Workers Of America... Never Mind...

The world is a very wicked place, all too often. Nowhere is this more visible than in the workplace. Each of us is expected to do useful work in our lifetimes. That's how our society works, and here in the United States and the West, it is an inherent part of our culture. Good works is part of our national consciousness.
That's the way it's supposed to work.
That's the way society wants us to believe.
However, do not think for a moment that hard, and even harder, work will get you ahead.
I've written that class structures exist because we allow them to, and those very structures are as immovable as mountains. Nor would they allow themselves to be moved.
Outside of many professions, the bulk of our workforce is now concentrated in what is called “service industry”. The work done in these industries is there to help others in some form or another. An interesting fact – this is a cycle of sorts, because the service industry often services itself.
Workers within this industry enjoy many levels of employment, but too often they are not viewed as people. Let me explain, and I’ll explain it based upon my own personal experience. For years, I worked as a support person within the customer service arena. Early on, it was drummed into my head that I was lucky to get the job; that for every employee there were perhaps as many as ten people who wanted that position. No doubt this was a scare tactic of sorts, because at least it had the effect of reminding you that you were replaceable. Whether or not it was true at the time is not the point. The point is it worked. You had to stay in line or you were replaced.
To my employer at the time, people were a commodity. Upper management never viewed anyone lower than middle management as people most of the time. This made it easier for them to make the tough choices, so I was told. If an entire project had to be shut down, and you had a few hundred people looking down the barrel at unemployment, it was best to not view them as “people”. They were “things”, numbers on a spreadsheet. They might as well have been office furniture; they were simply another cost.
Large service companies, in short, do not want “people”, all of their protestations aside. They want “automatons”, robots who simply understand commands.
What is the worker to do?
This is going to sound harsh; just deal with it, because this is the society we’ve allowed to come into being. We have been manipulated into believing that big business and government has our best interest in mind. Horse hockey. Who’s to blame? Well, who allowed this to happen? Don’t think too hard, America.
You see, that’s the problem to begin with. We just prefer not to think these days. We let our media decide for us, with flashy/trashy ads during election time and feel good programming the rest of the time. There is no such thing as a truly public forum to question our leaders, both governmental and business, at least one that isn’t managed; sorry, no tough questions for them. It’s all staged.
In the past, there was always an alternative in workers groups, such as unions. Nowadays, they are faltering as well as corrupt. They are both ineffective and scarce today.
This leaves it to the employees to do something on their own. If you think that will work, let me throw a figurative wrench into the works – it is called outsourcing. Today, the service industry knows that there’s not just ten people waiting to fill your shoes, but perhaps a hundred or more in Asia and Eastern Europe. If a company feels that they can save money (the usual excuse) by outsourcing, they will. Unabashedly. Usually brazenly.
All in all, this puts everyone in the service industry in a very uncomfortable position. You are, in short, being held a hostage of your own needs. You need the money, and they know it. Economic blackmail is such an effective tool, and it works both for government and big business.
And we allowed it to happen.
What can we do?
Just sit back and enjoy being taken for a ride.

Personal Significance & Family

This idea started off when I found myself thinking about a lack of offspring. I don't have children, and the fact is I'm probably not capable of producing any heirs at the moment. Kind of sad, but really kind of interesting. Let me explain.
I had the lack of foresight to marry when I was 20. One of the first things my ex-wife started talking about was having children, something she herself should have been avoiding. It started off simply, and then it became an obsession to her. She had to have children. The problem was, she had a tubal ligation before we married; a pregnancy could have been fatal to her. Didn't stop her from wanting children. Eventually, it became one of the many straws that broke the camel's back of our marriage.
My new wife isn't in such a rush. Thankfully.
Why is that a good thing?
Well, based on what I've seen and have experienced, the act of producing heirs and raising them has a detrimental effect on the parents. Right now, every pro-life and Christian group out there is preparing to pounce upon these words, but hear me out; If you want to make something of yourself, do it before the kiddies come around. Trying to be successful and raise a family at the same time can have disastrous results. The amount of time you need to spend to develop yourself will take that same amount of time from your family, and that has a reciprocating, negative effect. That's not to say it can't be done, but the risks are too high. Now, if you're already in a good financial position, you could take an approach that many wealthy families have taken; let someone else do it. Want to see what kind of fruit that bears? Look at some of today's no talent uberkind. Products of good breeding, yes. But not a sensible bone in their bodies.
As I said before, I’m not saying that this can’t be done when you have kids, of course. Just be prepared for what that entails. The average lower to middle class family has a hard time making ends meet these days; this normally means that both parents work. The added strain of trying “to get ahead” (or doing something significant) is hard enough on people who don’t have children. The stress of making it work without setting ambitious goals is hard on even the strongest people, and marriages. Unless you have the money of, say, the Hilton family and can hire good childcare, your chances are slim. Then, of course, there is that whole argument stated earlier (think; Hilton).
The only other option is to wait. Either have kids at an early enough age that you are still young enough to make an attempt at your ambitions when they’ve grown, or just be brave and try when you are older. Don’t think that for one moment I’m against the idea of personal advancement; on the contrary, I believe that everyone should strive to do something important in this world. But in our search for significance, we need to set our priorities well in advance. In our search for meaning, don't let your family be a casualty.

