Still alive - plus, some interesting books to consider reading

The past few weeks have been pretty tumultuous over here for a number of reasons, primarily moving to a new house, poverty (relatively speaking, of course), and having no internet (!!!!), but now I’m back with a very important message, namely: I want to let you all know what books I think are worthwhile. After all, the implication of being well-read (i.e. showing interest in books) is almost as good as actually being well-read. So here are a few good books I’d read, or at least sample if I had the time.

1)”Dave Barry’s Money Secrets - Like: Why is There A Giant Eyeball on the Dollar?”

I admit, I’m actually sort of reading this one, and it makes me laugh a lot. Hydralisk, this is one you should find on tape/CD if you can. It will help you shift some paradigms and revolutionize outside the box, or something like that.

2) “Obama Nation” by Jerome Corsi

When I first ran into this one at the book store, I got a little excited - “A well-researched, non-gushing book about Barack Obama?! How much is this? I’ll take 2.” I skimmed the preface, and thought it seemed pretty even-keeled and objective (and for the record, the author is not a Republican, but a Constitutionalist). However, when I checked out what wikipedia, the bastion of e-truth, had to say, my faith was shaken - apparently Corsi has taken some liberties with the facts, or else just drawn conclusions many didn’t want to hear (or, more likely, something in the middle). So anyway, I’m a little more skeptical of the book. However, it is on The New York Times bestsellers list, and, like so many people in this country, I take the New York Times more seriously than a lot of things. It can do no wrong. Ever. Seriously, though, I’m intrigued to hear what Corsi has to say about Chairman Barack’s supposed cult of personality.

3) “The Definitive Guide to Stuff White People Like” by Christian Lander

Another book I happily bumped into at the store the other day. Flipping through it, I was surprised at how many people the author and I both seem to know Lander has a great way of poking fun at white people (or, as one of my white co-workers candidly pointed out, a certain subset of white people: the college-educated, left-leaning ones), and I admire his ability to do so in a way that is simultaneously incisive and good-humored.

Also, you can check out the official website, stuffwhitepeoplelike.com.

Good Samaritans among us

Happy 4th of July, everyone! I’ve been meaning to relate an incident I witnessed a week or two ago here in Alexandria, VA. First, a little context. The Old Town section of Alexandria is very charming, and I find myself walking up and down the particularly busy King Street pretty much on a daily basis. Typically, there are a number of homeless people sitting along the street here and there and, although I have offered some change once or twice, I find myself basically ignoring them when I walk past, as is seemingly the norm. I think this is an easy habit to develop, particularly among the relatively well-to-do; there are a number of ways to consciously justify such callousness, some fairly legitimate (this guy seems crazy and possibly dangerous), others not so dignified (this woman probably brought this on herself - incidentally, this one is explicitly challenged by the Book of Mormon and the Holy Bible. See Mosiah 4:16-19, Deuteronomy 15:7-8). Also informing indifference to the homeless and poor, I believe, are such factors as the development of general indifference towards strangers (for the sake of not being nosy or disrespectful) and the frustration of not knowing how best to address the plight of the poor (we are finite beings with limited resources, and the needs of the poor may seem to require more than we can give). I do not pretend to have the answer to poverty - it is a huge and, in some ways, complex issue. However, I do not think the answer ultimately lies in government as now constituted, notwithstanding the aid which public services do provide, albeit imperfectly. To ultimately erase poverty, I believe, will require a drastic and willing change in how we as a society view property, our material needs, and our relationship with our fellow man.

That sounds like a pretty incredible set of circumstances, and some may assert that the expectation of such is hopelessly naive or downright impossible. Nevertheless, I believe they are changes which will occur over time as individuals learn from and apply the teachings and principles of Jesus Christ. Which brings me to the incident which I witnessed. On one of my many strolls down King Street, as I approached some homeless people thinking to myself, “Just ignore them - you’re justified”, a professional-looking lady ahead of me cheerfully asked one of the men if he had eaten lately, or something to that effect, and came to an agreement that she would return soon. As it turns out, I saw that lady about a half an hour later carrying a bag of takeout food in the direction of the homeless man. It was actually quite a simple occurrence, not at all dramatic and certainly without any fanfare on her part, but it nevertheless impacted me. It made me want to be more like that woman, less inclined to silently pass by these people every time, and more willing to share what I have with others. And that’s an interesting thing, because I don’t currently have much; I don’t have an income here yet, and I almost couldn’t pay rent this month. However, while I am not advocating extreme and unprincipled generosity, I do believe that it can be dangerous for our development as Christians to give excuses why we are unable to reach out to others. Admittedly, I have as much room for improvement in this as the next guy.

In closing, I believe that Good Samaritans such as this woman are not rare in America, although their good deeds are not typically broadcasted to the world, mostly by design. In large measure, such people reflect what is great about our country; the magnanimity to actively share the prosperity, with which we have been blessed with those who have not been as fortunate, with the recognition that the abundance we enjoy is a gift, not an entitlement.

Another point for Kierkegaard

I really like philosophy, and I gotta say, when it comes to existentialism, Soren Kierkegaard is my man! I just ran into this quote , which I think is classic insightful, cynical Kierkegaard:

“People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use.”

Too often true! Soren, you says it like it is!

What should we do about poverty?

This is a question I’ve been pondering lately. As is obvious, I’m a Mormon, and have been comparing the approach of our church to the approach taken by our government. One of the big differences seems to revolve around personal accountability i.e. the LDS Church stresses it, seeking to provide means for people to lift themselves up, while the government, as far as I can tell, mostly gives handouts with low expectations, if any. As is typically the case, I’m relatively ignorant of the cold hard facts, particularly as concerns the approach and current state of government welfare. What are your thoughts about poverty? Is socialism the answer? (I doubt it, but I’m always open to a convincing argument) Should we remove government welfare and hope that philanthropists come to fill the gap? Should we have merely temporary welfare? Place more emphasis on familial support? Questions, questions. Any ideas?

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.