The Greatest Machine of Them All

Winter break is a time for rest. A time for relaxation, for fun, and to forget about all the stress and problems slapped in our faces by school. Well, until it's time to come back that is. January 5th, we all need to get our timecards handed back to us and punch in once more, facing the grueling grind until finals and then onwards. While a break might seem like a good thing at first, it does have the unfortunate effect of sorting our time into neat little boxes. Always obsessed with order, our society's gotta have carefully set times that it's okay to relax in. These are the hours you work, and these are the hours you play. After all, this is the only way to keep the cogs in the machine turning regularly.

Though this rigid structure might be helpful for keeping society at its maximum efficiency, there's still plenty of room to resent it. Namely on the grounds that efficiency isn't all that good. Stating that in today's world is seen as basically treason. The economic system is built on growth, and the only way to keep that growth at acceptably cancerous levels is by squeezing every drop of work out of our fingertips. Efficiency is the altar our society worships at, always with money on our minds. Well, what if we just all, y'know, chilled for a moment? Maybe even more than moment. Take a step back and re-evaluate our priorities. Why are we working this hard? Is it even for a cause we believe in, or is it for a nebulous promise of future enjoyment? A re-evaluation of the fundamentals of our system is long overdue, and asking these questions is the first step to that.

He sees you when you're sleeping...and all the time

Lets talk about the elf on the shelf. It's a fun concept at first, a children's book that also comes with an  fun doll to play hide and seek with, Christmas themed to boot. Looking closer at it, it suddenly becomes a lot less friendly. The elf on the shelf's book details how he reports back to Santa every night on the behavior of the children. Furthermore, if the children touch the elf, the magic is destroyed and they get no presents from Santa. This essentially puts the children in a microcosm of a fascist surveillance state.  With every move observed by the elf and punishment threatened at misbehavior, it conditions the children to follow authority merely due to being watched. The kids have never actually had Santa never visit them due to the elf reporting bad behavior, but the threat is enough. The spectre of no-Santa is enough to keep them obedient under constant surveillance, which the elf does through magic. Any attempt to resist the state...sorry, elf, by touching him results in the magic being destroyed and no presents given. Quite the interesting moral we're teaching these children at such a young age, that the tool of surveillance is so powerful that merely interfering with it delivers punishment.

Ah, Winter...I think?

Well, it's December now. Quite a raging snowstorm out there, right? Wait a second, that's not snow...That's not snow at all! It's mild outside, and I barely need a coat to walk to school everyday. What gives, old man winter?

This wacky weather is most likely the doing of some weird temperature factors, probably wind fronts and the like. However, it's a very good starting point for a discussion about climate change. Environmental concerns are oftentimes shoved to the side in favor of the next humanitarian crisis, with much more emphasis being placed upon the poor, crying faces of people by the media instead of the dangerous effects we're already beginning to see due to our irresponsible treatment of Earth as a species. Unfortunately, the planet doesn't have a face. It can't easily tug at our heartstrings, biologically programmed to care for those that look like us. To many, it's just the ground beneath our feet. But in actuality, it's far more than that. It's all of our homes, our mother, and our only provider. If we destroy it, we'll essentially be setting fire to the building we're standing right in the middle of.

While the warm weather might be nice now, it won't be nice all the time. Acknowledging our irresponsible behavior is the first step in solving it, and today's a good a day as any.

Thanks to those forgotten

The time of year is rolling back around when we're supposed to give thanks. Well, at least in the United States of America. That's the only place that matters though, right?

Don't get me wrong, I have a lot to be thankful for. Like the fact that I'm a cisgendered, straight, white, wealthy, male human. I have to deal with very little structural oppressions in my day-to-day life, and pretty much the only box on the privilege test I don't tick off is faith. And despite the comfy seat my birth and biological makeup gives me, I think that a time of thanks is also a time to acknowledge the reason I have the things I do. Which is considerably less peachy than stuffed turkey and cranberry sauce. America, believe it or not, wasn't always home to Uncle Sam. Indians, as we still like to call them (Despite the fact that we knew they weren't from India about 5 minutes after good ol' Columbus hit the shoreline) were here first.

Native Americans, being the original people here, were a bit of an issue for the colonizing dreams of the European sailors. So, they scummed it out. Intentionally or not, they distributed blankets and other such goods carrying deadly diseases and germs to the Native American populace. It's estimated that about 90% of the total population was killed by infection (Cook, Noble David Born to Die, p. 13) , which left a skeletal force to resist the European invasion when it came full-force. 10% of a people isn't enough to even come close to winning a war against battle-ready Europeans armed to the teeth, leading to the birth of the US of A.