The First Amendment & I

For many years, a couple of decades in fact, I've been an outspoken proponent of the separation of church and state. What haven’t been readily apparent are the reasons why.
My spiritual path in my youth was a wandering one. My mother always made sure that we attended a church; she wasn't particular what church we attended as long as we went. Between the ages of six to fourteen, I attended Methodists, Baptists, Assembly of God, Church of God and various evangelical churches. Each church had its own approach to Christianity, and many were openly hostile towards the others. In 1976, my stepfather introduced me to Catholicism. After attending for a few months, I decided to join the faith; I was attracted to it, and it seemed to be the most original.
Before I joined the church, though, I heard various negativisms from the other denominations about Catholicism, though I paid little heed to each one. None of them seemed to be based on reality, at least to my young mind.
In my senior year in high school, I was very active in the CYO, the Catholic Youth Organization; I even held a number of offices in it. I also served as an altar boy as needed. I grew to love the religion. About this time, I decided to attend a couple of meetings of the Bible Rap club at school. Those meetings turned out to be rather cold.
Whenever I tried to talk, I was basically ignored. This hurt; these were my classmates, after all. One day, after a meeting, I approached one of the club members and asked her why I was ignored. Her response stunned me; "It's because you're Catholic, you're not a Christian." She was Baptist, she went on to explain, and they all knew about my religion.
I quit the meetings at that time. The truth was, the vast majority of my hometown leaned Baptist, and her opinion was not an isolated one. This situation made it difficult to be Catholic anywhere, it seemed. It was going to get worse.
A group known as Campus Life began having rallies at my school. I attended these, and really enjoyed them, fully aware that there was a definite Christian undertone to them. After one of the rallies, I was approached by one of the spokespeople, who asked, "Robert, are you saved?"
"When you asked, 'saved', you mean accepting Christ as my Savior?" I responded.
"Yes... are you?"
I looked at her with incredulity. "I was just confirmed into the Catholic church..."
"Oh, then, you're not saved..."
That was the point where I walked away. About this time, Campus Life was no longer holding its meetings on school grounds, but instead at a public park in the Glynlea area of Jacksonville. However, most of the schools in the area backed, even encouraged, students attending, regardless of their faiths.
As a young Catholic, I was angered to tears. I wanted so badly to fit in, and these social events seemed like a good way. Because I was Catholic, "not a Christian" to many of my fellow students, I was made to feel ostracized. I may have been a good person, but I was still going to hell, it was certain. The fact that many of these happened under the auspices of school extra-curricular activity, public school, didn't help.
Up to that time, I never paid the First Amendment much attention. Afterwards, after I had succinctly experienced why it was needed, I began to understand. America is a plural society. There are many forms of Christianity here, as well as other faiths. Allowing one religion to dominate too many aspects of public life is rife with problems. The First Amendment exists not only to keep religion out of government, but to allow the various religions to exist together in a legal manner, not allowing one to dominate another. It's not anti-religious, as some pundits would write, but irreligious; it cares not the faith, nor does it prohibit the exercise of.
Allowing one faith's religious views to dominate public discourse is a slippery slope. There are people who want a constitutional ban on flag burning, yet many of these people hold the flag above that cherished document, the one which our very freedom is based. The flag is just a symbol, the Constitution is a statement of what we, as Americans, believe. Or at least what we believed.
Don't let go of our freedom, the freedom to worship as we see fit.

