The American Situation

The government is locked out, shut down.

The congress doesn't agree with the executive branch, and the idea of compromise isn't in the air.

The country's population is divided almost 50/50 along red and blue lines, and the Tea Party and Far Left each have tremendous power.  Discourse is disagreement.

Seems a setting for a futuristic novel about some totalitarian state, where chaos reigns. Instead it's the state of the US today, sad as it is.  When things done't go right, blame is the rule, but really - it isn't the answer.  It's not about denouncing and revoking Obamacare, or election manipulation via re-districting.

Instead, what's been lost amongst the loud voices arguing is the idea of leading.  Leading the world by example of how powerful a force democracy is.  Leading though selflessness and compromise.  Like a good parent leads their family, like a good spouse or good friend leads a relationship.

If I take a "in order for me to win, you HAVE to lose" approach, then I doom us both.  That's what was allowed to happen, and that's the idea that's been sold to the American public - our side has to win, and the other side must lose.  It's sad that this wasn't questioned, but the pursuit of power tends to to avoid sound consideration.

The left isn't correct, and neither is the right.  They're both wrong in the way they've participated and manipulated the process.  They're both wrong in the lack of compromise to make America better for the people of America.  Somehow this was lost in the need to be 'right'.

The situation in America won't get better until the people demand leadership and compromise to help them all out of this situation.  I fear that the voices saying this are too softly spoken, and overshadowed by their own red-ness or blue-ness.  Why would I listen to a ...  (insert Republican or Democrat) - even if they are correct.

No, the situation in America won't get better soon .. and the loss will be felt by the American people for a long time to come.

Fire, Ready Aim

I've been around some people lately that have a real bias for action.  I enjoy that phrase, though the people who (only) have that approach can be speed-blind at times.

It's been interesting to watch them in this effort we're involved in, as they MUST do it fast, even though it's clearly acknowledged that we'll have to "tweak" the output afterwards.  I think they've sold themselves up the river, as we all know they won't be tweaking, but rather doing full blown determination of what it is that they're trying to achieve exactly. Or 're-achieve' to be precise.

There's a 0% likelihood that we'll actually get to their overall objective with this approach, and yet it's also unacknowledged at this point that they need to be seen to be doing something.  That's a powerful motivator for action - even if we can all agree its the wrong action to take.

It's fascinating to be part of efforts like this, the way a slow-motion car crash in a movie is fascinating.

Faith & Folklore vs Technology

I saw a wonderful little line the other day that's been bouncing around my brain ever since: "cell phone cameras deter aliens".

The point, made as astutely as ever by Seth was that now that the cell phone and its high quality cameras were ubiquitous, the instances of sighting alien spacecraft has gone way down.  Prior to our always-connected world where something wasn't real unless it was instagram'ed, the instances of sighting flying saucers were folklore, and generally not independently confirmable.  Bigfoot, the Loch Ness Monster and other such popular myths have similarly suffered from the emergence of connected-awareness. Does this demonstrate these situations as fallacy, or wishful thinking ?  Perhaps a little, yes.

It's interesting and unintentional that technology has started to give us tools to dispel or prove those things that required only faith in the past.  And that got me thinking.  What technology would emerge that would have a similarly profound impact on our beliefs and ways of life that we've had to take on faith until now.  Would time travel and the ability to go backwards into our history and validate or prove false the fundamental precepts of Christianity, or Islam forever change our religious beliefs?  Will cancer 'vaccines' tip us over the edge due to food production limitations, as our population swells with healthy people.  Will the ability to manipulate the sex of your unborn baby mean football is that much more competitive, and even more wars break out as the world tips towards having more territorial males..?

The unintended consequences of 'advancements' are fascinating to imagine.  But it does make you want to loosen your grip a little on your most sacred truths as well I think.

The Horizon Line

I went around the world this week.  Modern travel makes this far more feasible than that sounds. It's not extraordinary, it simply requires lots of sitting.  Its is special if you've not travelled too much, or perhaps if you envy long periods of sitting. I don't know anyone in the latter situation, but in that sense - it is a big world, so who knows.

I travel for business very frequently, and one of the side benefits of that is the ability to travel for pleasure. Loyalty begets loyalty in this sense, though if I had colds and fever sickness frequently, I don't know that I'd like to be rewarded with more of the same.  Perhaps airlines don't grasp some of the "fun" their own consumption experience entails.

I have come away from this week with the renewed understanding that our planet is indeed small. Getting around it all is easy. It might be a real feat to be on a Jupiter size planet and circumnavigate. Then flying at 1000 km/h, like as on a boat here on Earth,  it might take months or years.  But in our part of the solar system, we're talking about 40 hours of sitting. Big deal.  

What it brings into perspective is our fragility, due to our small size. This is relative of course. Sure, I'd hate to have to walk around the world, but think about the snail or worm's progress across the sidewalk. Then think about the Albatross, Arctic tern or Grey whale that regularly span hemispheric oceans every season.  If animals do this, as part of their innate DNA - then why do we think this is special..?

