What Makes America Great?

There are a lot of answers to this question floating around out there.

Recently I heard John McCain claim that this country is great because of the spirit and determination of the American People. It's a nice ass-kissing answer, good for an election season. Especially when you consider that, gasp, American people will be voting for him! But the comment makes it sound like there's something special about the American populace, he seems to imply that Americans are just better than people in the rest of the world. Hmm... where have I heard something similar to that before...?

(I'm not seriously saying that I think John McCain is that bad, I just thought it was a funny comparison of ideas)

Lets face it. People are people all over the world. People in America are not innately superior to people in Yugoslavia or Bangkok (I just like saying Bangkok). It's the system of America, our ideals, that create a mindset and a structure for people which allows us to succeed that makes America great.

So specifically what do I think makes America great now adays? Here we go:



1) Our tolerance of people who're different than us enables us to view people practically and judge them on qualities they have that actually matter.

Instead of worrying about the person's skin color, religion, or sex, we actually focus on what qualities will effect our interactions with them. This enables us to have more successful professional relationships and get more done. Good employees don't grumble over having to work with the hardworking Muslim guy because he has a different religion than them, they're thankful they have someone they can rely on to get the job done properly. Productivity is the goal, not homogeneity.

2) Separation of Church and State keeps us from enacting laws or worrying about issues that don't actually effect the success of the country.

As much as we all love to get pissy about abortion, it's not really an issue related to the functioning of our society. You could argue if it was outlawed there'd be more unwanted children, but I'd rather not go down that road. All I'm saying is, religious mandates typically don't contribute to cultural success, if anything they're counterproductive. Keeping religion out of government makes sure that government stays focused on passing laws which promote direct results instead of ideological or philosophical goals.

3) Freedom of Expression encourages creative thinking.

After all, what's the point in thinking something if you're not going to do anything about it? For example, in writing this, I've given the topic serious thought while laying out my views and even reconsidered what I was saying while I said it. Encouraging people to be free in their speech gets them into the practice of considering more angles of a situation, even controversial ones, which can sometimes be the solution to a problem. Openness is a good thing.



Ironically each of these principles is under attack by religious fundamentalists. (1) They want to discriminate against and make an issue of homosexuality. (2) They want to erode the seperation of Church and State by implying the country was founded on religious beliefs, posting the Ten Commandments, and mandating morality in law. (3) They want to censor pretty much all forms of media.

So how much longer is America going to be great if religion continues to grow in importance in America?

Trickle Down Economics

You've probably heard this phrase used a lot in recent times. It's a favorite Republican strategy, even though they'll regularly deny they support it because of the negative connotation.

It's the idea that if you give tax cuts to the wealthy and businesses, they will turn around and spend that extra money either by investing it which creates jobs, or by stimulating businesses with their purchases. To some extent, it's probably true that giving the wealthy tax cuts does result in some increased investment and spending; but not all of those funds will be spent in a way that will help the United States.

Some will be saved/invested in foreign banks and business opportunities, some will be pocketed by shareholders and corporate suits, and even if the money is spent in the American economy, only a certain percent of cost actually goes into the pockets of employees and employers, a large percentage is already spent producing the product which was purchased.

All citizens can agree on what the goal should be: to get money to those who need it to survive, prevention dire of economic conditions, reduction of poverty, and generation of comfortable wealth for the average citizen.

Trickle down economics only provides possible additional employment opportunities and businesses a chance to spend more if they choose. It is essentially putting more money into the pockets of the wealthy and trusting them to spend it in a patriotic way; and even if they do, it only helps the poor and struggling by giving them a chance to serve the rich. I think an economic stimulus package needs to do more than give the poor a chance to serve the rich.

McCain is proposing a 10% tax cut for businesses, from 35% to 25%. How about instead we give 8% to families making under $100,000 dollars a year and invest the other 2% in assisting Americans with higher education. I can guarantee you the poor and the middle class won't sit on it, put it in a swiss bank, build a factory in China, or buy a solid gold swimming pool. And maybe if the rich get lucky some of it will "trickle up."

Trickle Down Economics is just a fancy argument for making the rich richer.

Conventions and Election 2008

Mike Hucabee accused the "elite media" of unfairness in reporting at the GoP Convention because they've been discussing Sarah Palin's inexperience, a topic Republicans in general have been hitting on for about 8 months now in relation to Obama. How is it unfair for the media to discuss a massively hypocritical move when Republicans have been doing it ever since it became possible they'd have to go up against Obama instead of Hillary?