Now, some might say that "Hey, well look at all of the cool new things Europeans brought the Native Americans", such as new technology, advanced metalworking, and medicine. This, however, is greatly overshadowed by the genocidal effect of their arrival. Who cares about how much medicine is given AFTER 90% of the population is dead? That's essentially chopping a mans arm off and slapping a sesame street band-aid on the stump with a pat and a smile.

So, in this time of thanks, I'd like to give thanks not just to the people who are directly present in my life (My friends, family, and kickass teachers), but also those who aren't noticed everyday merely on the account of them being dead. I choose to look down at the ziggurat of Native American corpses our nation is built upon and acknowledge their plight and the atrocities committed against them as the cornerstone of the USA.

These souls are 2 dark: part 2

Constant death wears on you, after a while. Many a time, the game has caused me to toss my controller down and take a break from it out of frustration. This, in a dark fashion, mirrors life.  We stumble through life, sometimes even striking gold (Or in Dark souls II's case, a large soul), but without concrete knowledge that that really IS success. Why do we continue our journeys when we know the end is only, and always going to be our own death, usually to great anger on our parts? Though this point of view might appear to be vehemently nihilistic, there's actually a kernel of hope buried in there. The message that I read from the seemingly endless black pit is one of self-determination. Not in the sense of an iron will, but like a compass. There may be no objective reason we keep on throwing ourselves down the path, but we still do it. This is due to our own drive for it, something that we've fashioned for ourselves. There really doesn't need to be a "truth" in order to justify continuing soldiering on, all we need is a declaration from ourselves that "this is what I'm going to do". Regardless of reason (or lack there-of) we can do things. We have the agency to do this. Despite knowing that death is the only thing that welcomes us with open arms at the end of it all, we can create our own meaning for it. It's not all just a black screen with a morbid declaration upon it. Fearing death must mean there's a reason for us to be alive, even if that reason is entirely self-conjured.

These Souls are 2 Dark: Part 1

Dark souls II is a great game. It came out in March of this year and brought a lot to the table, with it being a shoe-in for at least a nomination for GOTY (Game of the Year) of 2014. It was a direct sequel to the critically acclaimed Dark Souls, which won the GOTY back in 2011, carrying that legacy and weight from the day it was announced. The game doesn't disappoint, continuing the series famed difficulty and challenge. I'm a huge fan of the series, so I highly anticipated it (and may have missed a day of school when it came out), so I was ecstatic when I heard new downloadable content might be being released for it. Which, of course, led to me playing through the game again. During my newest playthrough, I thought about the storyline and setting a lot more than I had previously, and I realized something:Your character has no concrete motives for struggling through the mess they're put in. They're cursed with a seemingly incurable affliction, which turns them undead. Unlike common zombie stereotypes, your character is very much in control and present when undead. It just makes them unable to die for good. Your character, though never voicing their own opinion, can be vaguely assumed to want to break free from this curse and attain a final rest. Only a few guiding forces are present in the game, and all of them echo the same thing as the others: Seek souls.  No reason is given for this order, just a few chuckles from the old crones in the beginning and a promise from the emerald herald that I'll find what I want if I get the souls. In accordance with the game's difficulty, you die. A lot. Every time you die, the game restarts you at the latest bonfire you'd visited. No breaks, just instant reincarnation with your healthbar slightly smaller each time. The only inevitability I know booting it up is that I'm going to see the famed "You died" screen.

Samhain- Or how all of these holidays were stolen

As kids (and not-so-kids) hurriedly scramble together costumes today for a night filled with candy and partying, we often get too caught up in the holiday to actually remember what it is. Halloween was originally a Gaelic festival called Samhain (Pronounced Sah-ween) that commemorated the end of summer and symbolized remembering the dead. Much of the classic Halloween traditions and actions taken are ripped from pagan myths and folklore (Such as Jack o' Lanterns). The appropriation of these Irish myths originated with the Romans, when they set out to conquer the islands off the coast of north-western Europe. Although Boudicca almost repelled them, the Romans succeeded in their conquest and brought Christianity with them, with only a few genocides along the way. Christianity back then, in case the Crusades weren't blatant enough, didn't take kindly to non-Christians. Another holiday that has only mildly disturbing roots is St. Patricks day. While the modern day spin on it is that it's meant to celebrate Irish culture, it's actually rooted in forced assimilation and eradication of Irish paganism and myths.  So, while trick-or-treating tonight, remember that these holidays are stolen from people that were then massacred. Happy Halloween!

