Grad student friends, do not take this personally, but I've begun to realize that many current grad students I know have, while in grad school, undergone a transformation towards a somewhat cold, aloof, detached, haughty demeanor, losing some ability to connect with people on a simple, warm level. I think some would insist that it's because their intelligence has exceeded the ignorant throngs who are unable to withstand that level of intellectual expansion and analytical prowess, but while I see some reason in that, I don't think that's the whole story.
I think too many find ideas they'd not considered and, because they're so new and different from how they've always thought, put far too much faith in those limited philosophies which are novel to them but have long since been assimilated, debated, and tempered by the whole of society and academia. Part of the reason I think this is because my friends and acquaintances who have entered graduate school a little later in life haven't undergone this transformation into a cold, jaded cynic nearly as much as those who have gone straight into graduate school in their early-to-mid twenties, at more impressionable, less experienced, more emotionally and intellectually volatile times in their lives.
Of course, there's also a difference between going into grad school for engineering or business and studying the humanities or social sciences, the latter of which are far more loaded with a particularly antireligious or relativistic sentiment and philosophy which tends to send people who previously believed in rigidly dogmatic belief systems into an intellectual tailspin or complete overhaul of sorts rather than integrating aspects of those philosophies into the defensible parts of their existing "world view". Of course, it could be argued the older folks are more set in their ways and less capable of abandoning their old paradigms, so it's not that they're more stable and able to synthesize disparate philosophies but that they're more crusty and closed-minded. But I suspect it's more the former. But I recognize that may be self-flattery, since I'm in the "older" camp. :-)
Anyway, my friends are all, of course, wonderful people who aren't soulless and cold and who care about ethical and productive living even if they don't subscribe to certain religious traditions of morality. Fear not, friends, I'm not saying you're awful people, though some of you show very minor signs of this aloofness disease. :-) I'm not "afraid" I'd become some monster if I went to grad school, but I'm just saying if I do go to grad school, I want to be careful not to confirm unnecessary stigmatization on the part of other people. ...or maybe I am a little afraid because I've seen this trend in myself in the past.
Um...I'm done thinking about this. I just got bored with it. If any of you are reading this, I'm surprised you didn't get bored with it in the first paragraph. Way to endure. :-)
29 March 2010
28 March 2010
22 March 2010
A Few Thoughts On Reform Reactions
1. I don't know what I'm talking about. I haven't read the massive bill. I don't know all of its nuances and legal loopholes. I can only go from what I've heard from news media (mostly NPR, Fox News, and CNN), a couple of friends in medical fields, a handful of friends who have had trouble finding medical care, and lots of friends and family who act like they know what they're talking about but who mostly get their information from specific news agencies and radio talk shows. Honestly, I haven't researched it that much. I am interested in the practicalities, but I'm more focused on the principles of government and economics.
2. Republicans and conservatives and whoever else doesn't like it can mitch and boan endlessly about how awful this is, but it's done. It's passed. Raise the caution flags if you feel obligated by your conscience to make sure we don't all blindly accept it and jump on a bandwagon to hell. Speak out about what must be done to remedy the situation. That's good and well and necessary. But for goodness' sake, set aside your bleeping need to sound indignant and incensed so that ten years from now, when the government surely is collapsing because of Obama, you can say, "See? I told you so!" Whine about how wrong it was if you must, but unless you're going to propose action to make it better, I'm sure there's something more productive you can do with your time, like researching solutions to the possible damage it will cause and electing representatives who will make the decisions you support, or spending quality time with a loved one or developing a talent or actually learning about the issues from both sides of the spectrum so you don't sound like a left- or right-wing talk show drone...or an ignorant, wishy washy moderate *sheepish shrug*.
3. I know that, for many of you who didn't support the bill, when you hear someone say, "At least it's something," you're thinking how ignorant and short-sighted that sounds, how lacking in wisdom and resigned to defeat. Let me try to articulate what I think many people mean when they say that: our government has been pretty gridlocked for some time. Republicans and Democrats refuse to truly cooperate and opt instead for power grabs and force. Republicans had many, many years to make meaningful change. They didn't. Democrats had a shot now. They did it. They didn't do it extremely well, nor did they do it ethically, as far as my nodding acquaintance can tell. But the thing I like most about the fact that they did it is that now the Republicans might be spurred into action, sparking actual progress unless both sides entrench and refuse cooperation. Goodness knows that if the American public is as unsure about this bill as the polls seem to indicate, this will actually help Republicans in the elections (probably their goal, at least subconsciously, in all their self-righteous soap-boxing), and competition can kick in to achieve some balance and whatever course correction is needed.
