Books, 1999), Kindle Location 3745-48.

Does your message fit your audience? That is perhaps the most critical aspect of marketing. If your message does not fit the audience - you will have no one to receive it. One of the "heroes" in the fight against the Congo Free State was E.D. Morel. His crusade against the atrocities being committed there made a significant impact. His ability to reach completely different groups with the same idea was instrumental in the fight to end the crimes being committed under Leopold's regime. He understood the basic concept that people will only care about something and be moved to make a difference if they understand how an issue personally impacts them. In a nutshell, people are inherently self-interested and that self-interest needs to be engaged in order for people to act. Fitting your audience then becomes an issue of whether or not you are connecting with the self-interest within the particular group(s) of people you are trying to reach. British businessmen in 1900 were not necessarily interested in helping native Africans getting slaughtered by brutal Europeans. However, they were interested in getting a piece of the economic pie that up to that point they had been getting cut out of. Morel got them on board by hitting that nerve. So whatever it is you are trying to "sell" to people - you must tap into that nerve center that motivates based upon selfish desire. This seems to be especially true in light of philanthropy endeavors. People will give of their resources (time, money, energy, etc) if they see a personal benefit. As their selfish interests are met - they will continue to move in any sort of direction one would choose to lead them in. Selfishness is the key to philanthropy? At first it seems paradoxical to say and yet the more I look at it the more I see it to be true. People are greedy & selfish by nature. Even when we feel like we are doing something for the greater good - we often are doing so under some form of personal motivation (the need to be known, recognized, loved, appreciated...). Every move we make, we do so in light of how others might respond. Its sick, ugly and twisted. Marketing has capitalized upon it & successful leaders have used it for years. A message will only reach humanity IF it taps into it. So the question becomes - can we use this tool of our own depravity for any consistent good? In other words, can our selfishness consistently be put to good use & how?

Fluidity Of Boundaries

2011-03-12T15:13:00.000-08:00

Les Demoiselles d'Avignon

Pablo Picasso

Cubism was new only for Europeans, for it was was partly inspired by specific pieces of African art, some of them from the Pende and Songye peoples, who live in the basin of the Kasai River, one of the Congo's major tributaries. It is easy to see the distinctive brilliance that so entranced Picasso and his colleagues at their first encounter with this art at an exhibit in Paris in 1907. In these central African sculptures some body parts are exaggerated, some shrunken; eyes project, cheeks sink, mouths disappear, torsos become elongated; eye sockets expand to cover almost the entire face; the human face and figure are broken apart and formed again in new ways and proportions that had previously lain beyond the sight of traditional European realism. The art sprang from cultures that had, among other things, a looser sense than Islam or Christianity of the boundaries between our world and the next, as well as those between the world of humans and the world of beasts...Perhaps it was the fluidity of these boundaries that granted central Africa's artists a freedom those in Europe had not yet discovered.
Adam Hochschild, King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa, (New York: Mariner Books, 1999), Kindle Location 1313-26.

I have to admit that I have not always had a full enough appreciation of art and art history. As a result, I have often been ignorant of the full value art has at expressing a time period's culture, customs, beliefs, and attitudes. So when I come across information that sheds light upon my ignorance, I am often overcome with the tremendous value & insight it provides me with. Currently, I am reading a book about King Leopold II and his tremendous brutality in the age of imperialism on Central Africa. It is a case in history that has unfortunately not had enough light shed upon it. The author (Adam Hochschild) does a tremendous job at providing a broad range of information to help the reader understand the time period as well as the facts of the story. One point he makes is the influence of African art on the artists of Europe of this time - including that of Pablo Picasso.

What stuck out to me was Hochschild's point of the fluidity of the boundaries between the different worlds for Africans at that time in history. I was struck at how amazing it must have been to not see such distinct lines between what we might call "reality" and that of the spiritual world (as well as that of humans and of animals!). Europeans were so compressed into realism that the potential to shed oneself of its shackles must have been so liberating to artists and free-thinkers of that time period. The question it begged to me was: How often do we fail to see the bigger picture because of the cultural restraints we place upon ourselves? We become so accustomed to seeing things and doing things based upon what we know, see and understand that we willingly stunt our creativity and possibility. As realism in art gave way to the liberating movement of cubism - we too have the potential to taste more liberating freedom if we allow ourselves to move beyond our own restrictions.

In particular, the spiritual world should be viewed in light of being intimately connected to that which we call reality. The amazing aspect of that is that a continent westerners shamelessly called "dark" was in reality a light to the concept of freedom of thought and expression. Instead of exploiting Africa - Westerners would have done the world a lot better favor by learning from Africa.

Life Change By Reading

2011-03-06T08:33:00.000-08:00

I recently started a book on the brutal massacre of millions of Africans from the area known as the "Congo Free State" under the leadership of King Leopold the II from Belgium. It is something I sadly know little about. My hope is to not only learn more about it but also like all historical learning to apply its learning to my own personal life. In other words, I hope my life is changed by what I read.

Life change by reading. I was having a text conversation with an old friend the other day and he was teasing me about my constant reading of history books. I am guilty as charged as the majority of books I read are generally historical & non-fiction in make-up. Why? There are a few reasons. One, I love to learn about history. I think true history is fare more exciting and interesting than fiction. It actually happened! Two, I think there is much to be learned from history. What we fail to grasp, learn, and improve upon sets up tragic potential for as of yet untold future. And finally, I read history books because they give me the facts, stories, and colorful additions to my ability to teach students. History is so much more than numbers & names. It is the very foundation human civilization is built upon - both good & bad. My goal is to help students understand that and have fun while learning.

So that is why I read what I read. Of course, everyone is different and everyone has their own set of likes, ideas, and tastes. With that in mind - my challenge would be for everyone to simply read more. Find out what interests you and spurs you on to better thinking, more creativity, and passion and then read, read, read.

Personal Connection

2011-02-26T19:36:00.000-08:00

Was Tocqueville right that religion contributes to American democracy? The evidence suggests that with one important exception he was. Religious Americans are generally better neighbors and more active citizens, though they are less staunch supporters of civil liberties than secular Americans. Morever, religious Americans are more satisfied with their lives. As we have seen, however, theology and piety have very little to do with this religious edge in neighborliness and happiness. Instead it is religion's network of morally freighted personal connections, coupled with an inclination toward altruism, that explains both the good neighborliness and the life satisfaction of religious Americans.

Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Unites Us and Divides Us, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010), 492.

Religious social networking. According to the research, religious Americans are more apt to be good neighbors and civic-minded simply because of the social networks provided by their particular religious institution. In other words, a church can have good preaching, good music, and a dynamic building - but without relationships it will mean squat. Without providing a forum and opportunity for true networking (none of that Sunday bullshit of "How you doing" & "I'm doing fine") - people will not change because of church. As Putnam and Campbell say it, "devout people who sit alone in the pews are not much more neighborly than people who don't go to church at all. The real impact of religiosity on niceness or good neighborliness, it seems, comes through chatting with friends after service or joining a Bible study group, not from listening to the sermon or fervently believing in God." People MUST connect with people to make religious participation meaningful. A perfect call for community.

It is amazing to me to see a well researched and articulated book point out the obvious and yet for the church to still not get it. How is it that we see book after book written about the need for community and then even have researched data to back it up - and yet it can still feel so hollow and empty when we go to church? We see the show, we feel the entertainment, and we can tell time and money have been invested...and yet none of it matters or penetrates. Even when we remark on the "timeliness of such a great sermon" - it usually has exited our thoughts by the time we hear that 6 am alarm the next morning. In many ways, that after church lunch with our group of church friends is more critical to developing our lives than the service we just got out of.

So should we ditch church all together? I don't think that is the answer or even a logical step. The church service still has meaning and purpose. However, the reality is that what churches need to do more of is develop ways for people to move beyond attendance and into meaningful relationships. The primary source of all time, creativity, energy, money, and effort needs to be relationship development. Because at the end of the day - that will truly transform more lives than a service. People become better people as a result of truly doing life with other people. Don't tell me you have Bible studies, small groups, or midweek programming. Give me something every single time I come in contact with your church that shows me relationship. Then, and truly one then, will church showcase the intimacy, relationship, and love that Jesus Christ desires with us.

After all, in heaven I would expect Jesus to give me a hug, share a story, or simply laugh with me NOT show me His ability to shock & awe my senses.

Trend Follower

2011-02-24T11:27:00.000-08:00

However, we can find encouragement in the fact that other evangelicals - and members of other religious traditions too - have adapted to ethno-racial diversity. Like the adaptation to changing gender roles described in the previous chapter, most religious Americans have conformed to the broader societal norms endorsing racial tolerance. To "adapt" and "conform" are passive verbs, chosen because, in general, religion has not served a prophetic role and promoted greater racial equality. Religious Americans are following the trend, not setting it.

Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Unites and Divides Us, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010), 315.

Religious institutions are followers not leaders in American culture. That is a heavy charge to make against groups that the majority of which would say they want to be changers of culture. How do you change culture when you are constantly adapting to fit into it? Taking a look at how American religious institutions have adapted to the changing gender roles, socio-economic relationships, and racial tolerance is eye-opening. Not because they have done so poorly at it, but because they have adapted and conformed in much the same way as the rest of American culture has. So the question is are American churches followers of God or simply cultural clubs?

Here are some things I think. The first is that I believe churches have started hiring female pastors simply because American cultural views of women workers has changed. With the rise of female power, authority and education in culture it became permissible for churches to employ them. Although I am happy to see female pastors, part of me wants to know why the church for so long did not have them but now the "rules" have changed. In other words is the church admitting to failure to recognize female leadership in the past or do we truly believe that in the last 30 years females have all of a sudden become acceptable spiritual leaders?

The second is in giving. I think the American church does a pretty decent job at this. Could it be better? Certainly - but that should not discount the good being done now. But the issue I have is the growing socio-economic divide that we are facing in America and has come to rear its ugly head within the church. Although the church does give money to those in need - it rarely seems to confront the issue that people with money struggle to relate to and form relationships with those without. Giving cash to a person in need is beneficial - befriending them and doing life with them is a whole, bigger step. What is the church doing to promote those types of relationships? Or has the church become okay with the idea of giving money but never actually seeing those who receive it?

Third and final is with racial tolerance. I think this is the hardest one because I think most Americans (myself included) do not do well with this. I believe the church has gotten more racially tolerant and for the most part people seem to be breaking down their out-right, blatant racist viewpoints. However, like in giving - its one thing to say I don't view other ethnicities as lower than my own, it is a whole, bigger issue to say I am seeking relationships and friendships outside of my own comfortable race bubble. Most churches remain homogeneous collections of people. That seems to be a far cry from the "every tongue, tribe & nation" worshipping model. The reality is that what little progress has been made in the church once again mirrors the slow growth model of American culture.

The church should have the desire and ability to set trends not follow them. Until it figures out how to do that, though, it will remain an American cultural club designed to make its members feel included and entertained while failing to bring the impact the surrounding society desperately needs.

Religious Entrepreneurship

2011-02-19T10:29:00.000-08:00

...the consistent pattern of religious entrepreneurship in America leaves us confident that more innovations will emerge. Such changes will be mostly incremental, mostly within local congregations, but always inventive.

Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Unites and Divides Us, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010), 179.

As a "showman, businessman, and entertainer" - P.T. Barnum rose to the heights of fame and fortune during the 19th century. Interestingly enough, Barnum might be one of the key figures to study in learning about the American church today. Although I would argue that the church is not offering the hoaxes that Barnum did, I do believe that the church is in a position where it spends many of its hours and dollars on figuring how to draw people in. What can be done to allure the person who is not currently coming to the church into coming to your church?

What this has done has made the business & entertaining side of church far more critical then in the past. A pastor with a theological degree might be able to explain the questions we have about the Bible, but without doing it in an entertaining way - he'll never have the audience to do so. Religious innovation and entrepreneurship have become the backbone of moving the church forward. What can be done to entertain the masses and convince them that your product is the best? What are you selling that the other local churches or possibly local entertainments are not? Might it be that the church would do better hiring more people with business, theatrical and marketing backgrounds? I have often thought that a church willing to hire the creative team behind Bud Light could certainly increase attendance.

Of course the issue behind it all is that the church (hopefully) remains focused on Jesus Christ and His message of redemption. Theology must remain a critical piece to the church puzzle. Without God - the church is simply a moralistic social club. However, the reality remains that churches need attedance & money. Without those two factors, churches (like businesses) shut their doors. So the issue becomes how much of the resources of a church go into the entertainment aspect - and what is the process for determining how effective those resources are at getting the audience to "buy into" the "product?"

The Dilemma

2011-02-18T11:16:00.000-08:00

However, if the broader appeal of conservative sexual morality emblazoned on the evangelical banner continues to wane (as it is likely to do because of generational succession), the evangelical movement may face a dilemma familiar to American evangelicals a century ago, a dilemma encapsulated in the differences between fundamentalism and neo-evangelicalism over how much to accomodate religious views to modernity. Continuing to sound the public trumpet of conservative personal morality may be the right thing to do from a theological point of view, but it may mean saving fewer souls now than it did a generation ago.

Robert D. Putnam and David E. Campbell, American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us, (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2010), 132.

I picked up Putnam & Campbell's book on American religion this past week. So far I have enjoyed its insights and research. Their work is done from a social scientist perspective with research, statistics, and hard-hitting questions. Too often the church and Christians live with their heads in the sand, and it is critical to ask questions and seek answers on issues that exist within the American Christian culture. The book (thus far) has done an excellent job at bringing those issues to the forefront of discussion.

