Simple principles in a complex world

This is not going to be some didactic blurb, as my posts often are. Rather, I’d like to pose an idea and get other people’s thoughts on the matter. So, I have learned from my studies of history, psychology, philosophy, and my general observations of people and society that we live in a world of complexity. However, my studies and observations have also taught me, in conjunction with my spiritual experiences and earnest applications of religious teachings, that there exist relatively simple principles to make sense of the world and forge a path forward through the jungles of complexity. This paradox of complexity and simplicity has been a continual source of wonder and interest for me, and has led me to form a maxim which I hope you, the reader, can take the time to evaluate and comment on:

“One of life’s greatest intellectual challenges is to discover and appropriately and effectively apply general, seemingly simple principles to a varied and complex world.”

What are your thoughts, people?

Ron Paul, freedom, and Joseph Smith

Now there’s three topics you never see together! The Libertarian in me is fairly sympathetic to Ron Paul in his candidacy. I do disagree with his stance on Iraq - as I understand, he wants to pull out, which I think would probably be a big mistake at this point - but I can understand his strong stance in this matter, having been one of the very few Republicans to oppose our direct intervention there in the first place. In hindsight, I think he may have been right to oppose invasion. Iraq aside, though, I agree with him that our government ought to more closely abide by the powers actually granted by the Constitution (that ol’ thing), and furthermore that it ought to do less regulating of the private lives of its citizens; make no mistake, our lives are highly regulated (in all likelihood, of course, this is still probably the most free and very best nation in which to live, perhaps in part because of certain of these regulations)! Among the various institutions which Paul hopes to abolish is the IRS, which I admit seems a bit strange. Granted, it IS a big mess, no thanks to rich people and their rich lawyers, as my lawyer brother tells me, but I imagine Paul must have some better system for collecting taxes.

Would this other system be a different system of compulsion? Most likely “yes”, i would expect, because granting citizens complete freedom over whether to pay taxes would probably be a darn ineffective way of collecting revenue. Assuming that personal freedom is the ideal and compulsion is its antithesis, how, then, can a society achieve its goals for the benefit of the whole by the free cooperation of the people? The short answer: I don’t know! It’s probably a whole lot more complex of an issue than I realize. However, I do believe that the great Prophet of the Restoration, Joseph Smith, presented an important principle that is key to solving this problem, if we can just figure out how best to apply it. He once said, in answer to how the people of Nauvoo, Ill. were so well-governed, “I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves.” How awesome is that! The Book of Mormon, The Bible, the words of modern day prophets, and other scriptures all defend and declare the principle of liberty, and the BoM is particularly clear about the fundamental importance of our freedom to live and especially to worship. Furthermore, the scriptures teach us that we ought not force others on any behavior, even those acts that are righteous (although they heartily endorse kindness, long-suffering, and persuasion). Of course, on the matter of whether or not we ought to forcibly prevent people from acting unrighteously, the scriptures are not quite so clear. But that’s a discussion for another time

Keith Olbermann’s impassioned, yet unconvincing, demand for U.S. troop withdrawal

So, I’m no expert on the war in Iraq, nor am I especially savvy about the latest political happenings. Notwithstanding my relatively small degree of knowledge, however, I am learning to be shrewd in evaluating the arguments being made on the cable news channels. Last night, I came across a very unconvincing diatribe by Keith Olbermann on MSNBC about President Bush and the Iraq War. My initial impression of Olbermann from the several times I’ve seen him on TV is not flattering: I think he’s disrespectful, self-important, and unrealistically extreme in his opinions (my experience has taught me that extreme positions almost always oversimplify situations which are actually quite complex). This particular “Special Comment” on his “Countdown” program was consistent with my perceptions of his character. While his rant did draw on an impressive arsenal of inflammatory vocabulary, I was nevertheless unconvinced by his accusations that President Bush has and continues to pull the wool over our eyes about Iraq and that by pulling our troops out of Iraq we will basically save our country, and perhaps even the world, the way some people talk about it. I also snickered when he ended his comments with “Good night, and good luck”.

The fact that we entered Iraq in the first place is what an economist might deem a sunk cost; whether or not we should have gone there in the first place is spilt milk we shouldn’t cry about. Furthermore, I don’t believe that the validity of our decision to go in can create a very strong argument for withdrawing. This has probably been painfully obvious to many, including my good friend at Den of Hydralisks, but it just dawned on me that the power vacuum we would create by leaving would quite readily filled by people much less savory than ourselves. President Ahmadinejad of Iran was recently quoted by the AP as saying:

“The political power of the occupiers is collapsing rapidly…Soon, we will see a huge power vacuum in the region. Of course, we are prepared to fill the gap, with the help of neighbors and regional friends like Saudi Arabia, and with the help of the Iraqi nation.”

One thing I like about this man is the candor of his often-nefarious intentions. His lack of subtlety (unless it is in actuality a clever ploy to veil his real intentions) makes the thought of thwarting him very tempting, and also offers useful ammunition in defending the war at home in the U.S. I don’t want to see Iraq effectively handed over to terrorists and/or rogue states like Iran. There’s no question that war is ugly, and it goes without saying that we are going to incur more losses if we stay in Iraq, but it would be woefully short-sighted to pull out now.

Emerging admiration for Glen Beck

Just a quick blurb right now. I currently have cable in my house, which allows me to be connected to all the great newsy shows out there, and one of those shows I often stumble across in my channel flipping is Glen Beck’s program on CNN Headline News. I was looking up some info on him at Wikipedia, the authoritative source of everything informational, and  frankly find the guy a little intriguing. Having dealt with family tragedies and his own substance abuse to get where he is now speaks a lot for the man. I also like these quotes:

“God stalked me like he had a giant baptismal rifle,” Beck said. “I thwarted him. I led people astray as much I could but he kept putting Mormons in my way.”

(Haha, baptismal rifle!)

“I am a conservative who doesn’t happen to be a Republican”

(I can respect that)