4. Would it have been better to hold off and find a better, more complete, less financially dicey, maybe more privatized solution? As far as I can tell, I'm pretty sure my response is "yes". But would that solution ever be reached if one side or the other didn't cram something through? Unfortunately, in today's political climate, I don't see it happening. That doesn't in any way justify cramming it through, if that's what was done, but if opponents of the bill will kindly get over themselves and get their posturing and grandstanding and damned self-righteous indignation out of the way (as if the disease of unethical and corrupt tactics is unique to the left) and get off their butts and do something about the problems they say are surely coming, I'd appreciate it. Dialog. Research. Elect ethical representatives. Whatever it takes. Maybe they'll take a lesson from this: if you don't do it yourself, someone else is going to do it their way, and you're probably not going to like it.
5. Democrats and Republicans, no matter how convinced you are that your righteous cause overrides the will of the people, if you again pull sh!# like even considering "deem and pass" on or cramming through such major legislation without clear public support, I am poised to personally come cut off your balls one by one, and maybe that'll tame you. Yes, that includes you, Pelosi.
2. Republicans and conservatives and whoever else doesn't like it can mitch and boan endlessly about how awful this is, but it's done. It's passed. Raise the caution flags if you feel obligated by your conscience to make sure we don't all blindly accept it and jump on a bandwagon to hell. Speak out about what must be done to remedy the situation. That's good and well and necessary. But for goodness' sake, set aside your bleeping need to sound indignant and incensed so that ten years from now, when the government surely is collapsing because of Obama, you can say, "See? I told you so!" Whine about how wrong it was if you must, but unless you're going to propose action to make it better, I'm sure there's something more productive you can do with your time, like researching solutions to the possible damage it will cause and electing representatives who will make the decisions you support, or spending quality time with a loved one or developing a talent or actually learning about the issues from both sides of the spectrum so you don't sound like a left- or right-wing talk show drone...or an ignorant, wishy washy moderate *sheepish shrug*.
3. I know that, for many of you who didn't support the bill, when you hear someone say, "At least it's something," you're thinking how ignorant and short-sighted that sounds, how lacking in wisdom and resigned to defeat. Let me try to articulate what I think many people mean when they say that: our government has been pretty gridlocked for some time. Republicans and Democrats refuse to truly cooperate and opt instead for power grabs and force. Republicans had many, many years to make meaningful change. They didn't. Democrats had a shot now. They did it. They didn't do it extremely well, nor did they do it ethically, as far as my nodding acquaintance can tell. But the thing I like most about the fact that they did it is that now the Republicans might be spurred into action, sparking actual progress unless both sides entrench and refuse cooperation. Goodness knows that if the American public is as unsure about this bill as the polls seem to indicate, this will actually help Republicans in the elections (probably their goal, at least subconsciously, in all their self-righteous soap-boxing), and competition can kick in to achieve some balance and whatever course correction is needed.
4. Would it have been better to hold off and find a better, more complete, less financially dicey, maybe more privatized solution? As far as I can tell, I'm pretty sure my response is "yes". But would that solution ever be reached if one side or the other didn't cram something through? Unfortunately, in today's political climate, I don't see it happening. That doesn't in any way justify cramming it through, if that's what was done, but if opponents of the bill will kindly get over themselves and get their posturing and grandstanding and damned self-righteous indignation out of the way (as if the disease of unethical and corrupt tactics is unique to the left) and get off their butts and do something about the problems they say are surely coming, I'd appreciate it. Dialog. Research. Elect ethical representatives. Whatever it takes. Maybe they'll take a lesson from this: if you don't do it yourself, someone else is going to do it their way, and you're probably not going to like it.
5. Democrats and Republicans, no matter how convinced you are that your righteous cause overrides the will of the people, if you again pull sh!# like even considering "deem and pass" on or cramming through such major legislation without clear public support, I am poised to personally come cut off your balls one by one, and maybe that'll tame you. Yes, that includes you, Pelosi.
21 March 2010
Racial And Sexual Slurs In More Than Word
A friend posted a link to a story about the amazingly abhorrent and ignorant actions of certain tea party protesters on Facebook today. There are many, many similar stories throughout the news media yesterday and today. I read the story and was absolutely amazed that people could be so idiotic...except that I know there are such people.