One of the first things the authors do is to take a look at how religion was impacted from the 1950's through the long 60's, 70's & 80's swing, and then the 90's & 00's backlash. There were clear statistical patterns during these timeframes. The 50's saw a rise in being a part of religious traditions while the 60's were a rejection of that culture. The 70's and then 80's saw a rise in the religious right and attempted take back of culture, while the 90's through today saw a relapse as people tired of religion and politics mixing. Facts are stubborn things - and analysis shows these patterns to be true. Church attendance & religious participation is dictated by the overall cultural feelings of the time. A large portion of the American population allow their religious participation to be based upon cultural tendencies.

So what does the church do? Does the church accomodate their viewpoints in order to mesh better with their surrounding society? Or does the church continue to try to be the "shining city upon a hill" to the decaying moralistic community engulfed around it? If choosing to stick to certain moralistic standards causes more people to avoid the church - is that acceptable collateral damage? Which battles does the church choose to fight...which battles does the church choose to remain silent on...which battles does the church give into...? As American society moves foward this becomes the central pressing issue on the church.

Guy Montag

2011-02-15T22:18:00.000-08:00

I recently finished Bradbury's landmark book Fahrenheit 451. Its one of those books I have heard about for so long, but never actually took the time to read. What a book!! I really enjoyed the story but even more then the story was the message behind the writing. At first it was easy to jump to the conclusion that this book is yet another powerful tool against the evil of censorship. In fact, prior to reading it that was what I had heard about it and assumed it was about. Yet after reading it, I discovered a far more profound message then mere anti-censorship.

The primary thing that stuck out to me was the the laziness of humanity. Written in 1953, the book is extremely prophetic on the apathetic & lazy nature of people today. Essentially the people of the story have given themselves over to mindless entertainment with an expressed goal of simply having fun. Life becomes about seeking pleasure, having fun, and finding happiness. As a result people stop thinking, stop caring, and stop learning. Books become evil and are burned not so much as a result of censorship but because people are too lazy to use them anymore. Its easier to simply become numb to the simple pleasures of life. Book require thinking, challenge assumptions, and do not allow people to rest comfortable. All of that is too much for the lazy culture. I was blown away because in much the same way I see that of our current culture as well. How many people do not read anymore? Internet, movies, television, and other forms of mindless entertainment have taken the place of reading. People do not want to learn and do want to be challenged anymore. We have become a lazy culture. Is it too much of a stretch to say that it will not be long before books "die" for us as well.

The other thing I gained from the story was the blame we often put on governments and government systems for our own inadequacies. We do not spend our own money well - and yet rail at the government for poor spending. We do not educate our kids at home - and yet rail at teachers for not doing enough for our kids. We do not like a variety of things - and yet it is often ourselves who are to blame for society's ills. In the book, the city and life of the people is ugly and pathetic. And yet the reality is that the people in the story have all earned their place. Too many refused to do anything about their situation and as a result their society crumbled. The firemen who burned books were not the problem. The culture that allowed for books to be burned was the issue.

Fascinating book. I am glad I finally took the time to read it.

A Beautiful Story

2011-02-13T10:29:00.000-08:00

Behind him came the baripity of the pickup, but he couldn't turn around. He tried to run faster, but his father passed him and stopped the pickup just ahead, then jumped out and ran back. He picked Jess up in his arms as though he were a baby. For the first few seconds Jess kicked and struggled against the strong arms. Then Jess gave himself over to the numbness that was buzzing to be let out from a corner of his brain.
Katherine Paterson, Bridge to Terabithia, (New York: HarperTrophy, 1977), 156-158.

My wife and I have a frequent argument over movies and books. She uses both to escape and generally does not like stuff that makes her cry or feel bad. I, on the other hand, like stories that spark emotion within me. Whether its joy, sorrow, happiness, sadness, anger, or shock - I like stories that move me. To that end, I have always loved Bridge to Terabithia. Along with reading Charlotte's Web this weekend, I took the opportunity to read Bridge this weekend. I remember exactly why I loved it. It is so easy to understand the emotions and feelings of Jesse Oliver Aarons Jr. His feelings of inadequacy, loneliness, turmoil, joy, friendship, lack of courage, lack of strength, competitiveness, anger, and raw emptiness all speak so true from the page of Paterson's great work. I love his friendship with Leslie Burke and how much she brings out the best in him. I cried (once again) over her death and the raw emotion and pain felt by Jesse. The passing of the torch to his sister May Belle and his discovery of understanding his enemies Janice Avery & Mrs. Myers.

However, the part of the book that always gets me the most is the scene sketched by Paterson above. Jesse never seemed to see eye to eye with his Dad and for most of the book you see Dad as cold & distant. He is there - but he spends so much time working and doing what he can to provide, that as the reader you feel the distance between the two. Jesse longs for the closeness of the relationship he had with him when he was just a little boy. And then in an instant you see this incredible depth after Jesse finds out Leslie has died. He runs away and his Dad chases after him and swoops him into his arms. I can just feel my own Dad wrapping his arms around me as I struggle to make sense of my own shattered world of hurt, pain, and lack of understanding. You feel the love and care that Jesse's Dad obviously always had for him - even if he did not do well with showing it. And I found myself crying over the absolute beauty of the scene.

A beautiful book. One of the best I have ever read. I am thankful I decided to spend the weekend traveling "back in time" to the books of my youth.

Some Pig

2011-02-13T08:56:00.000-08:00

Wilbur was merely suffering the doubts and fears that often go with finding a new friend. In good time he was to discover that he was mistaken about Charlotte. Underneath her rather bold and cruel exterior, she had a kind heart, and she was to prove loyal and true to the very end.
"No," said Charlotte. "They don't catch anything. They just keep trotting back and forth across the bridge thinking there is something better on the other side. If they'd hang head-down at the top of the thing and wait quietly, maybe something good would come along. But no - with men it's rush, rush, rush, every minute. I'm glad I'm a sedentary spider."
"Children pay better attention than grownups. If Fern says that the animals in Zuckerman's barn talk, I'm quite ready to believe her. Perhaps if people talked less, animals would talk more. People are incessant talkers - I can give my word on that."
"You have been my friend," replied Charlotte. "That in itself is a tremendous thing. I wove my webs for you because I liked you. After all, what's a life, anyway? We're born, we live a little while, we die. A spider's life can't help being something of a mess, with all this trapping and eating flies. By helping you, perhaps I was trying to lift up my life a trifle. Heaven knows anyone's life can stand a little of that."

E.B. White, Charlotte's Web, (New York: Harper Collins, 1952), 41, 60, 110, 164.

I took the opportunity to read Charlotte's Web this weekend. It was one of my favorite books as a kid, and I do not believe I had read it since about third grade. I zoomed through it Saturday morning and fell in love with the story all over again. What a beautiful portrayal of loyalty, friendship, and the inevitable sadness that comes when we lose someone we love. The life lessons that are taught through the writing are as applicable to the 28 year old version of me as they were to the 8 year old version. Anytime a book can literally move your heart, the writing is solid. It was a good reminder that no matter how many things I can learn, sometimes the most crucial are the lessons I already have learned. Excellent read.

Monkey Mind

2011-02-11T11:10:00.000-08:00

I can prattle away to God about all my feelings and my problems all the livelong day, but when it comes to time to descend into silence and listen...well, that's a different story. When I ask my mind to rest in stillness, it is astonishing how quickly it will turn (1) bored, (2) angry, (3) depressed, (4) anxious or (5) all of the above. Like most humanoids, I am burdened with what the Buddhists call the "monkey mind" - the thoughts that swing from limb to limb, stopping only to scratch themselves, spit and howl. From the distant past to the unknownable future, my mind swings wildly through time, touching on dozens of ideas a minute, unharnessed and undisciplined. This in itself is not necessarily a problem; the problem is the emotional attachment that goes long with the thinking. Happy thoughts make me happy, but - whoop! - how quickly I swing again into obsessive worry, blowing the mood; and then it's the remembrance of an angry moment and I start to get hot and pissed off all over again; and then my mind decides it might be a good time to start feeling sorry for itself, and loneliness follows promptly. You are, after all, what you think. Your emotions are the slaves to your thoughts, and you are the slave to your emotions.
Elizabeth Gilbert, Eat Pray Love, (New York: Viking Penguin, 2006), 132.

Gilbert's description of religion & spirituality is very interesting. At times I think she takes the easy route and uses a form of universalism to support her inability to choose truth. However, I do think she narrows in on some key concepts that are very applicable to my own life. For most of her time in India, she is highly focused on meditation and its practical benefits. She spends her time searching for the proper way to meditate as well as spend time in solitude & silence. All of these are invaluable spiritual disciplines. And uniquely I find my own life a mirror image of her's in terms of struggling to sit still, silence myself and actually listen to God.

Rest in stillness. My mind never seems to do that and frankly I am not completely sure how to make it. I admire the idea of retreating to a place that would cut me off from the hustle & bustle of every day life. I don't have the luxury of seeking seclusion in India, but I do think the first step in finding quietness for my mind is seeking an environment that would could help encourage it. The other key point is being a slave to my emotions. How easily true this is of me. I often find my actions & speech reflective of my current wave of emotions. The danger of my monkey mind - is that certain emotions & thought processes can easily derail me.

So now I am left with - how do I accomplish what Liz Gilbert set out to accomplish? Where do I go & how do I take it upon myself to accomplish a mind that seeks stillness? And even more importantly - what am I missing by being the only one talking in my relationship with God?

World Champions!

2011-02-10T16:36:00.000-08:00

I can distinctly remember watching the Packers lose in the Super Bowl to the Denver Broncos and how upset it made me. I even remember picking a fight with my friend Ben Swails in my frustration. After that night it became a waiting game for another chance to see my beloved Packers play in the Super Bowl. Most years ended with hope being dashed on the rocks of yet another Brett Favre interception. So after all the waiting...it was incredibly fun to watch them win it all again. Great game & great win. Another team effort led by the best quarterback in the NFL brought the Lombardi trophy home. Good job Green Bay. And hopefully they don't make me wait that long again for another title!

(AP Photo / Kathy Willens)

Play of the game. There were a lot of great moments in the game - but as has often been the case this year, Matthews made the hit that made the difference.

(AP Photo - Chris O'Meara)

Super Bowl MVP. One of the best QB performances in Super Bowl history. Aaron Rodgers was a beast in the playoffs. What a ride!

(Green Bay Press-Gazette / Corey Wilson)

The architect behind the Packers. Ted Thompson is one of the the smartest men in football. His bold & controversial move of saying NO to Favre was one of many brilliant moves he has done.

(Green Bay Press-Gazette / H. Marc Larson)

Underrated & under-valued. Coach McCarthy deserves all the praise for leading this team through adversity after adversity, injury after injury. Great coach!

(AP Photo / Eric Gay)
The drops were awful to watch. But Jordy kept pushing foward and made himself a Super Bowl hero.

(AP Photo / Paul Sancya)

Nothing better then seeing the pick six. Great pressure by Green & great finish by Collins.

Riotous and Endless

2011-02-03T16:10:00.000-08:00

I look at the Augusteum, and I think that perhaps my life has not actually been so chaotic, after all. It is merely this world that is chaotic, bringing changes to us all that nobody could have anticipated. The Augusteum warns me not to get too attached to any obsolete ideas about who I am, what I represent, whom I belong to, or what function I may once have intended to serve. Yesterday I might have been a glorious monument to somebody, true enough - but tomorrow I could be a fireworks depository. Even in the Eternal City, says the silent Augusteum, one must always be prepared for riotous and endless waves of transformation.

Elizabeth Gilbert, Eat Pray Love, (New York: Viking Penguin, 2006), 75.

I could write a lot of posts on the good and bad portions of the first third of Elizabeth Gilbert's book. The writing is very good. She does a great job at describing places, emotions, feelings, and questions of the soul. On many different pages I found myself laughing out loud and feeling the ache of loneliness & depression. Yet, I also see a feminist woman who is pretty self-centered and seems to think her way is the right way. She seemingly complains a lot and her justifications do not always land just right. Plus, she was able to get a publishing company pay for her to spend a year on the road. Not a lot to whine about Ms. Gilbert. So in all that, I must say I have found myself really enjoying her writing. So as I go along, I'll jot some thoughts down on passages that have made me pause and think. (Side-note: she dives into a worldly type view of spirituality a lot. I will probably not touch much on this. I don't agree with a lot of her thoughts in this regard - but I would rather focus on what I am gaining, not on what I disagree with).

The above quote comes from a part of the book where she is taking a personal walking tour around Italy, and comes across the Augusteum. Having just finished a book on Augustus - my curiosity was peaked. What was once a grand mausoleum in honor of Augustus, the Augusteum has undergone a variety of transitions through hundreds of years. Her take on its experience and ability to transcend, adjust and grow with the times was very insightful. The reality is our world is chaotic & constantly changing. What we think and hope for right now - can instantly change depending on what the world brings us tomorrow. Transformation will come. It will be endless and riotous. And no matter how much I desire to remain in the past or cling to some supposed path - I must be prepared to deal with what comes my way. Life might not look at all the way I want. That's okay. The key is found simply being able to endure.

The above picture shows the Augusteum today. Hardly a magnificent looking building to house & honor the great Octavian! Yet, the reality is it still stands. It is broken down. It has wild plants and weeds growing all over it. It is old and weary looking. Yet it remains. Can I say the same thing about my own life and journey? Or do the waves of change and transformation wash over me leaving nothing left behind?

Chick Book

2011-02-02T16:24:00.000-08:00

So I have decided to read a chick book. Not sure what I will gain by reading "one woman's search for everything" - but the fact is I love good writing. I have heard many good things & many bad things about this book, and now will investigate it for myself. I have no shame in reading it and I hope that its writing moves me as much as it has moved others. At the very least, I'll be able to see what the fuss is all about and formulate my own thoughts. So here we go...

Welcome To Wisconsin

2011-01-26T19:47:00.000-08:00

(J. Scott Applewhite / AP Photo)

Welcome to Wisconsin Mr. President.

Headed To Dallas!