The media didn't exactly give Joe Biden a break either when he was announced. It was discussed for days after if he was sending a mixed political message by choosing a Washington Insider in his "clean up the country, change is good" campaign.

The liberal media argument is getting old.

The 11th Hour

After watching the film "The 11th Hour" and being unable to find any solid criticism of it on the internet, I've been motivated to write my own; which in turn inspired me to re-activate my blog. It just seriously bothered me that I couldn't find anyone saying what I was thinking on the matter, so here goes.



First, for a bit information. For those of you who don't know, the 11th Hour is a documentary glimpse into the mind of a certain sect of the environment movement. It is a presentation which showcases the beauty of the earth, the way mankind is destroying it, and then presents ideas on how to fix this problem.

However they commit all sorts of philosophical blunders, lazy thinking, and logical errors in the process of justifying their concerns. They propose the following ideological and philosophical claims without any evidence or argumentation whatsoever:

• Nature is a divine entity.
• Nature has rights.
• Western Civilization's way of looking at property is immoral.
• Consumerism is the American way of life.
• Consumption and Materialism is the central tenet of American existence, eclipsing all other schools of thoughts and priorities in life.

Many of these ideas are an attack on the entire established culture of the West and boils down our priorities in life rather insultingly to simple interest in possessions; ignoring our values of free speech, thought, opinion, family, friends, experience, discussion, etc. etc. etc.

The film is very praising towards nature and demeaning towards humanity. It tries to place the blame of the destruction of the planet solely on the shortcomings of humanity, failing to recognize that we were destined to exist as a product of this environment and evolution. Furthermore, it mocks the splendor of humanity while talking up the beauty of nature. The film isn't very humanistic at all.

To make matters worse, many of the arguments or methods of presentation of evidence are simply emotional and circumstantial. I find it disturbing that many of the reviews I read said the exact opposite of this film. Some examples include...

• The claim that nature's processes of construction are somehow superior to mankind's because they're less noisy or disruptive. The film contrasts the difference in making Kevlar in a factory and a spider making webs. The two have absolutely nothing in common; one you swat out of the way with your hand and the other stops bullets (or at least lessens their impact).
  
• It is argued that nowadays humanity derives all information from media as opposed to other traditional sources; one of which named is the earth itself. What knowledge was given to us from the earth in the past? I certainly do not remember gaia speaking to me.
• When giving "evidence" that the amount of natural disasters that are occurring is increasing as a result of global climate change, the film simply shows media footage covering disasters for emotional appeal. Instead of trying to bombard us with fearful images why don't they come up with some concrete data on how much the incidence of disasters is rising and then present that? I understand that scary words and panicked music makes for better theatrics, but if we're trying to convince people can't we employ more sophisticated tactics than pre-election political advertisements?
• Very little evidence is presented in the film. The few graphs and charts they show are poorly labeled and explained. There are many jumps in logic throughout the movie to save the passive listener the trouble of actually thinking for themself.
• At one point the film is critical of how much TV Americans watch...while they are watching a TV displaying that very film.

Long story short, it's an interesting movie and certainly worth watching, but be prepared to gag on the eastern mysticism, western guilt, and just plain poor arguments you'll find therein. If you manage to wade through the philosophical crap and ignore the idiotic statements many of the figures make in the film, you just might find something worth knowing buried amongst the clear propaganda.

Goodbye

Thank you to everyone who listened to me... I appreciate it. I won't be posting here anymore.

I think i've reached a new low

Bad day.

Go up stairs to get something to eat and use the restroom at around 1 a.m.. On the way to the bathroom, I slip on something, fall, and hit my head on the floor in the process. It hurt. What's worse is I woke everyone up. Then I realize what I slipped on was a pile of dog vomit. Everyone comes out of their room expecting an intruder or some other spookey night occurance, and instead it is me laying in a pile of dog vomit which I have slipped on during my way to the bathroom.

For waking up everyone up the task of cleaning it up is delegated to me.

I realize this is a pointless self-serving post that none of you care about. I'm making it anyway. I hate dog vomit.

Truth

Beliefs can be absolute in our minds. But our faith in them does not speak of their validity, only of our commitment to them.