You're either a donkey or an elephant: The absurdity of the two party system

Midterms draw closer and closer. The race is on, and despite some articles indicating a democratic sweep, some saying it's going to be a close one, the vast majority of polls taut a republican victory. It's always between the democrats and republicans- Third parties are rarely mentioned, and when they are, it's as a laughing stock. Although there are two  independents in the senate, they've never come close to winning a major election by any means. This current schematic locks voters into a vicious cycle- when we dislike the leading party, we only have the other party as an option. It's a tyranny of false options, where you get to choose whether you'd like to crash in a red or a blue car. The only people that this bi-party system is good for is...(You'll never see this coming)...Politicians. It allows them to constrict voters to the notion of there only being two choices. That's absurd. There are more than two political ideologies. Voters shouldn't have to pick between the better of two evils, it should be a vote that we enthusiastically endorse. Socialists, communists, libertarians, green partiers, and many more- shouldn't be forced to identify as democrats or republicans just to have a fighting chance at winning. This only further muddles political issues and platforms to confuse and deceive voters. An informed electorate is only useful if there's a way to apply that knowledge. We, as a people, need to stand up to this system. We need to start getting independents names on bigger ballots. Cast more dissenting votes. Start breaking down the caucuses.  Eliminate the stagnant cesspool of a mockery of free will, and politics will start being less terrible all the time.

Survival against living: The ironic path of America

American college graduates have now, more than ever, been spit out into an economy that doesn't want them.  This is especially true when it comes to humanities related majors- politicians on both sides of the aisle  have made comments about how unemployable these majors are. The culture in America is quickly turning into one which fervently supports business/STEM majors and disparages those interested in humanities- because after all, humanities majors can't code or come up with the next tech craze. They don't have the means of producing the next device to make huge amounts of profit, or "advance" humans into the future. It comes down to a matter of money. Graduates are shying away from the humanities because of the lack of potential employability, and our culture is encouraging that. We, as a people, are saying that we want less philosophers and more engineers. While this is a very effective model for making profits, there needs to be a more critical eye pointed at the foundational assumptions behind this standpoint. Namely, that profits are the be-all and end-all of life. What our culture is currently belting out as we dance around the alter of business/STEM is that you aren't worth anything if you don't make large amounts of money. Our consumerist mindset is the most easily observable  consequence of this culture. A person's value is judged by their material possessions and quantity of gold in their bank lockbox. We crave the next iPhone or gadget because it's a status symbol- a symbol of consumption. Our addiction to the concept of wealth is what fosters this culture, and it's something that needs to stop. We're killing the future of humanities for the sake of profit.

This epidemic of profit obsession has a very scary implication- That life is about how well we can survive, not how well we can live. Material possessions are an example of a hording survival instinct run rampant, the exact same as an animal who consumes all food put in front of them. Physical resources are something that we need to survive, not to live. Humans aren't made different from animals by our ability to use computers and make it rain. The distinction is that we're aware of our own state of Being. As we get more entranced with our material survival, we further push aside our understanding of our Being. Profits and pragmatism prevent us from actually being human because we stop thinking. Not thinking to solve problems, not thinking to make money, not thinking to answer a question. Just thinking. Being is intrinsically tied to this ability to think for thinking's sake. While excellent for survival and making material profits, business/STEM encourages technological thought, thought that isn't just for thinking. Humanities mandate non-technological thought, the very thing that defines our Being, that makes us human. If humanities majors die out or decline severely, our station as humans dies out as well. There will be no more intrinsic value to humanity. We'll just be another animal, no different from a dog who endlessly thinks of the clever new way he's going to catch his tail the next time.   

Police problems

Ferguson. It's a name mentioned quite a bit in the past few months. Various terms have been thrown about, accusations and misinformation. One thing, however, stands as a fact: The increasing militarization of the police. Their justification for this is that they're needed to protect against the rising tide of criminals- after all, you don't want a scary man with a gun beating you up, now do you? While many ideas for how to reduce police militarization are tossed around, none of them have actually had any effect. They're all quick-fix solutions that don't address root causes, they're akin to slapping a band-aid onto a stab wound and saying it's all better.  Some are even worse options, promoting vigilantism because apparently everyone is batman now (Though a town full of batmen would be pretty sick). To address the issue at the beginning of the pipe instead of the end of the pipe of brutality, what we need to do is take a look at why we need police in the first place. The answer to that question is fairly obvious: to keep us safe from the evil law-breakers. This is where the problem is. The "evil" law-breakers. In order to justify more police power, there needs to be more and more criminals.  

The American penitentiary system, by many accounts, has failed.  However, I think it's succeeded beautifully for its intended purpose: Producing more criminals. The system incentivizes lesser, non-violent criminals to commit larger and more harmful crimes by cutting their employability and potential paycheck by 40%, in addition to exposing them to in-prison gangs and criminal groups. This locks them into a life of crime, and ravages the local economy of various neighborhoods, continuing this morbid cycle of producing criminals. That's exactly what the state needs though, to justify increased police power. Police power is the most directly observable form of state control, which is control that only benefits those sitting at the top of the system. Police industries are a boon for America's war economy, not to mention being useful for subjugating the people. 

