[437] Fiat Social Currency

I think progress is working things out of your narrative. If you consider modernity, it’s the adding, growing, consuming, “endless learning,” big data, and filling all your time with work that tries to define progress. Instead of making us smarter, I think it breeds a “monkey see monkey do” kind of habit. If I write an essay expressing one facet of my view or what I’ve researched, I can’t expect a polite focused response that qualifies, elaborates, or details where it thinks we differ. And only because I frequent the presumed “front page of the internet,” and I’ve read enough comment sections on Youtube or touted “intellectual” sites, do I believe the severity of the communication problem is on full display.

What is it to write deliberately? Increasingly, it seems less to do with the time you spend parsing out each word and reading and rereading until each line sits just right. Take my last sentence of the paragraph above. I “believe” we have a huge problem in communication. I didn’t say I was going to lay out 15 studies detailing how humans get things wrong based on rewards or tonality. But, if I was unfortunately met with someone who read an article on communication that day, I could all but bet I’d get a “refutation” of my idea that is not only supposedly explained in that article, but dutifully capable of picking apart my specific speculation.

This is lazy. It’s also dishonest. While I don’t think the internet created the habit of lazily and dishonestly communicating, I think it acts as a positive reinforcement mechanism. You might be able to lie in person and no one’s going to check you. You might be able to sell yourself and your presumed knowledge. Yet online, when you’re wrong, and someone knowledgeable dares call you out, you can delete your comment. You can create another profile. You can down vote them and render their voice a kind of “internet invisible.”

You’ve heard of the idea of living in a bubble. One of the great ironies of an online existence is the leveling out of information. Every time you print something, it exposes what you think you’ve tucked away. What feels “cold” and flat is actually teeming with all the emotional baggage you can bring into every line. Maybe it’s an opinion piece about GMOs. Depending on what website it comes from its view can certainly be pieced together with as many links to research as your heart could desire. Does it help make the “intellectual” case that they are poisonous because the article appears on a site like Truthdig with the tone of The Drudge Report? For the large swarm of ironic liberals, absolutely.

Or consider the cemented pretentious irony of a place like reddit. I am now unable to read anything without the presumption that the person is being sarcastic or extremely uppity. You don’t get popular unless you’re dismissive, speaking “in summary,” or making a well-timed bad pun. Is everyone trying to be that way? Of course not, but not everyone needs specific information about editing software from a sub with 15 dedicated people. That kind of information does not seem like the norm, the habit, or the voice of prideful ignorant displays of opinions.

Even if you’re a doctor who’s written books in service to your articles, opinions are all you can hope to receive. You’ll get criticized for all you’re not saying. You’ll get accused of using recent tragedy to “forward your agenda.” You’re wrong for the website you posted to. You’re wrong for whatever presumed “flippant tone” you’ve adopted. Mostly you’re wrong because “well I don’t see how this can be true…” It’s not that they consider and refute the thesis. It’s not that they even read the article at least half the time. They don’t know the science, they don’t have the sources. And they don’t really argue. They mindlessly complain and speculate, feel great about it, and then get 1000 up votes suggesting their mess of “criticism” is valid by the ordained fingers of the populace.

I submit the highest rated comment about Jon Stewart’s opening monologue about the South Carolina shooting:

“I love Stewart, this was awesome of him. But he keeps saying "we gotta fix it". That's nice and all, but how? The thing is it WAS just one guy. Not a group, not a kno felon. No warning. I don't see how we can fix things like this without the government stripping away rights and wrapping us in bubble wrap to prevent us from harm. I would love a solution to things like this but it's hard to think of one that won't take away the rights of the American people. Yes, we could start a movement to help end racism but there is still going to be that one fucking nut job somewhere and I have no idea how to stop something like that.”

I want you to reread it and let it sink in. It almost has to be deconstructed word by word.

“I love Stewart, this was awesome of him. But…”

There’s a but? A heartfelt plea about gun violence and racism is all well and good and it couldn’t have come from a greater guy, but…

“he keeps saying ‘we gotta fix it.’”

Kinda. He’s more speaking desperately to our ridiculous and irrational culture. He’s speaking to our denial. He’s speaking to our inability to recognize it for what it is, so even the possibility of fixing it could be brought to light. This immediate condensing, this caricature, of what he said is a lot easier to dismiss and criticize though, right? Jon didn’t expose us to his feelings and a deeper conversation, he just banged the desk and complained that “we gotta fix it.”

“That’s nice and all, but how?”

Am I the only one who hears the pretentious condescension? Good boy Jon, here’s a pat on the head, you keep barking about how you feel while us adults know that nothing can be done. This person isn’t even really asking the question! This is throwing up their arms. HOW!? They’re not offering how, or discussing possibilities. They don’t want to either. They want to shuffle the reality of the shooting and a genuine response to it away.