Creativity, Competition & Society

In all of the reading I've done of late, one thing keeps getting drummed into my head. In our world today, there is only a small window of opportunity that exists, for most of us, to either make it or not. Michael Lewis, in his book "Next", compares today's marketplace success stories to athletes. Most athletes are in their prime for only a few years, after which they become uncompetitive. He had a very good point when he brought up comparisons between athletes and young innovators. On the other hand, Lawrence Lessig's "Free Culture" brings up how the establishment is constantly putting restraints on any new, up and coming competition to the status quo; they inflict their will upon those who try to use the tools and materials that have been created to produce something new. In short, they seek to stifle progress.
Where is the classic renaissance human to go in a world that sees cut-throatism at either end of the age spectrum? The powers that be don't want you to succeed, let alone exist because of what you represent, while the younger generation is hot on your heels, seeking to undo you as well.
The creative class is a dynamic group. To be a member is to know that there will always be strife in your personal life, whether internal or external. It's not a comfortable spot to be in. It is the spot I've chosen, however, and I do not seek ways to fit in to regular society. Indeed, I actively seek not being assimilated altogether. Not that I buy all of that anarchy nonsense either.
I feel, however, that society, polite society, prefers that we find our place and stay put. When your soul prefers not to stay still, society is uncomfortable. When you try to stay still, your soul stirs and becomes restless.
I suppose this might explain the amount of antidepressants dispensed today. It also explains why I choose not to take them.

Old Macs Just Don't Die... Nor Do They Get Tossed

Recently, I've been reading about certain groups and their concerns over our high-tech society. The majority of their concerns dealt with the issue of waste; where does all of this high tech stuff go when it dies?

A quick look around my apartment suggests that it comes to me.

I grew up poor, and as a result, I have a tendancy to use things until they can't be used any longer. When I got into computers, though, this tendancy mutated into rescuing old computers from the trash. At first, this seemed like a good thing to do. Now, I can honestly tell you that is perhaps the furthest thing from the truth.

For me, opening up these old machines and making them run was a challenge. Once the challenge was met, though, my interests in them waned, and they had to go. Usually, they wouldn't. Lately, though, they are starting to trickle out. It's good to see them find homes that aren't mine.

The reason I bring this up has to do with those aforementioned advocacy groups. Lately, they've brought their gripes to my favorite computer company, Apple. One of their members said that if Apple doesn't begin actively recycling their machines, by 2008, there will be over 10 million Macs and Apples in dumps. That's a lot of computers in the garbage. Problem is, I just don't buy it. Most of the Mac/Apple enthusiasts I know just do not throw these machines away. They go out of their way to find alternative methods for disposing of them; by giving them away, trading them, selling them, even just holding on to them in storage. For us, these machines symbolize not just an appliance, but a culture. Trust me, people who tend to name their computers are more than just a little bit attached to them.

Obsessive? Yes, I guess so. Incredibly, I'd have never gotten into the Cult of Mac had it not been for someone tossing out an Apple Lisa. I was strictly a PC guy up to then. Their loss, my gain, and the rest is history.

A landfill loaded with Macs is about as likely as a dump packed with Rolls; just isn't going to happen.

A Sad Argument For Class Structure

We've all heard that America is a classless society. Nothing could be further from the truth; we are clearly delineated class-wise. I once heard that some of the brownstones in New York and New England were deceptive. When viewed from the outside, you see what appear to be multiple apartments. But, once you pass through the doors, you find that many of them, in middle class neighborhoods, hide large, single dwellings. That's how class works in this country - you don't see it at first. But it's there. Ask any minimum wage employee.
That's the crux of the problem. Some of my friends say that personal advancement is an individual issue. They take a very libertarian viewpoint, and they have that right. However, what they don't like to talk about is that in order for their ideal society to work, classes have to exist. For instance, you might have senior managers and owners on top, middle managers and specialists on another layer, and your average workers and then laborers near the bottom. Is there interclass movement? Probably, but it would be doubtful that someone from the bottom tier could make it any higher than a middle tier. The upper tiers would always set out to assure that they maintain that position.
Simply put, a rigid class structure would always come into being. Somehow, it's human nature. We want structure, our collective conscience needs it. Or so it seems.
I would argue that this is partially nature, but more than likely nurture. For all of our time on this planet, there have always been leaders and followers, rulers and servants. This need to follow and be ruled over is part of our psyche, coming up from the most primitive part of the brain, the area just above medulla oblongata, our reptilian ancestry. It is our animal selves that want this. We can't help but listen to it, against our own will.
Can the upper brain, the cerebral cortex, our higher selves, overcome this? I doubt that it can, not any time soon. This is not an argument for class based on biology, however. The one thing that truly separates us from the rest of nature is our intellect. It is simply too easy to listen to those animal instincts that were bred into us. We have, within ourselves, the ability to rise above these notions. Society forces us to accept things as they are, it seems, and the class structure would demand this of us.
We're still relatively young, both as a species and as society; it was barely a tick of the geologic clock ago that we were hunter-gatherers, trying to eke out a living. Biologically speaking, we've been a raving success.
Perhaps in time we can find another way to make society work. Until then, we just have to do the best we can and remember that we are all human, no matter our social position.