2011-01-23T22:07:00.000-08:00

Well it certainly wasn't pretty for most of the game and there were a lot of tense moments in the second half - but all that matters is that the Packers are headed to the Super Bowl. I don't know if they can beat the Steelers - but it certainly is awesome to have a shot at the title. Ted Thompson deserves special recognition for building this team and stocking it full of talent. I don't know of too many other teams that could make it this far while losing so many starters to injury. The coaching staff has kept them together and has gotten the most out of some low-key guys.

Way to go Packers!!!!

(AP Photo / Jim Prisching)

What a pick-6 by B.J. Raji. His play on the D-Line has been spectacular all season long.

(AP Photo / Charles Rex Arbogast)
Rodgers got them started early. His game was off - but he set the tone for a victory.

(Nuccio DiNuzzo / Chicago Tribune / MCT)
Has any undrafted free agent ever played a bigger role? Shields was simply amazing today.

(Evan Siegle / Green Bay Press-Gazette)
When did Capers decide he was going to use Shields as a blitzer? Smart move!!

(AP Photo / David J. Phillip)
James Starks has been a major help in the playoffs to the running game.

(Corey Wilson / Green Bay Press-Gazette)
Perhaps the MVP of the game. Masthay has continued to get better - incredible punting today!

(Evan Siegle / Green Bay Press-Gazette)
The defense was rock solid today. They carried the team when the offense was down.

Reform?

2011-01-22T11:01:00.000-08:00

The reform package - touted as an alternative to increased taxes or further cuts to state education funding - calls for increased class sizes and fewer teachers, balanced by more classroom technology with personal laptops and required online courses for high school students. Under the plan, educator pay would be based on merit, with bonuses for student achievement. Tenure for new teachers would be eliminated, as would job security based on seniority. The state would pay for the plan mostly by increasing the ratio of students-per-class from 18.2 to 19.8 during the next two years, saving about $100 million annually. Idaho would shed about 770 teaching jobs as class sizes increase and more courses are taught online.

Maureen Dolan. "Citizens Testify on Education." Coeur d'Alene Press 22 January 2011: A1.

Education is absolutely necessary. For some it is a way to help improve our nation and secure a better foundation for our future. For others, it apparently is a necessary evil that should be crippled with low finances and high expectations. What we must ask ourselves is what is best for our future and what will help us produce not only academically inclined students but healthy young men and women. With something as important as education - our minds should not be focused on penny pinching or on extravagant expenditures. Instead, we should be thinking about what is actually best for the the students and the education system in general.

The state of Idaho is currently in an educational debate with a set proposal being sent forth by the chiefs of education in the state - Tom Luna and Butch Otter. Their plan (as outlined by Maureen Dolan above) has been extremely controversial since its unveiling. Without tossing mud, serious questions have to be asked. Does anyone truly believe that increasing class sizes is for the benefit of kids or teachers? The more pupils per class - the harder it is to effectively teach and reach all of them. More kids per class will equal more kids being "lost" in the general education classroom. The same could be said about required online classes. I don't care how advanced technology is getting. The interaction and learning environment of a classroom with an actual teacher cannot be replaced with a laptop and cyber-classroom. There is so much more then learning the ABC's of a class that goes on inside a school. Are we willing to sacrifice that - and if so, what does that look like for the future of America?

Finally - what does merit mean? What does student achievement mean? Have we truly found a reliable method of measuring it? I do think teachers need effective accountability like any other profession. Teachers need to be held to a high standard and expected to do their best. However, simply relying upon test scores and other generic measurements does not give us an effective formula for merit or achievement. What about the teacher that has a tremendous impact upon kids who do not like school, will not try at school, and have no home life to enforce strict standards? Those kids might end up being responsible citizens and solid young men and women despite being academically deficient. The ability, attitude and home life of a student has far more weight on their performance & achievement then anything a school, teacher or class can do. Should teachers be punished when those 3 attributes are lacking?

Perhaps what is happening is that America is disgusted with what we are becoming as a nation. We are lazy, apathetic and self-indulgent. We have to have the very best but do not want to work hard to get it. We just expect things to come to us with little to no effort on our behalf. Our families continue to break down and our morality is ceasing to exist. As a result, we have become a nation that deplores our condition but refuses to take steps to correct our dismal state. So instead of taking a real hard look at ourselves, we instead lash out at things we feel our easier to blame and control. Instead of being disturbed at our broken families and lazy kids, it is much simpler to point the finger at teachers and their lack of effort. Its the schools' fault! Its my son or daughter's awful teacher's fault! Blame someone! Blame anyone! Just do not blame me.

Well taking aim at education through the elimination of teacher positions, increased class sizes, and lowered teacher salaries will certainly save dollars & look like reform. But in the end, as dead flies give perfume a bad smell, the folly of blaming education for our own iniquities will eventually bring our downfall in society.

Excessive Liberty

2011-01-18T13:56:00.000-08:00

Beneath these two issues - treatment of the mentally ill and gun control - lies a deeper one: Where does one draw the line between freedom and anarchy in a democratic society? According to Yale law professor Paul Gewirtz, "Our various legal rules, taken together, may be producing a society in which liberty is bordering on disorder." The libertarian tendency is deeply American, going back all the way to the Whiskey Rebellion. But it must be balanced against a civilized society's need for behavioral constraints, agreed upon by the consent of the governed. If the Arizona shootings point in any direction, it is toward reassessing the excessive liberties we've granted ourselves in recent years.

Klein, Joe."Arms and the Unbalanced." Time 24 January 2011: 25.

The concept of liberty often means the freedom from despotic government, control, interference, obligation, restriction, confinement and restraint. It is a theory that has deep meaning in the United States forming a significant chunk of the foundation of the nation. There are few things people cherish more in this country. We love the liberty to speak our minds, choose our destinies, and keep our stuff. Infringement on any of our liberties is bound to attract negative attention from all sides of the political spectrum. William Wallace's "FREEDOM!" resonates with many of us as if George Washington screamed the same thing at Yorktown.

And yet it is with our great love of liberty that we have found ourselves in a moral morass. As much as we do not want any entanglements in our personal lives from the government, we have seen the potential danger to unrestrained choice. Our liberties have become the stumbling blocks to safety, sanity and well-being. Certainly the great majority of people can conduct themselves in a manner worthy of liberty. However, for the percentage that cannot...have we set ourselves up for failure in society? Is it possible that we might be hurting ourselves by allowing liberty to run unchecked? Of course no reasonable person would argue for Orwell's Big Brother to take control of our mess. However, as a collective group, perhaps the citizens of this country could develop a better system of checks & balances on our own freedom of choice.

It is said less is more. In the case of our liberties, perhaps choosing to give up some might be the answer to gaining more for our beloved land of freedom.

Epic Meeting

2011-01-17T17:21:00.000-08:00

What a match-up! The NFC Championship game should be one for the ages. Both of these teams seem to be firing on all cylinders. They each boast great defenses and solid coaching staffs. I think Green Bay has the better quarterback and collection of wide receivers, but the Bears counter that with far superior special teams and the better running back. The only real separation might simply be Chicago getting to play at home while the Packers have to play in one of the most hostile places in the league. Since 1921 the two teams have played each 181 times. Number 182 will be epic and might be their biggest match-up since 1941. Hopefully Green Bay has not used up all their magic and can find a way to win. Go Pack Go!

Afghanistan Looms

2011-01-12T18:22:00.000-08:00

Photo: Tyler Hicks / The New York Times

"After 10 years of fighting a war that now costs the U.S. upwards of $100 billion - $1 million per soldier - per year, where do we draw the line? Once we've cleared the Taliban from an area, what remaining responsibilities do we have - and what should the Afghans be doing for themselves? Do we really need to provide cold-storage facilities to the world's fourth poorest country? Given the sour U.S. economy and budget deficits, what to do about Afghanistan looms as a major domestic policy issue for President Barack Obama this year."

Klein, Joe. "Finishing The Job In Afghanistan. Needed: Security, Development And A Stable Pakistan." Time 17 January 2011:44-46.

Is it possible that most Americans are completely ignorant of the on-going conflict in Afghanistan? If so - does that mitigate the seriousness of the war that is costing a lot of money and lives? What is the U.S. plan for the war? Do we care about it long term - or are we simply going to look for the quickest duck & run strategy? Do Americans care more about getting our soldiers home or long-term stability for Afghanistan? Fiscally speaking, how do we continue the war? Will this issue be a key component of the Presidential election of 2012?

Keep & Bear Arms

2011-01-11T15:30:00.000-08:00

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I get it. Freedom is freedom. Once we start placing qualifiers on freedom it slowly erodes our rights as Americans. Restrictions make more restrictions easier to take hold. Just because one crazy person does something, says something, or causes some problem does not mean the rest of the country should deal with enforced consequences of his or her stupidity.

But why in the world is a 30-round magazine necessary for a handgun? Why do background checks still miss so many key questions and problems that individuals might have? Do we truly need over 100 million handguns in this country? And the most basic question I wrestle with - why have we become so fixated on the idea of owning, carrying, and using guns?

Vitriolic Rhetoric

2011-01-10T11:03:00.000-08:00

"The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. The vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business...This has not become the nice United States that most of us grew up in. It's not unusual for all public officials to get threats constantly, myself included. That's the sad thing about what's going on in America: Pretty soon we're not going to be able to find reasonable decent people willing to subject themselves to serve in public office."

-Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik-

The political debate and opinion about the shootings in Tucson from this past weekend is going to last a long time with both sides of the fence providing argument. Each side has already used the tragedy to further their cause which in and of itself is extremely disappointing. The fact of the matter is that we should all be grieving over the incredibly sad & devastating shootings. It is a dark moment for the United States and humanity in general. There are just no words to be found for a moment like it.

But moving forward (as we must do as a society) - what do we need to learn. Like him or not, Sheriff Dupnik said something incredibly valuable in his above-mentioned statement. Anger, hate and bigotry remain at outrageous levels. And we have allowed our politics to spin more and more frustration out of voters, politicians, and the political process. Instead of disagreeing over healthcare issues - we demonize our opponents and their beliefs. Agreeing to disagree has been eliminated as a viable option. Extremists on the radio and television garner the largest ratings and so networks continue to allow them to run their mouths. The American public willingly allows themselves to be spoon fed hate because it just feels good to find someone to blame for the ill we feel. If we don't like the job we have, the spouse we chose, the insurance we get, or a variety of other issues - we simply point the finger at someone else. Its Obama's fault. Its Pelosi's fault. Its McConnell's fault. Its whoever the "hot ticket" for the opposing party that is to blame. We are so consumed with finger pointing, anger, and frustration that its vitriolic rhetoric that controls the day.

In the end, we are the ones that lose. We may not all be crazy and psychopathic, but so few of us are actually willing to take a strong stance against the shit we get fed each and every day. We have become so self-focused on our own problems that we refuse to see our "opponents" simply as people with different needs, wants and opinions on how to accomplish goals. The best we can hope for from this whole ordeal is the opportunity to start seeing people as people. Use this tragedy as the means for unification and working together for the best of society. Eliminate rage, anger, bitterness, malice, slander, deceit, hypocrisy and general mean spiritness. Let's not look to simply find which political viewpoint deserves the most blame. Instead, let us remember that we are all in this together and perhaps the best thing we can do is unite under the banner of love to move foward.

Starks!

2011-01-09T19:08:00.000-08:00

23 carries for 123 yards. What a postseason debut for James Starks! It was a nice victory for Green Bay over Philadelphia. Now its time to get ready to play the #1 Atlanta Falcons.

We'll See

2011-01-08T20:43:00.000-08:00

"There's a little boy and on his 14th birthday he gets a horse...and everybody in the village says, 'how wonderful.' And the zen master says, 'we'll see.' Two years later, the boy falls off the horse, breaks his leg, and everyone in the village says, 'how terrible.' And the zen master says, 'we'll see.' Then, a war breaks out and all the young men have to go off and fight...except the boy can't because his legs are all messed up and everyone in the village says, 'how wonderful.'"

(Gust Avrakotos)

"Now the zen master says, 'we'll see.'"

(Charlie Wilson)

side-note: Charlie Wilson's War is one of my all-time favorite films.

Without Thought or Restraint

2011-01-01T21:52:00.000-08:00

'As soon as riches came to be held in honour, and brought glory, imperium, and power, virtue began to grow dull; poverty was seen as disgraceful, innocence as malevolence. Therefore because of wealth, our youths were seized by luxury, greed and pride; they stole and squandered; reckoning their own property of little worth, they coveted other peoples'; contemptuous of modesty and chastity, of everything divine or human, they were without thought or restraint.'

- The senator and historian Sallust, writing in the late forties BC.-

Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar: Life of a Colossus, (London: Yale University Press, 2006), 109.

Every winter a collection of guys and myself pick out a book (or 3) to read together with the expressed goal of learning something from history and hopefully gaining insights for our own lives. Discussion does not seem to happen often, but its been a fun exercise in reading, learning, and comradery. This winter we selected Roman leaders as the topic with Cicero, Julius Caesar, and Emperor Augustus as the primary focus. Needless to say, I have been overly thrilled with the readings thus far.

One of the things I cannot help but notice is the parallel between the ancient Roman world and that of modern America. I'm sure every historian has noted a parallel between that of the Roman world and those western countries who have assumed world power status since the fall of the empire, so I am not claiming original thought here. However, I see so many examples of our contemporary world facing the same ills of society that would eventually bring Rome to her knees. The above quote from Sallust in regards to riches becoming 'held in honour' speaks of the poverty of the American moral soul. Everything about America today screams of the need for riches, greed, and covetousness. People are valued by their material wealth, and those without it dream of having it. Riches have become the lens with which Americans view their worlds. As a result, pollution of our mindsets has become a real problem. Even our institutions like churches have become transfixed to the need to acquire and display wealth simply to get those with wealth in.