I haven't heard the word "nigger" used in a long time, but I have witnessed drive-by shoutings of "faggot!" now and then, usually by teenage or college-age asses who obviously have lives so uninteresting that yelling at strangers gives them a boost. I keep hoping one of them will get so distracted by their yelling that they'll hit something large and unyielding with their toolish sports car or pick-up truck and save the world from the proliferation of their genetic code and social upbringing. But so far that hasn't happened, so I just join most others on the street in regarding them as pathetic little boys and hope they have some redeeming qualities and will one day learn how ridiculous and extraordinarily stupid they'd been, and I move on with my life. We've all been stupid, we've all been jerks, and fortunately, most of us grow out of most of it. OK, so I'd rather they grow out of it and have a chance to learn the error of their thinking and behavior than smash into something.
So anyway, I know the reaction I have about that kind of behavior, and from the article above, it's clear many in the media and in the democratic party are similarly expressing disgust. It's also become a punching bag for decrying the supposed redneck bigotry of the Tea Party movement. I'm pretty sure most of the Tea Party folks are not racist, homophobic haters, but I must admit I cringed as I thought of the probable response to this from the right: cries of media bias and speculation that it was only one or two people shouting the slurs. As I searched for news results, I found an article I expected would be exactly that. It mostly was. But it's more firm in its denunciation of the slurs than I thought it would be, and the author points out that the coverage of the protests has focused almost exclusively on those shouts rather than the substance of what the majority of protesters were really there for: political demonstration and strength in (large) numbers. But I still have a problem with the title and with the fact that the article clearly deliberately attempts to steer attention from the bigoted shouts to media bias and to another random, isolated slur against the Tea Party folks.
Fortunately, other articles have surfaced today regarding Republican and Tea Party leader denunciation of the racial slurs. They're unequivocally stating their opposition to it. I don't have a TV at home, so I don't know if Fox News is whining about media bias and insisting the whole thing is being blown out of proportion, afraid to alienate their more bigoted watchers, but I hope they're not. Hopefully, they're reporting responsibly and not slapping wrists for gross bigotry while giving quiet, good-ol'-boy pats on the back for political ballsiness.
Think I'm completely out of line in supposing that happens, let alone among those who matter? What about Rep. Steve King's response in which he likens it to "a lot of places in this country that I couldn't walk through," as if two wrongs (assuming he's even right about his statement) make "I just don't think it's anything," or the justification offered by Rep. Devin Nunes? I think many liberals are taking his comments out of context and ranting overzealously, but really, Nunes? Even beginning to excuse those comments or blame the government for their behavior? I suppose you would, then, proclaim that U.S. foreign policy is to blame for the 9-11 attacks? I know you said the word "crazy" but not directly referring to these specific people. You then went on to say "smearing" (in no specific reference) is "not appropriate", then going right into a "but" about the left wing? Classy. I can see why you're in office.
I don't think for a moment racism is finished in this country. I happen to live in a place where it is, I believe, relatively rare, but I've heard some really ignorant and even vitriolic comments, around work and social events, about a prominent ethnic minority here. And I'm pretty sure it's nothing compared to some regions of the country where history and culture wars keep tensions high. I don't think, for a moment, homophobic bigotry and discrimination based on sexual orientation is finished in this country. With recent and upcoming political wars, understanding is sacrificed to battle cries and vilification. Of course, I also don't think religious discrimination is a thing of the past. Discrimination in all its forms is alive, probably kept in check both by law and by the decency of people who make the difficult effort to challenge their own paradigms and open their ears and hearts and minds.
We act shocked when someone yells "nigger" or "faggot", but I've witnessed people yelling those things not in those words but in their actions and attitudes. Some idiots in the Tea Party protests have yelled nasty words, and that cannot be excused and should be vehemently denounced. But they were, as far as I can tell, a small minority of the group, denounced by the party's leadership. And yes, there's been bigger news to focus on than that, with sweeping reform immediately underway, but I want to remember that acting incidentally indignant over these relatively few people who shouted nasty words is fine and well and might make me look good for a moment, but I'll try to remember my feelings about them the next time I'm talking about minority groups in my community or the politics around immigration or marriage or civil rights and try to make sure I'm not doing the same thing as those idiots in my speech and demeanor, just without using those particular words.