American Ozymandias

Every nation goes through a period of rapid growth, and many of the more progressive ones go into an expansive period. Thus are the cycles of countries and kings; evolve, develop, grow, influence. If the growth is slow, the nation and its sphere of influence can survive for many years. However, nothing lasts. Every great nation eventually grows old, and its reach contracts until only the country itself remains. For some nations, this happened in more of an implosion; much like those cosmic cataclysms, where a bright star explodes after a massive implosion in what is called a supernova. All that remains is a dim remnant of its former self.

Empires evolve and die. That's the way it works. That's how balance is maintained.

It is easy to think that the United States is not an empire. In fact, the amount of influence our young country exerts over the globe has been tremendous, especially since the 20th century. No single country has ever had such a profound effect on the fate and fortunes of others. We have burned brighter than any other nation.

Much like those bright stars. And empires of yore. And like those super luminous stars or massive empires, the momentum to continue burning so bright is lost. Collapse is the outcome of both. Is this our fate? Only the future knows.

The words of Shelley's poem "Ozymandias" reflects the arrogance that is inherent within such societies, and it should serve as a reminder...

"...Nothing remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away"

The Life Artificial

Tracie and I saw the movie "Robots" recently, and while we both thoroughly enjoyed the movie, it started a chain of thoughts in me that are at once fascinating and perhaps a little more than profound. In the movie, you find a world completely inhabited by robots; robot men and women, robot dogs and even robotic birds. No real life forms could be discerned, they were all mechanical. Could such a world exist?

Given an infinite number of possibilities, it could. In the Piers Anthony novel "OX", the human explorers find themselves going from one alternative universe to another. One such alternate world is abandoned, but it appears that it was entirely automated; even one of our explorers is hurt when a robot flower closes on his finger. This was my first introduction to this bold idea, and the movie "Robots" has again sparked interest in it.

How could it work? How would you create an entirely automated ecosystem?

Some technologists fear that we may accidentally create a race of nanobots someday that will run roughshod over our humble planet and leave behind a "gray goo", a writhing mass of nanobots that covers the planet... or perhaps even planets. This seems to be the robotic equivalent of a bacterial experiment. Let's say that you have a test tube filled with a nutrient solution. Into this test tube you plant a starter colony of dental plaque bacteria. Within a day or so, the bacteria multiply until all of the nutrient solution is absorbed and its entire weight has been converted into a single mass of plaque. The problem is that this is a sealed environment; the bacteria begin to die once all of the nutrients have been used. The same would happen to a nanobot environment, unless you designed them to fulfill certain niches. In short, you design them to fill the same roles as organic life.

These would be the equivalents of plants and animals, macro and microorganisms. Imagine a world where artificial plants convert nutrients in the soil into mass that is then used by larger artificial animals. Once the artificial organisms "shutdown", their components are recycled back into the environment. This insures that the robotic ecosystem always maintains just the right balance.

Just like our natural world.

Perhaps this has been done already.

The comparisons are easy to make. On the most basic level, all life on Earth is composed of molecules that are programmed to do just the above. If one system tries to overtake another, it is put back into place. Balance is maintained. Life thrives.

This idea is certainly is rife with controversy, enough for all sides to condemn it. But for myself, I find a strange comfort in it. If the purpose of life is to create more life, then perhaps our ventures into artificial life are merely continuing a task that was started billions of years ago. Maybe we're working towards a culmination. It will be a long time before we see where it leads.

Where To Begin...

Most who know me are aware that I tend to write. Quite a bit. Addicted to it, one might be tempted to say. Perhaps it's a function of my complex personality... or at least one of them. Suffice to say, I'm talkative, complex and puzzling. Occasionally, though, flashes of brilliance might be seen through all of the clutter. If it's there at all.
So, where to begin. Suppose I could start off with some anecdotal story about myself, but rather than rehashing all of that now, let's wait and see what appears. I will give you a little info about myself, though.
I've held a variety of jobs, though I prefer being an artist and writer. Since there's not much money in either of those fields, I've also worked as a planetarian (Google it...), and currently work as a support person at an undisclosed, unglamorous job. It pays the bills, especially the one for my ISP.
I like a lot of things. I love astronomy. I love the beach and the ocean, yet I cannot swim. But then again, I love the sky, yet can't fly unaided. I like simple, usable tech. I like old computers... perhaps a bit too much. I love my cat. I love my wife. I like old ships. I like manual typewriters. I have many, many more interests.
So, there you have it. Seems like a good place to start.