Overall, the difficult transition we need to make isn't one that directly has to do with police. It's prison reform. Focusing our penitentiary system on rehabilitation and reducing crime in positive ways instead of negative ones is critical to breaking down the growing police state that's becoming America. This is what's needed to prevent another Ferguson. 

Fascism and Freedom

There are two extremes: Laissez faire and absolute fascism. Middle ground between these is where many people reside, however most can be boiled down to favoring one or the other. People can support having some aspects fasciszing and others be more siding towards freedom. Everything affects everyone- In some minute way or another, all actions have a connection with all other actions. Now, Fascism doesn’t work unless it’s absolute fascism- The fascism of the Leviathan. The Leviathan’s control dictates everything as according to one ruler, which has nothing to do with the freedom of others. However, with absolute freedom, one being’s freedom is curtailed and infringed upon by another’s freedom. For example, if I had the freedom to cage a man, my action would take the freedom of that man away. All actions, in some form or another, require some investment of a force or tangible object, and either this investment or the results of the action itself have echoing repercussions upon all other actions. The concept of true freedom is impossible unless there is a single being in a vacuum, and even then the limitations of said vacuum would prevent absolute freedom. If true freedom is an impossibility, then we must look at absolute fascism. Absolute fascism is just as much of a fantasy as absolute freedom is- by the definitions of fascism you must have the Leviathan to control others- And then the Leviathan isn’t affected by fasciszing, and instead has absolute freedom. It’s the paradoxical relationship between freedom and fascism that makes the plurality so intriguing. You can’t have either in absolutes, and each only holds meaning when compared to the other.

Scotland Forever

With the Scottish vote to secede coming up this week, the American media has been plastered with various polls and speeches about the pros and cons of Scotland secession. Over in the U.K. (Or, what WAS the U.K. at the time of writing this article), David Cameron's desperately rallying for Scotland to remain a part of the U.K. " So let no one in Scotland be in any doubt: we desperately want  you to stay; we do not want this family of nations to be ripped apart.". Cameron also indicated that the U.K. had always been at the forefront of history, and that they were there 'together'.

Together isn't exactly the word I'd use. Together tends to have the implication that all parties are there willingly. This isn't so much the case for the U.K. Britain, by all measures, is the most colonial state in pretty much all of history, brutally controlling a large portion of the globe at one point in time. Despite their various underhanded economic tactics used in Asia (Like that time they got China addicted to opium), and their navy used to strong-arm other countries into submission throughout the world, I'm going to focus closer to home. Britain is not a good neighbor. They routinely exploit and straight up shank those nearby them (Remember that whole great potato famine thing in Ireland? Yeah, the British caused that.). Their violent history gives Scotland nothing but justification for seceding from their union. Hopefully, a successful secession establishes a foothold for Northern Ireland to secede as well.

Disaster Porn

Ukraine- The name brings up images of fire, marching armies, rubble, and guns. Everything that the current American concept of Ukraine contains is negative, focused on destruction. Before Russia invaded Ukraine, Americans payed very little attention to it, just knowing that it was that place that looks like Russia but wasn't. However, immediately after the disaster of the invasion occurred, it became America's favorite eastern European country. Why? Why is it only in the moment of crisis that we pay attention to Ukraine? Why did we only care about Haiti when the earthquake struck? They're all symptoms of an addiction, an addiction to disaster porn.

Disaster porn is harmfully affecting America, it draws all of our attentions to the overwhelmingly negative aspects of a situation instead of recognizing the positive things about an area as well. We don't think about the way that Ukraine used to be now, we only think about the burning ravaged land that the media portrays over and over again. America's addiction to disaster porn changes our perception of other countries into an apathetically concerned scenario. We portray disapproval of the events going on over there, and yet we keep consuming them as quickly as the news can pump them out. Some of us urge our leaders to get involved in Ukraine, and yet the sluggish movement on the part of the US belays our true apathy towards the situation.

Our addiction to disaster porn is a harmful result of the media's relatively new transition to overwhelmingly visual medias. Pictures and videos became the new words, transmitting much more excitement and "in-the-momentness" that Americans have come to crave. This consumption of disasterous imagery doesn't need to be bad, so long as it spurs appropriate response to it. However, it doesn't. We care about the afflicted area for only as long as we can see imagery of how much it's damaged by whatever events are occurring over there. We never have a long-term investment in the country. And that's something that's got to change.