Recognizing this problem is easy. The solution is not. Even in my own life, I know I struggle with wanting bigger, better and more. Being content and chaste is not worthy anymore. Life without thought or restraint is glorified. As a result, America, much like Rome, finds itself in a quagmire with very little hope of solution.

The Bible

2010-12-31T08:50:00.000-08:00

Every word of God is flawless...

Proverbs 30:5

In 2009, I read through the entire Bible in a quick reading 90 day program. It was fast and at times felt like skimming. However, it provided some great overview & big picture thinking. In 2010, I was able to read through the entire Bible over the course of the year (thanks Central). It was slower and at times felt like I was forcing my way through. However, it provided daily insight, encouragement and wisdom as well as the satisfaction of reading cover to cover. Reading the Bible, much like reading history, just reminds me of how little I know. There is so much truth packed into it and instruction for daily living that I simply just miss. However, I will continue to plug away. 2011 will bring some new readings of 'stuff' I have already read. And yet, like always, it will inspire and challenge me without fail. Take the plunge and start reading the Bible. You'll never know where it will lead you.

2010 In Books

2010-12-30T11:42:00.000-08:00

"Every man who knows how to read has it in his power to magnify himself, to multiply the ways in which he exists, to make his life full, significant and interesting." -Aldous Huxley-

2010 was a great year in a variety of ways. One of my favorite parts of it was the amount of reading I was able to accomplish. It was a fun year of gaining knowledge, expanding my horizons, and learning so much that I had not previously known.

From Leonardo da Vinci to Marcus Tullius Cicero. From the construction of the Brooklyn Bridge to the race for the polio vaccine. From the corrupt William Tweed to the corrupt & struggling Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger. From presidential wannabe William Jennings Bryan to the actual presidencies of Woodrow Wilson, John Adams and FDR. I learned of the genius of Thomas Edison to the folly of Renaissance Popes, British leaders in the 18th century and American leaders during Vietnam. Or the Brown Brothers and their story in early Rhode Island history. George Washington and his slaves had a very interesting history as did the men of the early 20th century in charge of the world banking system. The War of 1812 continues to interest me and I have taken on a new fascination with New York City after reading so much about it. The thinkers of the Metaphysical Club helped spur my love of philosophy while I contemplated why Americans struggle so much with ourselves. Without avoiding my faith, I was encouraged to have a crazy love for God while trusting in an absolute naked salvation. My struggles with how church should be were challenged and my fight against doubt was reassured. And finally, I found time to invest in some fiction which helped excite my imagination in Tinkers, Gilead, The Road, Chesapeake, and Anthem.

The best part was knowing that my pursuit of knowledge and passion for learning were futher inflamed. It is an endless road with so many more subjects, ideals, myths, figures, time periods, and adventures to explore. It is nice knowing I haven't even scratched the surface yet. Page after page, hour after hour - the investment was worth it. I look forward to what 2011 will bring.

The god of I

2010-12-19T15:45:00.000-08:00

I stand here on the summit of the mountain. I lift my head and I spread my arms. This, my body and spirit, this is the end of the quest. I wished to know the meaning of things. I am the meaning. I wished to find a warrant for being. I need no warrant for being, and no word of sanction upon my being. I am the warrant and the sanction...It is my eyes which see, and the sight of my eyes grants beauty to the earth. It is my ears which hear, and the hearing of my ears gives its song to the world. It is my mind which thinks, and the judgment of my mind is the only searchlight that can find the truth. It is my will which chooses, and the choice of my will is the only edict I must respect...Many words have been granted me, and some are wise, and some are false, but only three are holy: "I will it!"...Whatever road I take, the guiding star is within me; the guiding star and the loadstone which point the way. They point in but one direction. They point to me...I know not if this earth on which I stand is the core of the universe or if it is but a speck of dust lost in eternity. I know not and I care not. For I know what happiness is possible to me on earth. And my happiness needs no higher aim to vindicate it. My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.

Ayn Rand, Anthem, (New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1995), 87-88.

This was perhaps the most disturbing portion of Ayn Rand's book. Having escaped the clutches of his culture, Equality 7-2521 experiences "freedom" and lands on fulfilling his own personal happiness as the key to life. Goal & purpose were fulfilled in him choosing for himself the fulfillment of his own personal gain. I was blown away at the pure selfishness displayed by the character. Although I can identify with the abuse that a we-based collectivist society could bring to the dearth of individual freedom; it is also wrong to blatantly worship "I". Everything pointing to "me" is no way to see the world. Eventually this can only lead to self-reliance and self-worship. True love has no place in that world - as the needs and focus cannot possibly be extended beyond the realm of oneself. This is the key argument against Rand's belief in objectivism. Everything in that realm is based upon the "I" which has way too many fallacies to support itself. Can one truly trust in themselves and make decisions based upon their own selfish wants and desires and really turn out solid decision making? Its the essence of capitalism once again. That in retaliation to state control, all control is given to the individual with some laissez faire belief that in the pursuit of self we can really benefit society as a whole. I just cannot buy it. The worship of self will always lead to destruction - no matter how much pleasure & happiness it might seem to promise.

To Us Alone

2010-12-19T15:36:00.000-08:00

There is no life for men, save in useful toil for the good of all their brothers. But we lived not, when we toiled for our brothers, we were only weary. There is no joy for men, save the joy shared with all their brothers. But the only things which taught us joy were the power we created in our wires, and the Golden One. And both these joys belong to us alone, they come from us alone, they bear no relation to our brothers, and they do not concern our brothers in any way. Thus do we wonder.

Ayn Rand, Anthem, (New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1995), 76.

I continue to be amazed at how much Ayn Rand pushes the doctrine of personal satisfaction as the goal of life. And yet as much as I want to argue with her, she brings up a valid point. What are the things that truly bring us "life" and "joy"? Are they not the things which satisfy ourselves and fill our own cups? Do the things that contribute to society as a whole really bring us greater joy then the things we do which satisfy ourselves? What is the balance needed between working hard and spending time on things which bring us personal joy and those things which contribute to "our brothers" around us? Is it possible to concentrate on the things which bring us greatest joy - and have those things 'trickle down' to those around us?

I have a hard time agreeing with her point of wonder, and yet I can understand where it is coming from. Many things that I like to do (reading, running, naps, etc) are for myself. Does this make them wrong? Perhaps what is necessary is to strive to find the balance of filling ourselves while remembering that to love one another is our greatest contribution. God certainly wires us to love certain activities - so it cannot be wrong to indulge in them. But when our focus becomes completely on ourselves we lose touch with reality.

Transgression of Preference

2010-12-19T15:20:00.000-08:00

International 4-8818 and we are friends. This is an evil thing to say, for it is a transgression, the great Transgression of Preference, to love any among men better than the others, since we must love all men and all men are our friends. So International 4-8818 and we have never spoken of it. But we know. We know, when we look into each other's eyes. And when we look thus without words, we both know other things also, strange things for which there are no words, and these things frighten us.

We do not wonder at this new sin of ours. It is our second Transgression of Preference, for we do not think of all our brothers, as we must, but only of one, and their name is Liberty 5-3000. We do not know why we think of them. We do not know why, when we think of them, we feel of a sudden that the earth is good and that it is not a burden to live. We do not think of them as Liberty 5-3000 any longer. We have given them a name in our thoughts. We call them the Golden One. But it is a sin to give men names which distinguish them from other men. Yet we call them the Golden One, for they are not like the others. The Golden One are not like the others.

"If you see us among scores of women, will you look upon us?" "We shall look upon you, Liberty 5-3000, if we see you among all the women of the earth."

Ayn Rand, Anthem, (New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1995), 15, 26, 28-29.

One of the most interesting parts of the Anthem was the sin or transgression of preference. The people in the were commanded and forced into never choosing anyone above anyone else. Friendships were not allowed. Sex become a once-per-year ritual simply to procreate. And people were conditioned simply to live in complete equality. No favoritism. No choice. And I found myself all of a sudden arguing against complete equality. I like the trangression of preference. I am guilty of it on a daily basis. My kids mean far more to me than any other kids. My friends are incredibly important to me and I am far more likely to go out of my way for them then others. My wife is the most incredible woman on Earth to me. I want to choose her every single day. She is my "Golden One" and I have no qualms with choosing her above every other female day after day. Equality & no favoritism look and sound good. And yet reality shows that when given the choice, we all violate the transgression of preference.

Is it really bad then to violate equality? When do the constraints of equality interfere with the necessity of free choice? Is the violation of this transgression inevitable and are we (in reality) okay with it?

Common Good?

2010-12-19T14:44:00.000-08:00

I shall merely point out that the slogan 'Production for use and not for profit' is now accepted by most men as a commonplace, and a commonplace stating a proper, desirable goal. If any intelligible meaning can be discerned in that slogan at all, what is it, if not the idea that the motive of a man's work must be the need of others, not his own need, desire or gain?

'Social gains,' 'social aims,' 'social objectives' have become the daily bromides of our language. The necessity of a social justification for all activities and all existence is now taken for granted. There is no proposal outrageous enough but what its author can get a respectful hearing and approbation if he claims that in some undefined way it is for the 'common good.'

The greatest guilt today is that of people who accept collectivism by moral default; the people who seek protection from the necessity of taking a stand, by refusing to admit to themselves the nature of that which they are accepting; the people who support plans specifically designed to achieve serfdom, but hide behind the empty assertion that they are lovers of freedom, with no concrete meaning attached to the word; the people who believe that the content of ideas need not be examined, that principles need not be defined, and that facts can be eliminated by keeping one's eyes shut. They expect, when they find themselves in a world of bloody ruins and concentration camps, to escape moral responsibility by wailing: 'But I didn't mean this!'

Ayn Rand, Anthem, (New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1995), v-vii.

I recently finished Ayn Rand's book Anthem. I am doing my best to process that which she was trying to communicate when she first published the story in 1946. The above section comes her own personal foreward to the story of Equality 7-2521 and his quest for meaning & freedom. My next few posts will deal with the story itself.

I Drink Your Milkshake

2010-12-18T16:15:00.000-08:00

"Greed is a bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction." -Erich Fromm-

I finally watched the 2007 movie There Will Be Blood. I had heard a lot about it, and it starred one of my favorite actors (Daniel Day-Lewis) so I decided to sit down and watch it today. The film was completely fantastic. One of the better movies I have seen. It was gruesome, gut-wrenching, dark, and emotional. I found the darkness & drama of the characters a spot on match for the historical time of the film as well as my own inner darkness of greed & ambition.

The concept of the destruction of greed was laid out so perfectly throughout the film. We see how it strips a man of his sense of character and forces an ambition that drives everyone else away. The utter loneliness caused by the greed forces the main character through a series of movements each of them alienating the man further and further. The grip of ambition becomes the driving force in his life, his idol to cling to and worship. We see the descension into the dark abyss of nothingness by a man all alone.

If you are into dark films that are very powerful - I highly recommend this one.

The Plight of the Poor

2010-12-18T11:16:00.000-08:00

Josephine Shaw Lowell now agreed that the plight of the poor was 'not due usually to moral or intellectual defects on their own part, but to economic causes over which they could have had no control, and which were as much beyond their power to avert as if they had been natural calamities of fire, flood or storm.'

Edwin G. Burrows and Mike Wallace, Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), Kindle Location 28569-71.

Lowell was a Progressive Reform Leader in the late 19th century. Much of her work was based upon the poor inhabitants of New York. At the time, many people considered those who were poor to have gotten their based upon their own poor choices. Many Christians claimed their sins had led them to a place of poverty while those in the business community claimed they lacked the intellectual capabilities to move beyond their state of pauperism. Either way, the poor of society were often left with little pity and meaningless handouts or exit strategies from their condition. Lowell's statement is critical, then, because it points out the potential idea that many suffering people had reached their state not by choice but by the economic choices of the wealthy. Hence the raw issue of captalism - there will be people with great wealth, but it will come at the cost of the class of poverty.

How do we combat the plight of the poor? What strategies must be in place - and how do we deem them successful? Part of the biggest struggle seems to be the mindset of those who are not poor. Ideas, schemes, and plans are laid out by people who have no concept of how people without anything feel. Our bigotry of why people are poor and what causes them to continue in poverty taints our ability to help. It is very difficult to come to grips with the notion that some people do not have the freedom or opportunity to do anything beyond remaining in the squalor and chains of their poor economic condition. It truly is the mindset barrier that remains the obstacle needing to be overcome. The goal then becomes changing how we think before we develop a system for fighting against the cruel grip of impoverishment. A proper way of thinking will eliminate our need to dispense charity and focus on helping our fellow people as equals.

The Tragedy of Hate

2010-12-09T14:22:00.001-08:00

Dealing with cancer cannot be in any shape or form easy. Finding out that your cancer has spread and no amount of drugs or treatment will be able to spare your life is absolutely awful.

Dealing with a spouse has has cheated on you violating every ounce of trust cannot be in any shape or form easy. Finding out about the extramarital affair along with the rest of America is absolutely awful.

Elizabeth Edwards died on December 7th. The last stretch of her life perhaps the hardest. Whether or not you agree with her politics is besides the point. She was a human being. She cared for people. People cared about her. An estranged husband, children, nieces, nephews, aunts, uncles, parents, and numerous friends are all left without her now.

As if this were not hard enough, today comes the news that Westboro Baptist Church has decided the best course of action is to picket her funeral in protest of her life, viewpoints, and stances. REALLY?! That organization thinks the best way to represent God is by picketing a woman's funeral. What will it accomplish? How will that tell the world about hope & love? How can picketing the funeral really be of benefit? What a dark day in human history when a group claiming to represent the hope of the world has chosen themselves to promote hate & darkness.