I haven't heard the word "nigger" used in a long time, but I have witnessed drive-by shoutings of "faggot!" now and then, usually by teenage or college-age asses who obviously have lives so uninteresting that yelling at strangers gives them a boost. I keep hoping one of them will get so distracted by their yelling that they'll hit something large and unyielding with their toolish sports car or pick-up truck and save the world from the proliferation of their genetic code and social upbringing. But so far that hasn't happened, so I just join most others on the street in regarding them as pathetic little boys and hope they have some redeeming qualities and will one day learn how ridiculous and extraordinarily stupid they'd been, and I move on with my life. We've all been stupid, we've all been jerks, and fortunately, most of us grow out of most of it. OK, so I'd rather they grow out of it and have a chance to learn the error of their thinking and behavior than smash into something.
So anyway, I know the reaction I have about that kind of behavior, and from the article above, it's clear many in the media and in the democratic party are similarly expressing disgust. It's also become a punching bag for decrying the supposed redneck bigotry of the Tea Party movement. I'm pretty sure most of the Tea Party folks are not racist, homophobic haters, but I must admit I cringed as I thought of the probable response to this from the right: cries of media bias and speculation that it was only one or two people shouting the slurs. As I searched for news results, I found an article I expected would be exactly that. It mostly was. But it's more firm in its denunciation of the slurs than I thought it would be, and the author points out that the coverage of the protests has focused almost exclusively on those shouts rather than the substance of what the majority of protesters were really there for: political demonstration and strength in (large) numbers. But I still have a problem with the title and with the fact that the article clearly deliberately attempts to steer attention from the bigoted shouts to media bias and to another random, isolated slur against the Tea Party folks.
Fortunately, other articles have surfaced today regarding Republican and Tea Party leader denunciation of the racial slurs. They're unequivocally stating their opposition to it. I don't have a TV at home, so I don't know if Fox News is whining about media bias and insisting the whole thing is being blown out of proportion, afraid to alienate their more bigoted watchers, but I hope they're not. Hopefully, they're reporting responsibly and not slapping wrists for gross bigotry while giving quiet, good-ol'-boy pats on the back for political ballsiness.
Think I'm completely out of line in supposing that happens, let alone among those who matter? What about Rep. Steve King's response in which he likens it to "a lot of places in this country that I couldn't walk through," as if two wrongs (assuming he's even right about his statement) make "I just don't think it's anything," or the justification offered by Rep. Devin Nunes? I think many liberals are taking his comments out of context and ranting overzealously, but really, Nunes? Even beginning to excuse those comments or blame the government for their behavior? I suppose you would, then, proclaim that U.S. foreign policy is to blame for the 9-11 attacks? I know you said the word "crazy" but not directly referring to these specific people. You then went on to say "smearing" (in no specific reference) is "not appropriate", then going right into a "but" about the left wing? Classy. I can see why you're in office.
I don't think for a moment racism is finished in this country. I happen to live in a place where it is, I believe, relatively rare, but I've heard some really ignorant and even vitriolic comments, around work and social events, about a prominent ethnic minority here. And I'm pretty sure it's nothing compared to some regions of the country where history and culture wars keep tensions high. I don't think, for a moment, homophobic bigotry and discrimination based on sexual orientation is finished in this country. With recent and upcoming political wars, understanding is sacrificed to battle cries and vilification. Of course, I also don't think religious discrimination is a thing of the past. Discrimination in all its forms is alive, probably kept in check both by law and by the decency of people who make the difficult effort to challenge their own paradigms and open their ears and hearts and minds.
We act shocked when someone yells "nigger" or "faggot", but I've witnessed people yelling those things not in those words but in their actions and attitudes. Some idiots in the Tea Party protests have yelled nasty words, and that cannot be excused and should be vehemently denounced. But they were, as far as I can tell, a small minority of the group, denounced by the party's leadership. And yes, there's been bigger news to focus on than that, with sweeping reform immediately underway, but I want to remember that acting incidentally indignant over these relatively few people who shouted nasty words is fine and well and might make me look good for a moment, but I'll try to remember my feelings about them the next time I'm talking about minority groups in my community or the politics around immigration or marriage or civil rights and try to make sure I'm not doing the same thing as those idiots in my speech and demeanor, just without using those particular words.
19 March 2010
Understandable
Important distinction I make in life: saying something is "understandable" is not the same as saying it's "OK" or "justified". Just sayin'...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)