We would all approach the world differently if we were more migratory as people.  Without being 'travellers', our horizon is our whole world and the empowerment that we offer to the horizon line is self defeating I think.  "If I can't see past it, the places beyond must be far away."  Poppycock.  That's some sort of pre-historic, latency issue that was intended to ensure we didn't get lost from the pack of proto-humans we lived with for self-protection.  If I travel the world, the sabre tooth tiger doesn't get me these days, though duty-free stores may.

The other horizon-line fallacy invoked is that we can we can do what we want to the planet, and it is big enough to recover. (Hence my fragility comment) Problems only manifest past the horizon.  Sure that sounds silly, but look at history - when does the US enter WWII ? Post their islands being attacked. When a bus plunges somewhere in the world, it's only news if 3 XXX's were onboard. (At XXX, insert your nationality here). Polar ice-cap melting? Sure seems cold here in winter still. If stuff happens 'over there', past the horizon it doesn't matter to us as much as if it was right in front of us. 

Imagine for a moment that you are driving in a car, over a bridge.  Over water.  Suddenly, the car veers of the bridge, and into the water and sinks towards the bottom.  

Clearly, you're having a bad day in this car. Underwater.

What becomes evident very fast is that you're about to run out of air, and so effort is made to escape the car to avoid drowning.  That all makes sense, we would all react that way.  And I think the allusion is also clear.  You see we're all in the same car, and it is small, though due to the horizon line..we don't quite acknowledge that yet, this fact that we're in deep trouble.  Even though there's significant evidence to support the fact we're in trouble. 

Ignoring the fact doesn't make our "air" last longer to extend the analogy, it just gives us less reaction time.  Do you think more or less reaction time is beneficial if in that unfortunate situation?

I, for one, wish we'd all understand this horizon line bias that colours our perceptions about our world, as I think it would change how we approached just about everything.  

Summit the Mountain in Front of You

You'll find it's easier than trying to climb a far away or future one. 

Stretching

Sometimes we relax and enjoy down time. It's deserved, (or not) and we indulge a little.  Other times though we prepare ourselves, take a deep breath and stretch.  We push beyond our comfort zones knowing it is good for us.   This can happen in a workout or other favourite activity when we go harder for a defined short term - the sprint at the end of a run. Or it can happen over the long haul when we make life altering decisions such as moving away from the single life and deciding to have a family.  There's a middle ground though that I think represents the hardest type of stretch.  That extended but not permanent commitment to something that will do us good over the mid-term.  A year long decision to really change a pattern in your life.  There's no shortcut on these. 

Stretching isn't easy. It requires a degree of self motivation and will power. It requires that we put what's good for us ahead of what's comfortable.  And like anything we decide, there's is a need for commitment to stick with it.  With that in mind, when we see others stretch it impresses us - certainly it impresses me.  I think we place ourselves in the others' shoes for a moment and ask if we could do it.  We consider it, and quickly and if only superficially grasp what is needed for that stretch , for that movement outside where we feel safe.  We recognize it.  

I know someone that's stretching now.  I know she's not 100% ok with it. And I'm really blown away by her personal strength to do it.  I hope to be inspired by  her to explore new areas for myself and I'm not so secretly wishing her tremendous good fortune as we don't see this kind of thing everyday.  

Look around and give yourself a pat on the back if you 'stretch' regularly.  You deserve it.   

We are All Compound People

Some of us have numerous online identities, and some don't.  It can get creepy when an individual pretends to be something they aren't - middle aged men assuming the identities of young people in online communities for example - but I'm not talking about the questionable outliers, I'm thinking more mainstream.  I've heard it recommended more than a few times, that we "professionally" ought to maintain numerous profiles, one for our work, and one to make comments about a few beers with friends or your like/dislike for the favourite local team.  I happen to disagree.

I think we are all compound people - we have a multiple aspects or perspectives in our lives depending on whether we're at work, at home as kid/parent/spouse, or at church or the local biking club.  That's not an exception, that's the normal way we do things.  We exhibit it with our dress (business suit / casual wear / community clothes) and our talk.   When we suppress this idea in the online world, and pretend that we're always professional, or always all about this passion or that one, we are attempting to manipulate people's impressions of us.  Especially if under another online identity, we are making those personal comments or sharing instragrams that are 'unprofessional' in nature. (I don't mean questionable here, I mean not work-related) It is not genuine, and hence begs questions around trust in what's being said - because it's not the whole story.

I support the concept of being one person, and have the people that choose to listen to you understand that there are multiple interests and important aspects in your life.  I put forth that the same is true for each member of your audience, and hence legitimacy is granted.  Your listeners, viewers or audience may not like your entire interests - but that's the beauty of choice.  They can elect to un-listen in the various forms that takes.  For those I listen to, I'm not as interested when they post a picture of their dog, as when they talk about the things that I care about - BUT - and here's the important bit, I know that they aren't hiding anything, and are genuine as otherwise they wouldn't have the guts to say it all.  

There's a side-note here worth saying.  You don't have to post it all, and I'm not suggesting that you do share everything in your life.  If you only want to blog about work topics, or only talk to old friends on FB, that's fine.  Each of us adopts the personality for our circumstances as we require.  Just be straight about it, as we're all compound people.