Tribalism

2010-12-07T10:55:00.000-08:00

Tribalism provided camaraderie, protection, identity, and also a sense of being in charge, something increasingly hard to come by in the workplace. Many gang members were technically "apprentices" or "journeymen," but few harbored any hope of becoming a "master." Jobs seldom gave a worker status or a chance to display skill. And if being a waged employee diminished one's sense of autonomy and control, being fired devastated it. The panic [of 1837] had mad painfully clear that the new economic order could pitch a worker into desperate poverty, virtually overnight. Security and self-esteem were best pursued elsewhere. After work a butcher, tailor, or cartman could doff his smock, apron, or overalls, don colorful gang regalia, rendezvous with his comrades, and regain at least the illusion of being in control of his life, of being a man among men.

Edwin G. Burrows and Mike Wallace, Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), Kindle Location 15346-52.

It is utterly fascinating reading about the development of the gangs of New York City in the 19th century. Scores of men joined together in like-minded groups to represent their own interests and feelings. From nativisit groups to Irish immigrant groups, these men often rallied around particularly hot topics. Interestingly enough, the groups (including those of poor and highly mistreated African Americans) had far more in common then they would have liked to admit. Yet because of the squalor-like conditions they were forced into; it became a feeding frenzy on who would be kings of the lower classes. (It could easily be argued that the laissez-faire politics and economics of the rich & powerful were most responsible for the rise of these groups.)

What is most intriguing though is the need for tribalism that everyone has. Security, self-esteem, identity, and a general sense of control all came from being a part of a gang. The economic forces prevented self-worth from developing in the workplace, thus the rise of gangs in the 19th century. Obviously the gangs had many issues (not the least of which was the intense & bitter racism that developed amongst themselves) - but it is easy to see why the associations formed. Men in particular find such value and worth in their vocation. What can possibly fill that void when work becomes non-existent or at the very best a wage-earning day in & day out boring routine?

My question is what can we do in society to foster healthy associations? If tribalism is as natural as history shows it to be (and I would argue can have tremendous value) - how can humanity channel it into more productive groupings? When a man has no hope of "making it" because his job, life, or circumstances prevent it; what can be done to help him find worth? In other words, is it possible to nurture the growth of gangs whom are focused on the actual building up of individuals & society as a whole? If yes, how? If no, then what can be done about the situation?

For God's Glory

2010-12-05T15:24:00.000-08:00

As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?"

"Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life."

John 9:1-3

Today's message @ church was based upon the question of why bad things happen to people if God is so incredibly loving and is in full control. Since God is in control, He then either makes things happen or at the very least allows them to happen. So when we are confronted with sad, horrifying, and evil events in this world - we must ask - why God would do them or why God would allow for them to happen. One of the points the pastor made was that sometimes God allows for things to happen in order that He might be glorified through them. In other words, some tragic events lead to the glorification of God.

Which brings us to the blind man from John 3. The text does not say how old this man is - but whatever his age, he had been blind from birth. Jesus explains that his condition is not a result of sin - but simply an opportunity for God to be glorified. Jesus could work a miracle & God's work would be shown. Of course this is a great story - and it does show God's glory & might. Yet how would you like to be the blind guy? He lived all of his life unable to see simply so Jesus could show off God's work at that point in time. Why did God pick him to be blind? Why does God choose any of the situations we all find ourselves in that are out of our control? I would hope that the man would be eternally grateful for Jesus performing that miracle in his life - but wouldn't he rather have simply been able to see his whole life?

When dealing with the struggles & hardships in our life it is easy to think that it would simply be better for God's glory to be displayed without us having to be the projects upon which he uses His ability to do miracles. Yet as I have read this story as well as countless others, I have come to the conclusion that I am far too humanistic in my thought process. As much as I try, I cannot get over the fact that I simply put too much stock in humanity. All of creation was designed to bring God glory - even people. As much as I want to bring this story back to the blind man - or bring my own struggles and problems back to myself - the real story is God. We dwell too often on what we think, feel, and understand without realizing the story is never about us.

So although I am sure that man would have taken sight from birth and God's work to be displayed in a number of other ways it could have been, it wasn't up to that man or to us as listeners of the story. God has a plan, God executed His plan, and that man as well as myself have to simply be thankful to be a recipient of God's grace & glory.

Go Devils

2010-12-02T21:44:00.000-08:00

Fork 'em Sparky.

Pride

2010-11-16T12:18:00.000-08:00

"Let another praise you, and not your own mouth; someone else, and not your own lips."

Proverbs 27:2

"The crucible for silver and the furnance for gold, but man is tested by the praise he receives."
Proverbs 27:21

Pride is the biggest stumbling block to humanity. It is the root cause of all our strife, war, anger, and lack of relationship. All problems can be traced to a lack of humility manifested in the pride of ourselves. Everyone from politicians and CEOs to homemakers and substitute teachers deal with the burning lust for recognition. We want people to see our value. We demand praise for the work and effort we pour into our labors - whatever they may be. Nothing quite stings like not getting the pat on the back we thought we deserved. On the flip side, when the compliments and praise do come - how do we respond to them? What do they do to our character? Do we use them as fuel to keep improving or do we simply rest then on our glory we so "deserve." The test that comes as a result of receiving credit is one of the hardest to pass in life. It can feel incredibly strange to receive praise - despite the fact that we all enjoy it. The balance between needing feedback and receiving it in humility is very delicate indeed. As I have read through the book of Proverbs this year, this issue has been the one that has stuck out the most to me. Perhaps its due to my incessant need of approval or my own personal struggle with pride. But now more then ever, I have realized just how difficult the world of praise, recognition, and humility is to navigate.

John Peter Zenger

2010-11-11T19:39:00.000-08:00

No one imagined that Zenger's acquittal set a legal precedent for the elimination of restrictions on the press - it was an instance of jury nullification, not a judicial opinion - and indeed decades would pass before printers in either America or Great Britain were safe from official scrutiny. What made the case so significant to contemporaries, rather, was that it sent a clear warning to judges and prosecutors that the law of libel was out of step with popular sentiment and that they could no longer rely on juries to shield the government from public censure. In doing so, moreover, the Zenger verdict endorsed assumptions about relations between "the people" and their rulers long familiar to reader's of Cato's Letters or the Craftsman - that executive power tends to expand at the expense of liberty, and that to protect themselves, freemen must be able to speak their minds without fear of official retribution.

Edwin G. Burrows and Mike Wallace, Gotham: A History of New York City to 1898, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), Kindle Location 3979-85.

The trial of John Peter Zenger against charges of seditious libel is a fascinating story from New York City's early history. The case would not only be a landmark decision for the city, but would have long term effects on what would become the United States of America. The fact that Zenger's lawyer (Andrew Hamilton) led his defense for free was one of the best parts. In essence, Zenger was accused of seditious libel which even Hamilton agreed with was true under the existing law of that time. However, he convinced the jury to partake in jury nullification appealing to the common sense of liberty and freedom of press. It was the law that was at the heart of the issue - not the guilt of the defendent. Highly intelligent defense and one that has has had such tremendous impact on our society today.

Defamatory statements are not always the most pleasant - but there is tremendous value in being able to speak one's mind. From the results of the Zenger case, we eventually reached the ability to simply state our opinions whether factual or not. Of course there is a certain amount of trouble that comes with freedom - and yet the absence of it would be far more damning to our culture. It is so ironic how easy it is to take for granted our freedoms in this country. Freedom of the press seems so "normal" in our Internet age where everyone says whatever they want. And yet at one point, not too long ago, that ability did not exist. Thanks to the courage of men like Zenger & Hamilton as well as the jury that sided with them - we now can boldy state what and why we believe.

When The Gales of November Came Early

2010-11-10T17:22:00.000-08:00

Does anyone know where the love of God goes / When the waves turn the minutes to hours

The searchers all say they'd have made Whitefish Bay / If they'd put fifteen more miles behind her

They might have split up or they might have capsized / They may have broke deep and took water

And all that remains is the faces and the names / Of the wives and the sons and the daughters

-Gordon Lightfoot-

35 years ago the Edmund Fitzgerald met her doom on Lake Superior. I remember reading about the disaster as a kid in Minnesota. We even sang Gordon Lightfoot's song in 5th grade choir. It is amazing how few people have ever heard of the story/disaster. 29 men met their death in one of the worst storms ever experienced on Lake Superior. So in memory of the disaster - I point out a couple of websites to follow up on it. Read, learn, and remember!

CNN Story

Tim McCall website - very good!

Navigation

2010-11-08T20:12:00.000-08:00

We believe that the world we've inherited has an immense momentum; that actions taken in the past have bequeathed us the mix of constraints and possibilities within which we act today; that the stage onto which each generation walks has already been set, key characters introduced, major plots set in motion, and that while the next act has not been written, it's likely to follow on, in undetermined ways, from the previous action. This is not to say that history repeats itself. Time is not a carousel on which we might, next time round, snatch the brass ring by being better prepared. Rather we see the past as flowing powerfully through the present and think that chartering historical currents can enhance our ability to navigate them.

Edwin G. Burrows and Mike Wallace, Gotham: A History of New York to 1898, (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000), Kindle Location 498-503.

It is often said that those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. Although there is some validity to this statement, I do not think it is completely accurate. Each generation & each time period has the ability to make a distinct change & mark. However, that being stated, we often find ourselves in situations and places that were pre-determined for us. The "act" of which is our lives has essentially been set in motion. The possibilities & constraints we face each day are often determined by factors out of our own control. Many of these factors are unfair and biased against those who have less power, influence, and status in society. As a result, we often see a repeat on history. Its why Otto von Bismarck was able to point out that some damn fool thing in the Balkans would trigger a war even before Ferdinand was shot.

All of that being said, the value of history comes into play when we realize that studying our past, its characteristics, and its "currents" - we better prepare ourselves for what the future will certainly deal us. Coaches don't study game film because their opponents will run the exact same script. They study game film because it prepares them for the possibilities of what might come. History provides the navigation to handle our lives. We know recessions will come and will go. We know that conflict results when we force our ethnocentrism on others. We know that religion is often polluted and abused for personal & powerful gain. We know that the rich like being rich and the poor are at a distinct disadvantage. We have seen each of these scenarios time and time again.

Our best hope then is to study, read and learn from what our past has shown us. What can history prepare us for tomorrow? Because although it will never, ever be the exact same - perhaps we can recognize the small clues and patterns that enable us to actually grab the brass ring. Our future has largely already been determined. But what can we do in the intangibles to make a difference?

Friends

2010-11-07T07:35:00.000-08:00

One of the things I have discovered a lot about since moving is the critical importance of friends. These relationships with others are so often taken for granted and not fully appreciated in the moment. It is amazing how much a friend can do for a person's life. Someone to vent to, someone to watch football with, someone to laugh with, someone to drink a beer with, someone to share struggles with, someone who is just there when you simply need someone there for you. Besides spouses & kids; I think friends are the most under-appreciated things in people's lives.

The last time I was new in a place was 10th grade. Having moved to Arizona from Minnesota, I was forced to make new friends. Of course I had the benefit of being in high school which provided an abundance of opportunities of new friends. Moving up to Idaho has been a much different experience. I have church, and my job at the school, and even neighborhood opportunities. However, I have seen the difficulty in finding people you simply connect with as if it was designed that way by God Himself. This last Friday, my wife and I had the benefit of meeting a couple of people like that. We laughed, we discussed life, and shared a good meal & beer. It re-reminded me just how good it is to have a true friend.

So here's to my friends. You all are worth so much more than I have ever communicated or shown. Thanks for making life good.

Cassandra's Curse

2010-11-06T21:24:00.000-07:00

But the fate of warnings in political affairs is to be futile when the recipient wishes to believe otherwise. In formulating Cassandra's curse - that she would tell the truth and not be believed - the ancient Greeks showed their remarkable early insight into the human psyche.

Barbara W. Tuchman, The March of Folly, (New York: Random House, 1984), 199.

Greek mythology has always fascinated me. Greek culture seemed to have such as a solid grasp upon humanity and the struggles that came with being human. In a remarkable story, we see the character of Cassandra being able to accurately predict the future. Unfortunately, she is cursed by Apollo in that her gift brings only misery as no one will believe her. Therefore, events like the Trojan Horse came to be because her prediction of Troy's downfall by the horse fell on deaf ears.

How ironic today that we see many leaders stumble in the same was as they did at Troy. Dissent and alternate pathways are shown - and yet rejected simply out of disbelief. Many modern day Cassandras face the same dilemma in that their insight and advice is rejected to the downfall of the hearer. What mistakes could we avoid if we simply listened? What pitfalls might we avoid if we heard the dissent we do not want to hear? Alongside each of those questions is the problem of our desire to "believe otherwise." How many of us are actually willing to listen to opinions and ideas that fly in the face of our own or even what we believe to be normalcy?

It was tragic that Cassandra met her demise without being able to benefit anyone with her prophetic ability. The challenge today is not let the Cassandras in our own lives fail to challenge us to listen and change the direction we are headed.

Noble Edifices

2010-10-09T16:10:00.000-07:00

Through visible beauties and grandeur, they believed, the Papacy would be dignified and the Church exert its hold upon the people. Nicholas V, who has been called the first Renaissance Pope, made the belief explicit on his deathbed in 1455. Urging the Cardinals to continue the renovation of Rome, he said, "To create solid and stable conviction there must be something that appeals to the eye. A faith sustained only by doctrine will never be anything but feeble and vacillating....If the authority of the Holy See were visibly displayed in majestic buildings...all the world would accept and revere it. Noble edifices combining taste and beauty with imposing proportions would immensely exalt the chair of St. Peter." The Church had come a long way from Peter the fisherman.

Barbara W. Tuchman, The March of Folly, (New York: Random House, 1984), 61.

Visible beauty & grandeur v. doctrine. For Renaissance Popes, the argument between those two was easy. Build the buildings large & beautiful - and people will come. The awe of majestic art will be more convicting & build a more solid faith than the words of Scripture. Never mind the prophecy of Isaiah 53 (He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we should desire him) - the eye had to be appealed to if conversions were going to happen. In reality, the eye had to be appealed to in order to continue the control, status, and power of the Catholic Church. Simplicity & obedience to Solus Christus were not the imperative. Big & beautiful structures were the imperative.

While it is easy to castigate the Catholic Church for that offense, I wonder if the same mindset is not plaguing the current American church. Today, some of the most sophisticated, technology driven, and opulent buildings in America are churches. Building campaigns and pressure to give are being pushed all around the country. While discipleship is verbally being pushed, a core component of it often revolves around a believer's willingness to tithe & give correctly. Churches want to believe that they are winning people by doctrine & beliefs - but the reality is the primary way churches are reaching out is through appealing to the eye. Churchgoers now need to be impressed with a service, in awe of the architecture, and blown away by the amenities. Its a lose-lose cycle as churches spend far too much time & money on being attractive to the eye and churchgoers cling worthlessly to a feeble faith that is based more upon being comfortable than true discipleship.

The foolishness of the Renaissance Popes led to a mighty fall for the Catholic church. What will be the cost of the steps the American church has now taken? Has the church's quest to be attractive come at the cost of its ability to do true discipleship? When does the cost of a building campaign outweigh its benefit? If being attractive & majestic in appearance is so critical - why didn't Christ, Himself, use the same method?

Chesapeake

2010-10-08T13:21:00.000-07:00

He was so excited by the endless possibilities of rejuvenation that his mind raced on. 'Of course, when the ducks return, the geese may leave. Then we'll change again and they'll come back. The entire bay can be revived, every one of its eight thousand coves...' He hesitated. His face grew somber. 'Unless, of course, we have so contaminated the oceans that they can no longer send fresh tides and fish into the bay.' He shrugged his shoulders. 'Mankind was destined to live on the edge of perpetual disaster. We are mankind because we survive. We do it in a half-assed way, but we do it. I suppose before the year ends we'll even see some blue heron wading back. Their struggle has lasted for eleven thousand years. Ours is just beginning.'

James A. Michener, Chesapeake, (New York: Random House, 1978), 851.

I just finished Michener's book on the historical fictional account of the families that made the Chesapeake Bay. It was very well written and had tremendous research on each and every page. I was very happy with it. It really made me think about the impact families and generations can have on the shaping of an area and/or community. It is so easy to lament how ugly, twisted, and deplorable America has become. Everywhere a person looks there is evidence that we as a people have gone to hell. The future of our once great nation has become so cloudy that many are without hope moving forward. And its not just the gruesome acts of murder, rape, and the crushing blow delivered to the masses by the corporate capitalists. It is the slow yet steady decline of any resemblance of accountability, responsibility, and true & honest hard work and effort.

Yet the reading of the book reminded me of the fact that hope remains in people choosing to make and leave and imprint upon a culture and society. Every single day of work, I get to face 120+ seventh graders with impressionable minds and attitudes. I teach them geography, history, and factoids about the social fabric of America. But even more than that, I get the opportunity to care for them, teach them values, and instruct them on the methods of hard work and responsibility. With some it feels like a daily battle. With others I see such bright hope for the future of our nation. With all, I feel like I get the opportunity to truly make a difference in life. A or F - I get them with me for 52 minutes a day, five days a week. And like the characters of Michener's novel, I will undoubtedly leave some type of mark. My hope is that my time is well spent, and that the change I get the opporunity to enact goes in on some level.

There is and always will be hope. As Michener pointed out, often times our half-assed ways seem to knock hope out the window. But we are survivors, and if we choose wisely - we can leave a history of the positive change we made in America.

9 Years Later

2010-09-11T12:28:00.000-07:00

9 years. I still remember walking out of my dorm room @ NAU and hearing someone say that a plan had flown into the World Trade Centers. I raced back to my room in time to see the second plane slam into the other tower. Ugh. You could just feel it in your gut. Anger and hate began to boil within me. I remember just how overwhelming the emotions were. Yet 9 years later I realize that hate has not and will not end the problem of terrorism or violence. Fighting fire with fire this time doesn't seem to be the answer. I don't know how to love bin laden or al qaeda. I don't know how to turn the other cheek to terrorist cell groups. I don't know how to forgive atrocities like the killing of 3000 people. Yet I know that my anger does not bring about the desired outcome I want. So today I will try once more to care. I will try to love. I will try to pray. Loving one's enemies is not easy and remembering the hurt & pain does not make it any easier. But in a world torn apart by hate...it is my duty to attempt to be a beacon of hope & love.

What Is Right?

2010-09-05T15:22:00.000-07:00

People reach decisions, most of the time, by thinking. This is a pretty banal statement, but the process it names is inscrutable. An acquaintance gives you a piece of information in strict confidence; later on, a close friend, lacking that information, is about to make a bad mistake. Do you betray the confidence? "Do the right thing" - but what is the right thing? Keeing your word, or helping someone you care about avoid injury or embarrassment? Even in this two-sentence hypothetical case, the choice between principles is complicated - as it always is in life - by circumstances. If it had been the close friend who gave you the information and the acquaintance who was about to make the mistake, you would almost certainly think about your choice differently - as you would if you thought that the acquaintance was a nasty person, or that the friend was a lucky person, or that the statue of limitations on the secret had probably run out, or that you had acquired a terrible habit of betraying confidences and really out to break it. In the end, you will do waht you believe is "right," but "rightness" will be, in effect, the compliment you give to the outcome of your deliberations. Though it is always in view while you are thinking, "what is right" is something that appears in its complete form at the end, not the beginning, of your deliberation.

Louis Menand, The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America, (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2001), Kindle Location 5713-23.

Winning Arguments

2010-08-30T22:17:00.000-07:00

The instinctive reaction to conflict is a combination of self-defense and attack. One ferrets out the errors in an opposing position in a seek-and-destroy mission that supposedly leaves one more secure. The person genuinely committed to truth does better to seek out the kernel of truth that is part of any point of view. Truth is so precious it must be prized wherever it is found. No system of thought, almost no single influential idea, is totally devoid of truth. By ignoring or distorting that truth for the sake of winning arguments, we diminish our own cause.

Daniel Taylor, The Myth of Certainty, (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 128.

One of my horrible habits in life is the incessant need to be right in any & all arguments. I hate losing arguments. I hate being wrong. I am a stubborn ass which leads me to digging in my heals to prevent losing any ground in different types of conflicts. As a result I tend to view my opponent in an argument not as another person with a different opinion, but as someone who needs to be proven wrong & often humiliated in that process. The worst part of this is that I often will take low blow shots during arguments designed to not only fluster my "opponent" but deeply wound them in the process. Why? Because my experience has been that a deeply wounded person generally cannot argue as well.

As a result of this poor mindset - I often fail to glean the truth & importance of what the person I am arguing with has to say. I fail to look at things from their perspective. I fail to see why they would argue what they argue. I fail to see the truth their viewpoint contains. Mostly I fail to become a better person as a result of the disagreement. Its a sad & shallow existence at that point. The goal needs to be to learn. In every & all situations we MUST be focused on learning. Seeking & finding truth has to be our goal as people. Whether that comes from people who think, talk, and act in accordance to our wishes or from those who don't. Every person, every situation, every idea, and every argument must be valued as a way of improving upon myself. Its less important to be right then it is to gain perspective. I desire growth as a person. Now its time to foster that growth.

The Metaphysical Club

2010-08-29T16:57:00.000-07:00

I just finished The Metaphysical Club by Louis Menand. It is the best book I have read this year. I thoroughly enjoyed the ideas, history, and thoughts the book contains. I look forward to writing out my thoughts on portions of it, but needless to say - I highly recommend it.

The Quotable William James

2010-08-28T21:23:00.000-07:00

"A great many people think they are thinking when they are merely rearranging their prejudices."

-William James-

Scrubs Learning Moment

2010-08-26T15:40:00.000-07:00

Every once in a while - I learn something about myself from watching television shows. While watching Scrubs, it doesn't take long before I see myself learning something from J.D. usually through Dr. Cox (on a side-note, this relationship mirrors my relationship with Ryan Russell in real life).

Dr. Cox: It's time. Sit down and listen up, Newbie. I suppose you want me to say you're great...that you've raised the bar for interns everywhere?

J.D.: I'm cool with that!

Dr. Cox: Well, I'm not going to say that. You're doing okay. Someday you might even be better than that. But right now, all I see is a guy who's so preoccupied with wondering what everyone else thinks about him, that he doesn't have anytime to think whether or not he believes in himself. Did you ever wonder why I told you to write your own evaluation?

J.D.: I don't have a safe answer for that. I just figured that...you...

Dr. Cox: Clam up, Newbie! I wanted you to think about yourself...and I mean really think! What are you good at? What do you suck at? And write it down. Not so I could read it, or anyone else could read it. But so you could read it! You see in the end, Newbie, you don't have to answer to me, or to Kelso, or even to your patients, for God's sake! The only one you have to answer to, Newbie, is you. There, you are evaluated. Now get out of here, because you truly make me so damn mad I might just hurt myself!

Absolutes

2010-08-25T13:38:00.000-07:00

"The idea of knowing absolutes has a very limited meaning at best when it is human beings who are the supposed knowers. Absolutes, by definition, partake of infinity; they are without boundary. What relationship can a finite knower have with an infinite object of knowledge except a finite, limited one? Can one then be said to know or 'have' an absolute on which to ground one's beliefs when one only knows, at best, a sliver of that absolute?"

"But how would we know unmistakably that anything was infinite or absolute unless we ourselves were infinite?"
Daniel Taylor, The Myth of Certainty, (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 91-92.

Can you know anything absolutely? The question seems pretty simple until one begins to ponder what exactly it means. The older I get, the less sure I am of anything absolutely. This is not to say that faith doesn't play a role in my life, just that I am uncomfortable proclaiming absolutes as much as I did say 5 years ago. So much of my outlook & view of life has been tempered by circumstances that it is hard to say that I have anything but a limited & biased mindset. My reasoning for my beliefs is grounded in the knowledge I have so far acquired as well as the journey I continue to take based upon my own likes and dislikes. In fact, in some ways the further along my own personal path I take - the further away from absolute truth I probably go.

To me there is no other areas where this issue of absolutes is debated than that of politics & the spiritual realm. In both areas, people are very quick to shout for their beliefs and view the opposing side as idiots. Having worked in a church, it was easy to see the polarization of both issues up close and personal. Our limited range of equality lends us towards being "tolerant" which is simply another way of saying I'm right but I'll allow you to be wrong. Our thinking quickly escalates to absolutes on issues, beliefs, and choices which reality knows there is no answer this side of heaven.

So if we cannot be absolute about anything - what do we do? How do we make choices & step out in faith on anything without the ability to truly & fully know it is correct? In other words, how do finite beings make decisions with infinite implications?

Security

2010-08-24T16:23:00.000-07:00

"We believe what we do about the world, of course, for many different reasons. All ways of explaining the world tend to be self-verifying and self-sustaining. An outlook does not have to be 'right' in order to seem right. It need not be logical (thought most people will consider their position reasonable), nor consistent, nor thorough, nor defendable, nor anything else to fulfill its primary function - providing an explanation of things. Once in operation, a belief system processes all information, all evidence, in its own terms, appropriating that which verifies its outlook and defusing or ignoring anything else."

"We fend off competing world views because by threatening our present understanding of reality they threaten our essential security...When people defend their world view, they are not defending reason, or God, or an abstract system; they are defending their own fragile sense of security and self-respect...No one understood the psychology of this better than Kierkegaard. He recognized how subtly intertwined are our beliefs with our instinct for self-preservation..."
Daniel Taylor, The Myth of Certainty, (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1992), 23, 25.

Security. The one thing, above all else, that people want is security. That is why humans go to great lengths to pursue wealth, relationships, and a myriad of other things which give the human ego a sense of security. In much the same way, we pursue security in our belief systems. Everyone wants to believe that his or her belief system is correct because its "rightness" gives them a feeling of security in a world of uncertainty. In other words, people are constantly on the look out for certainty because their journey in life never seems to give them any. The slightest bit of doubt can create a fissure of unbelief which can radically alter a person's sense of security.

This is why we attack other people's belief systems. Not because they are always inherently "wrong" but because we do not feel comfortable enough in our own. Our "fragile sense of security" cannot withstand the storms of doubt that other belief systems could introduce to us. Instead of learning, growing, and adapating - we become rigid out of fear. This rigidity is what enforces the narrowing of our minds and philosphies to the limited acceptance of facts and figures that reinforce our own personal worldviews. Of course we're always right - because our depth is limited the realm of our own acceptance.

Self-preservation is easy enough to laugh off when it comes to the style of music we like or our favorite football team. The problem though is when it escalates to the level of personal belief about the world and its operations. Violence & tyranny become our only options as we must force our beliefs on as many people as possible in order to give our selves the greatest degree of security. The end result is a world of mistrust, anger, hurt, and revenge. All because of a simple chasing after the wind known as certainty.

Polio

2010-08-04T15:51:00.000-07:00

I just finished reading, Polio: An American Story, by David M. Oshinsky. It was my first book I read on my new Amazon Kindle DX. So in reality I have two things to report on, the book's content as well as the medium in which I read it.

1. The book was very good. It is easy to see why it was the winner of the 2006 Pulitzer Prize for history. The book chronicles the story of polio in America, primarily in terms of the fight for a vaccine and the bitter feud that developed between Albert Sabin and Jonas Salk. We do not often think about polio today because of its eradication due to the efforts of those two men, but the reality is the disease consumed the minds of Americans and made a celebrity out of the scientist Salk. Perhaps the most interesting part of the book is the divide in accolades received by both men. Whereas Sabin was highly regarded within the fields of science and medicine, Salk received his regard from the public in need of a hero. Salk was never given much if any credit from his field of study. Which begs the question: if given the choice would you take the recognition of the general public OR the recognition of your paricular avenue of study/work?

2. As far as the Kindle DX goes, I have to say I really enjoyed my reading experience on it. It was easy to use, easy to read off of, and I really enjoyed using the dictionary that was already downloaded onto it. My only concern with the entire thing was/is the inability to skip from chapter to chapter. Perhaps this is something I still need to learn on it usage. Other then that though, I really liked it. Looking forward to more reading...

Three Minutes

2010-07-22T11:25:00.001-07:00

"The average American spends three minutes a day reading a book."

"The typical American spends an average of about nine and a half hours a day consuming media."

Dick Meyer, Why We Hate Us: American Discontent In The New Millennium, (New York: Crown Publishers, 2008), 87.

I believe we are facing a crisis with the above statistics. The elimination of reading from the diet of input consumption in Americans is alarming. We are literally setting ourselves on the path of ineptitude. It will not be long before the vast majority of the leadership of the United States will be non-readers. They will be heavy consumers of technology & media - but with little regard for reading & knowledge development. That is another way of spelling doom. The worst part of it all is that the majority of Americans do not blink an eye at these statistics. They might feign shock or awe - but the reality is they don't care.

It takes a certain amount of discipline to read. I understand that not everyone enjoys it - but there is something to reading words on paper. There is something to creating your own images, pictures, and ideas instead of having a screen show them to you. There is something to thinking about what might a book be communicating instead of just consuming & beliving whatever screen it is you get your info from. It doesn't take any effort to consume media. It takes no brain power or ability. It is just given to you. It is beyond crystal clear that the lack of reading in America will destroy our power to think, reason, struggle, and be well-rounded citizens. Unfortunately, it seems we just don't care enough to change.

Try Something

2010-07-20T08:00:00.000-07:00

"Must the country remain hungry and jobless while raw materials stand unused and factories idle?" he [FDR] asked. "The country needs, the country demands, bold, persistent experimentation. Take a method and try it. If it fails admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something."

Jean Edward Smith, FDR, (New York: Random House, 2007), 263.

This question has been proposed to me numerous times since I decided to move: "But isn't the job market for history teachers pretty bleak?" Now I don't think anyone is trying to discourage me or predict doom for my family, but I do believe people (myself included) often get caught up in fear. We need bold, persistent experimentation - and yet we constantly take the easy route. We love to quote Robert Frost and his ideal of the road not taken - but the truth is we always take the path more traveled upon. Its not a lack of desire that forces our hand on this - but a lack of faith. Like the Israelites, we just don't trust that God can part the Red Sea.

So the answer to that question is yes the job market for high school history teachers is probably pretty bleak. The entire US economy is struggling right now so why would this sector be any different? But the road not taken still makes all the difference. FDR's command of "But above all, try something" rings daily in my ears. This could fail in some ways but the reality is I know I could not stay doing something I did not feel like God was calling me to do anymore. It would have been more safe and yet detrimental for my development as a person. I have no clue how things will turn out, where I will end up, or what kind of journey it will be like. But my choice is to succumb to the fear or be invigorated by the challenge that lies ahead. I choose the latter.

Into The Great Wide Open

2010-07-19T08:19:00.000-07:00

"The missionary work of the non-professional missionary is to live his daily life in Christ, and therefore with a difference, and to be able to state the reason and cause of the difference to men who see it. His preaching is essentially private conversation, and has at the back of it a life which explains and illustrates and enforces his words. It is such a missionary work that the world needs today. Everybody, Christian and pagan alike, respects such work. When it is so done, men wonder, and inquire into the secret of a life which they instinctively admire and covet for themselves." -Roland Allen-

...Discerning and following God's calling on our lives is both the primary mission of the individual Christian as well as the most significant step we can take toward bringing healing to the body of Christ. Said another way, God knits together the body in His wisdom and sovereignty. That which is most healthy for the individual members is necessarily that which is most needful for the body.

Warren Cole Smith, A Lover's Quarrel With The Evangelical Church, (Colorado Springs: Authentic Publishing, 2008), 221.

I am stepping down. With those four words I began the process of liberating myself from the world of fulltime vocational ministry. I must be careful to help people understand that I am not leaving in anger, frustration, hurt, or bitterness. Truth be told I have experienced all of those in my tenure at the church but they aren't the driving force of my departure. It is best to never leave a place guns blazing. I don't believe I am doing that.

The reality is that I feel I can be more effective outside of the walls of vocational church ministry. I will come in contact with more non-churched people in the world of education than I could ever dream of inside the church. Being the light of the world doesn't matter if that light remains hidden safely within the walls of the church. No, its time to step beyond the boundaries and make a difference. That isn't to say that church staff members do not serve a purpose or don't have an impact on the world. Its just for me - I see the potential outside instead of inside.

So here we go: Into the Great Wide Open. I am sure it will be weird, different, thrilling, exciting, and potentially even scary. The reality is I haven't felt like that in years. I am excited to teach. I am excited to be around people for the majority of my job instead of the minority of it. I am excited to see what God has in store. Most of all I am excited that instead of just sitting, I am doing something. Good or bad, sometimes we just need to make headway in life.

Gambler's Heart

2010-07-16T20:38:00.000-07:00

...Yamamoto possessed the rank, prestige, and administrative skill to do something about it. In the Navy he was known as a bold, original thinker and an inveterate gambler. He thrived on all night poker games, testing his opponents' nerves, endurance, and patience - just as he tested himself. "In all games, Yamamoto loved to take chances just as he did in naval strategy," explained his administrative aide, Captain Yasuji Watanabe. "He had a gambler's heart."

Yamamoto's decision to attack the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor not only was breathtakingly bold but involved a revolutionary, hitherto untried use of naval airpower - an experimental concept untested in the crucible of battle. "What a strange position I find myself in," Yamamoto wrote to his friend Rear Admiral Teikichi Hori on the eve of the fleet's departure, "-having to pursue with full determination a course of action which is diametrically opposed to my best judgment and firmest conviction. That, too, perhaps is fate."

Jean Edward Smith, FDR, (New York: Random House, 2007), 532-534.

Isoroku Yamamoto was Naval General of the Japanese Navy at the time of Pearl Harbor. Although attacking America was not his favored position, he took upon himself to do it in a creative way that was built upon risk. He used an untested method to fight the battle while putting everything - including his best judgment - on the line. The attack on Pearl Harbor was breathtaking for its incredible destruction & success. It was a gambler's strategy & it worked to nearly flawless perfection. Of course we can look back and judge Japan for helping the United States enter the war - which would lead to the downfall of the Axis powers. However, at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor, all that was known was that Japan needed a big W on the board to help boost morale and nail the US where it counted. The gambler's heart of Yamamoto lead to the plan that accomplished that.

I admire the gambler's heart. I admire the courage. I admire taking chances and putting experimental concepts into practice. It certainly must lead to a fair share of mistakes, accidents, and disaters. But as they say in Vegas - you have to bet big to win big. My life doesn't resemble that of Yamamoto. I do not have the gambler's heart or the desire to risk it all. I like to think I do. I like to talk like I do. But the reality is I almost always play it safe. But why not risk? Life is so short and you only get one shot at it. Your untested plans, goals, dreams, and strategies are waiting to be used. Double check to make sure the convictions and judgment that holds you back is not based upon fear. Just go.

Bet it all. Take that chance. The gambler's heart leads to the big reward.

A Spirit of Charity

2010-07-15T07:00:00.000-07:00

"Liberty requires opportunity to make a living - a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for. For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands and almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, and other people's labor - other people's lives. These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. In vain they seek to hide behind the Flag and the Constitution. Governments can err. Presidents do make mistakes. But the immortal Dante tells us that divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted in different scales. Better the occasional faults of a Government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a Government frozen in the ice of its own indifference." -Franklin D. Roosevelt

Jean Edward Smith, FDR, (New York: Random House, 2007), 368.

The Constituted Means

2010-07-14T07:46:00.000-07:00

"A revival of religion is not a miracle, nor dependent on a miracle in any sense. It is a purely philosophical result of the right use of the constituted means - as much so as any other effect produced by the application of means." - Charles Finney- "With this statement, Finney not only rejected salvation by grace but also opened the door to the use of emotionalism and technique to produce a high body count when it came time to sing the hymn of invitation at the close of the service...And Sproul stated plainly the problems with body-count evangelism when he said, "Everyone who has faith is called to profess faith, but not everybody who professes faith has faith. We are not saved by a profession of faith. A lot of people, it seems to me, in the evangelical world, believe that if they have walked the walk, raised the hand, signed the card - that is, made some kind of methodological profession of faith - that they're saved."

Warren Cole Smith, A Lover's Quarrel With The Evangelical Church, (Colorado Springs, Authentic Publishing, 2008), 139-140.

Emotions. Nothing about a person impacts their decisions more than their emotions. Every day people make choices that are born out of emotional moment. It can be as simple as buying a beer because it was a stressful day at work or as complicated as making a "profession" of faith at a church service because the circumstances were set up to lead to that. Advertisers play upon the impulses & emotions of people to sell products, and often the evangelical church plays upon the same emotions to "sell" Jesus, offering, and serving. With the right lighting, music, words, and set-up, any church can make an effective decision weekend. As Charles Finney, 'the Father of Modern Revivialism', clearly stated it - the "right use of the consituted means" can produce a revival. People can make decisions that they feel like are changing their lives without realizing what they are doing or why they are doing it. The consequence (unintended as it might be) is that people make a decision for Jesus or put money in an offering bin without ever really choosing to do so. Their lives don't change. Their faith doesn't exist. They simply have a memory of an emotional moment and less cash in their wallet.

The hard part comes in the lack of trust that Warren Cole Smith gives to God in the process. Can God still use the moments that churches play upon emotionalism & technique? Could God not still change lives despite the clear manipulation being done to people? After all God is the one who remains sovereign - despite the mess people make in the world and in His church. My personal belief is that God can still use these "revival-like" moments BUT that a lot of the decisions made in these moments are not as deep as the church would like to believe they are. The number of decisions look good on paper & help us feel like we are accomplishing The Great Commission, but the reality is that if all of these emotionalism techniques being used across the evangelical church in America were truly 100% effective - we would see more "fruit" from the decisions. Instead - it seems the evangelical church contributes to the notion of a nation that claims to be 83% Christian and yet displays very little of the love & life of Jesus Christ.

Best Guy On Radio

2010-07-13T16:01:00.001-07:00

Colin Cowherd is the best guy on radio right now. If you don't listen to him - you are missing out. Very funny & intelligent, with a great command of radio. Good insight on culture as well as sports. Highly recommended.

Distorted Reality

2010-07-12T22:22:00.000-07:00

Today we might look with disdain on geographical provincialism. But we are trapped in a new provincialism of time. We are trapped in the ever-present now. We now live without a past or a future. We act with no regard to consequence. Effects admit no cause. The result is that we live in an age of ideology. We can make up any theory we like about how the world operates, and we look for data to support it. Of course, the problem with the modernist's worldview is that it is sustainable only if time is erased. Because actions and ideas do have specific and related consequences, the only way we can keep our ideologies from crumbling under the weight of reality is to distort reality.

Warren Cole Smith, A Lover's Quarrel With The Evangelical Church, (Colorado Springs, Authentic Publishing, 2008), 44-45.

The concept of the new provincialism in Warren Cole Smith's book was very intriguing to me. Especially in regards to his belief that we now live with an abandoment of the past, fixated only upon the 'ever-present now.' Without the past or the future, we can make decisions and build our own realities because we are comfortable with the here & now. In an era of incredible technology & information, we are able to look for facts and completely justify/support our personal stances & ideologies. As a result, we can never see our own mistakes or faults because "our data" clearly showcases we are correct. When the cold realities of life hit us - we simply maneuver around them back to our comfortable distorted reality.

Much of what Smith is addressing in his book pertains to the current evangelical church and its complete distorted reality. However, I think this simple idea can realistically apply to anyone and anything. All of us are guilty of living lives of distorted reality based upon self-constructed idealogies. We have convinced ourselves we are correct simply because we have "numbers" to back ourselves up. Our politics are shaped by our upbringing, personal biases, and the content/media we filter into our thinking. However, instead of recognizing this we argue against other people because their thinking/idealogy is so dumb & narrow-minded. Well guess what?!? They have facts too! The reality is that all our modernist thinking is based upon circumstantial evidence that we have compiled that is based upon current trends, facts, and figures.

The way you believe church should be run, the way you believe politics should be operated, how big or small you think the government should be, and what you prefer to do with your spare time is all based upon your own construct of reality. We all need to do the world a favor and get over ourselves. Think beyond your own feelings & beliefs. Your way, my way, his way, her way - they're all wrong in some way. Until we see that we each view life through a distorted lens, we'll never get anywhere. The question is not whether or not your idealogy is crumbling - its whether or not you are astute enough to see the pieces falling down.

Not Merely Admired

2010-07-10T12:34:00.000-07:00

"He was a man that could talk to you," a farmer remembered. "He had sense enough to talk to a man who didn't have any education, and he had sense enough to talk to the best educated man in the world; and he was easy to talk to. He could talk about anything." Roosevelt also listened. The stories of low farm prices, failed banks, and rurarl poverty stayed with him into the White House.

To be a great president, said FDR, required "the quality of soul which makes a man loved by little children, by dumb animals, that quality of soul which makes him a strong help to those in sorrow or trouble, that quality which makes him not merely admired but loved by all the people - the quality of sympathetic understanding of the human heart, of real interest in one's fellow man."

Jean Edward Smith, FDR, (New York: Random House, 2007), 218, 222.

It is easy to be completely enamored by the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt. He certainly made mistakes during his tenure, but he had the unique ability to be truly loved by people. He knew how to have a conversation with people. He knew how to listen to people. He knew what mattered to people. It was his ability to connect with regular people and have them actually fully believed he cared about them as an individual that stuck out. He understood people & chose to care for them. People were not mere statistics. He was admired for his leadership but loved for his care & connection.

The single greatest quality missing from today's leadership is that: care & concern for one's fellow man. All around me I see quality leadership that can lead in tough times, make difficult decisions, and forecast incredible vision. But lost amongst all of it - is a genuine concern for people. Leaders don't listen any more. Leaders can't "talk about anything" any more. Leaders simply don't care any more. Leadership has become about building power, establishing networks with influential people, and being stoic in the midst of crisis. And yet in all the good we get from that, we miss out as people on being cared for. On being loved. On being listened to. We desperately crave a leader who will lead but also love. If it is enough to simply be admired - a leader has already fallen woefully short of what they could & should be.

The "quality of soul" as FDR put it makes a person not only a good president or leader; but a genuine person worthy of admiration and love. That is what I desire to be.

Size, Speed, and Power

2010-07-08T10:48:00.000-07:00

"It was the hypocrisy of religious-right political leaders quick (and right) to condemn big government and its corrupting power, but who thought that the big ministries and megachurches they were creating would somehow be immune to the same corrupting power."
"Size, speed, and power have become the ways the evangelical church measure God's blessing."
"But I do believe we have gotten to the point where it is fair to say this: many of the worse elements of the modern world - materialism, empire building at the expense of community building, and the accumulation of power and money - have become some of the most recognizable attributes of American evangelicalism."

Warren Cole Smith, A Lover's Quarrel with the Evangelical Church, (Colorado Springs: Authentic Publishing, 2008), 7, 40-41.

I just started Warren Cole Smith's book. It is interesting to say the least. I don't know if I agree with all of his points or if he even has valid solutions to the legitimate problems he sees. However, the book has provided some interesting things to chew on.

One of the things I have been pondering is the idea of size & power in the church. Now I am not against megachurches, but I do find it interesting that the fear of size in relation to the government does not translate over to the fear of size in the church. Many right-wingers love to gush about the need for government to be small enough to kill yet see no potential issues with a church being large, powerful, and at times without strict accountability. It is my belief that with size comes potential. Of course that potential can be used for evil - but it also can be used to accomplish greater things. A large government is no worse than a large church - it just depends on whom is in power, what type of accountability they have, and if they are using their size for the betterment of society. A small government just like a small church is not guaranteed any more success, hope, or effectiveness just because its size is smaller. The frustrating part in it all is the idea that Christians think they are immune to the same issues of improper spending, ill-use of resources, or abuse of power that the government often is guilty of. People are people. If one foot needs to be on the throat of the government, is the other on the throat of our large and powerful evangelical churches? If not - why?

Liberty of the Community

2010-07-08T08:14:00.000-07:00

The course of modern history, he [FDR] suggested, had been a struggle for individual liberty. 'Today, in Europe and America, the liberty of the individual has been accomplished.' What was now required was a process by which that liberty could be harnessed for the betterment of the community. 'Competition has been shown to be useful up to a certain point and no further. Cooperation, which is the thing that we must strive for today, begins where competition leaves off.' FDR avoided the term 'community interest' as too socialistic. He eschewed 'brotherhood of man' as too sentimental. Instead, he defined cooperation as 'the struggle for liberty of the community rather than the liberty of the individual' and said it was 'what the founders of the republic were groping for.'

Jean Edward Smith, FDR, (New York: Random House, 2007), 84.

Individual liberty v. Community liberty. Nothing could describe the battle FDR fought and the idealogy he clung to better than those two forces. No President (since Lincoln) fought harder for the community of the United States than FDR did. As a result of his beliefs, the interests of the community were taken into far more consideration than each individual. People ignored since the beginning of the republic were finally looked upon. Jobs were created that helped push forward the American economy. Different regions of people were banded together who had previously been estranged. Individual rights might have been touched & toyed with but it was done so for the betterment of the whole United States.

I find the idea of the individual v. the community highly fascinating. I think this is a huge debate in public policy today for all types of situations. The government, the church, businesses, neighborhoods, etc., all struggle with this battle. Who gets preferential treatment, when do they get it, why do they get it, and how is it better if they do? Do you raise taxes to pay for social betterment, or do you cut them in the hopes that less taxes creates altruistic people who will pay for social betterment themselves? Should the government be large in order to use its power to take care of the nation or should the government be small because individuals can handle themselves? Every single decision, policy, and debate hinges upon this concept. And in light of it all, FDR's ideas of competition v. cooperation loom large. I don't know if I have the answer to what the balance needs to be. However, I do believe that the rights of individuals is very sacred to Americans. When those rights are threatened, we become uncomfortable - even if they are sacrificed for the expense of helping others. The question thus becomes how do we help and focus on the community and make the individual okay with it?

The Ebb & Flow of Confidence

2010-06-19T19:37:00.000-07:00

The Great Bear of Wall Street legend, Jesse Livermore, once observed that 'stocks could be beat, but that no one could beat the stock market.' By that he meant that while it was possible to predict the factors that caused any given stock to rise or fall, the overall market was driven by the ebb and flow of confidence, a force so intagible and elusive that it was not readily discernible to most people.

Liaquat Ahamed, The Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World, (New York: Penguin Books, 2009), 307.

Confidence is a funny thing. It can often be the decisive factor in a variety of situations from competitions to performances to the stock market. The great stock market crash of '29 came about as a result of confidence. At first ballooning out of control, and then spiraling downward in the same manner - the confidence of people drove the stock market. The highest of highs was followed by the lowest of lows. Fortunes, hopes, and the stability of the US economy were all impacted by the intangible force of confidence. Although it was predictable that the stock market would suffer from its unreasonable heights - no one could have predicted the severity of the downward turn in confidence.

How do you keep confidence becomes the question. As it was in 1929, the financial experts of America & the key political leaders associated with them must convince the American people to have confidence. While driving in California this past week, I saw numerous "Recession Facts" billboards. All of them said essentially the same thing in trying to restore confidence in the economy. As times become more desperate, people become more willing to lose hope and confidence that good will come. It is in these moments that leaders are tested the most. Confidence becomes the key issue that leaders must learn how to instill in their people.

If we can learn anything from '29, it is that confidence is a very weak platform. It is ready to give in at any moment. It follows a roller coaster pattern of up & down with very little chance for stability. Which means that we must learn how to harness its power, and limit its ability for damage. Leaders become leaders by doing exactly that. Their people follow believing that great things are in store, while trusting that downtimes are but a blip on the radar. The test therefore of great leadership is to gauge the confidence of your followers. Although difficult to predict & control, it is that level of confidence that will make or break how you lead.

Casualties Of War

2010-06-09T08:09:00.000-07:00

[In looking at the Great War] The experts seemed to have forgotten that among the first casualties of war is not only truth but also sound finance. None of the big wars of the previous century - for example, the Napoleonic Wars or the American Civil War - had been held back by a mere lack of gold. These had been fights to the death in which the belligerents had been willing to resort to everything and anything - taxes, borrowing, the printing of ever large quantities of money - to raise the cash to pay for the war.

Liaquat Ahamed, The Lords of Finance: The Bankers Who Broke the World, (New York: Penguin Books, 2009), 75.

The Great War (World War I) would impact the world economy like no other war before it. As a result of the war, the United States became the premier economic superpower in the world. However, they did so at the expense of the economies of Europe. As a result, the economies of Europe would face the 1920s trying desperately to dig themselves out of the massive holes they created by fighting a costly war (in terms of both human sacrifice & sound financial sacrifice). Eventually the instability in Europe and poor financial decision making would cripple the entire world. No one was spared from the disaster that we now call the Great Depression.

What's interesting in it all, is how war completely destroys a nation's ability to think clearly. Men and women become mere statistical data to be used and sacrificed at the will of a leader. Sound financial thinking gets tossed out the window as money is poured into an effort that may or may not even accomplish the intended purposes of the conflict. Strife is stirred up & sewn on the hearts of yet another generation. And in the end, no matter how much you inflict damage on the opponent, their mindset never truly changes. As a result, the aftermath of war is a field of destruction touching every aspect of a country.

The sad reality is that a study of history conclusively shows that choosing war over rational & peaceful diplomacy is always the most brutal & horrific choice. But as we continue to see all over the globe, leaders and bands of people refused to acknowledge this. Truth, sound finance, and life continue to be the commodities we are willing to sacrifice on the altar of being right & inflicting our opinion on our opponent.

The Malady of Self-Delusion

2010-05-29T08:12:00.000-07:00

Kissinger would have done well to take counsel from Calvin Coolidge's observation that "It is difficult for men high office to avoid the malady of self-delusion. They are always surrounded by worshipers...They live in an artificial atmosphere of adulation and exaltation which sooner of later impairs their judgment."

Robert Dallek, Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power, (New York: Harper Perennial, 2007), 488.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely the old saying says. The office of the presidency provided Nixon with untolds amount of power, prestige, and exaltation. He had government officials and government agencies at his finger tips - willing to do what he saw was right. He become the driving force behind world affairs. He experienced high approval ratings (not right away, but pretty quickly - and they stayed there until Watergate) from the American public. He was surrounded by men who in their own personal thirst for power were willing to accomodate his delusions. What Richard Nixon wanted, Richard Nixon was going to get.

Self-delusion is almost impossible to avoid when pride, arrogance, and complete freedom are given. Our judgment cannot avoid being impaired when we are surrounded by people who are our biggest fans. Pride is a natural outcome of position & title. No matter how high your position is - you have some degree of adulation from those beneath you. The problem is when that adulation becomes the voice you hear for making judgments. What to do? Cut out the worshipers. Don't look for praise when doing your job. Don't depend upon positive feedback after delivering a performance. Don't live for reassurance. Simply do what you need to do - in the best possible way to do it - and crave criticism that can help you execute better.

Identity

2010-05-28T20:59:00.000-07:00

It is astonishing that in the midst of a major international crisis the principal American policy makers would be fretting over whether they came across as "tough." Impressing foreign adversaries as firm about U.S. national interests made sense, but there was something less than rational about "coming off like men." It was if the contest with Soviet Russia was a test of Nixon's manhood. Personalizing a great crisis or turning any political debate into a battle over a leader's identity or sense of self is never calculated to serve the national interest. In the end, it is amazing how well Nixon and Kissinger did in making foreign policy in spite of unacknowledged impulses to make decisions partly based on their amour propre.

Robert Dallek, Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power, (New York: Harper Perennial, 2007), 346.

Nixon & Kissinger spent the majority of their time at the pinnacle of their power concerned about their identities. Each of them was deeply obsessed with fostering an identity that would highlight their impressive resumes of accomplishment. Their days were shaped around creating images that the world would be completely grateful for and dependent upon. They wanted the world to need them and desired to be seen as experts on a global scale. Each problem they tackled was done with a sense of vanity and expectation that it would prop them up. Because of this, they constantly had to strive in order to maintain the lofty status they believed they had to have. Entire policies and worldwide political decisions were made to reinforce themselves. The problem of course came about when cutting corners and taking advantage of the law became "necessary" for survival. But even before that, the problem could clearly be seen in something as simple as Nixon needing to tame the Soviets in order to feel good about himself. It was if he was still the kid on the playground showing off to impress the cute little ponytail girl.

When our sense of worth and identity is shaped by the things we do and what others think about us, we will never find peace. There is always something more or better to do and there will always be someone who is not impressed by you. What's worse is we put ourselves in the uncomfortable position of making decisions not based upon what's best but what feeds our egos. Even if it does turn out right (Nixon's going to China for example), we live with the knowledge that we chose based upon ourselves instead of doing what we thought was best. Everyone has an identity. So the question becomes - what are the forces you are allowing to shape yours?

Disservice

2010-05-26T09:07:00.000-07:00

It is difficult to understand how anyone could work for someone as volatile and irrational as Nixon sometimes was. Most likely, Kissinger and others rationalized their collaboration as helping to save Nixon from himself. After all, he was a democratically elected president and they saw themselves as servign the national well-being by reining him in. Yet what seems so striking in the record is how often the people around Nixon catered to his outbursts and flights of fancy rather than calling him back to reality by challenging some of his most unsavory and unenforceable demands. It was a way to remain at Nixon's side but it was a disservice to sensible policy making. It also speaks volumes about the reluctance of high government officials to alienate a president and perhaps force their departure from an office they believe gives them the chance to shape history-making events.

Robert Dallek, Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power, (New York: Harper Perennial, 2007), 316.

There can be little doubt that Kissinger and the other men in Nixon's close presidential circle saw that he was a lunatic. Although Nixon was extremely brilliant and had some good policy ideas, his paranoia, nervous breakdowns, alcoholism, and wild rants had to be of major concern. Certainly it would have been difficult to challenge the authority of a President - especially one as determined as Nixon was on retaliating against those he thought were out to get him. However, how many mistakes and poor decisions were executed or supported simply out of this fear? Even worse is the idea that some might be willing to cater to lunacy simply because they liked the taste of power they had in his inner circle at the highest level of authority in America. Disservice to the masses was allowable as long as it helped maintain their own status quo.

In this case, I think the real issue & problem lies with the supporting cast instead of the main actor. What Nixon needed was sensible truth & someone willing to speak it. The tragedy was the demise of a presidency because the supporting cast cared more about their ability to hang onto a role than shape correct policy. Of course stepping up and calling out a leader may get you fired, let go, or pushed the outer edges of obscurity. But that becomes a small price to pay to ensure that history will remember you as the one that stuck to your principles. Is it really worth accepting, dealing with, or even defending policies, decisions, and retaliations you disagree with simply to save your job? Is whatever amount of power you feel from your current position truly worth the compromise it takes to keep it? And who knows. Maybe, just maybe, in speaking up you will prevent a disaster and will earn even more respect from the commander in chief.