“The thing is it WAS just one guy. Not a group, not a kno[wn] felon. No warning”

Absolutely not the point! This one guy took in racist information. This guy telegraphed his intentions for months or years. This guy had a warped sense of reality on top of his other generalized mental issues. This guy had easy enough access to the litany of guns this country celebrates. What if it had been a team? What does that have to do with anything? What if he was a felon? No warning? Besides his friends, his pictures, his writings you mean?

“I don't see how we can fix things like this without the government stripping away rights and wrapping us in bubble wrap to prevent us from harm.”

Oh you don’t? So that makes this is wise and reasonable thing to say? We’re not having a discussion about what “rights” even are or where they come from. We’re going to dive into hyperbolic either/or sentiments with no realization or discussion of consequences. We’re going to sell “fear of having our rights taken away” while ignoring our “right to survive this violent racist country.” You don’t see because you don’t read, you don’t respect, and you don’t allow yourself to understand anything beyond the confines of an opinion democratically elected to the top of an internet forum.

“I would love a solution to things like this but it's hard to think of one that won't take away the rights of the American people.”

Which rights? From which people? Why do you want the right to kill and be killed by access for the easiest means by which to do so? Hard to think of more severe background checks and training? Hard to think of cooperation of among states so trafficked guns are less of a problem? Hard to think of controlling lobbying by the NRA? Hard to think of selling a message of empathy and togetherness instead of fear in the media? Hard to reevaluate what the right to bear arms meant back before the age of machine guns? And just because it’s hard, does it mean it’s not worthwhile? Can we not concede that all the areas I listed are implicated in the large “racist gun culture” that we’re apart of?

“Yes, we could start a movement to help end racism”

Umm, how? No the fuck we couldn’t. Racism is “in-group out-group” basic animal mentality. A movement isn’t going to fix that. Is the problem natural fear of “the other” the real problem? Or is it stoking that fear and weaponizing it?

“but there is still going to be that one fucking nut job somewhere and I have no idea how to stop something like that.”

Thank god noone is asking you for ideas. And again, this isn’t what people who suffer needless death think can be fixed. Here’s an updated take on a quote “no one fucking nut job is an island.”

Again, this is a comment with over 1000 up votes. It seems you don’t have to read that far into the kind of consequences, just the ones we deal with every day, when this is the “effort” and “credibility” we allow our conversations to sit at. He gets plenty of people to agree with him later, calling what Jon was offering “platitudes” and asking inane questions about banning guns and hate speech. Idiot fuel for the idiot fire.

For shits, let me write an “ignorant diatribe paragraph” of how I actually feel. In brackets I will explain what’s wrong with it. At the same time, feel free to compare it to a more thoughtful and deliberate section seeking to speak to a more specified point.

People are dumb and getting dumber. [unsubstantiated, relative to what?] Even if a place like reddit isn’t all 13 year old white males, it adopts the voice and habits of a pack of them. [impression, need examples, no way to accurately account.] “The great power of democracy is the belief that my facts are equal to your opinion.” [Improperly quoted, presumption of accurate facts not relayed.] If this trend in poor communication continues, I bet we go extinct, as our ignorance to “truth in general” will permeate into ever dire consequences. [I’m not Cassandra, detract from my point by not talking specifics related to war, nuclear energy, or the environment, let alone social causes.] I don’t see how ANYONE could be comfortable with the status quo in this country. [Of course I could. Rich people, ignorant people, people who make odd dramatic equivocations and analogies about theirs and others’ places in the world.]

I contend we don’t know the difference between the lazy grandstanding and posturing of the above paragraph, and even the point of this digression. No matter how many times I state it explicitly the point will go missed. There is, in fact, a dramatically different form and habit of discourse when you’re keeping the point and reading deliberately than what you’re rehearsing in comment sections. That habit has consequences to not only your view of intelligence, but your capacity for empathy. All links, opinions, styles, votes, perspectives, arguments, tones, capacities, debates, and offerings are not equal. They are not truthfully up for discussion like your willingness to respond is all that’s necessary.

I call on the people who can see the difference. This writing isn’t even for “the people of reddit.” I think smart and respectable people denigrate themselves in these mediums or on their playgrounds. I don’t want their talking points to remain un-called out for what they are. They’re not “the other side.” They’re not “humbly offering a differing view.” They’re normalizing bullshit conversation. They’re lazy. They’re dishonest. And we hurt ourselves by playing with instead of against them.

[436] Beacon of Dope

Take an immediately hyperbolic sentiment like, “I don’t believe in free speech.”

I’ve been feeling my gut want to flirt with expressing and justifying this sentiment for the past couple days. I’m provoked by statements that I think I can show to be threatening, deadly. I have a waning conception of “freedom.” I’m so steeped in how “I” can “break down” or “justify” what the statement means to me. I feel a crippling sense of irony seeping into every new line.

Again, I’m falling over the edge of thoughts provoked by the world of music. Watching the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony specifically. Whether the artist being celebrated is alive or dead, it feels like a eulogy to me. Nothing is genuinely bad at ceremonies like that. The tears are real. They flow from the kind of emotion that springs from a place so much bigger than you or your song. Somehow you and everyone you’ve touched are sharing the same moment.

And that’s the dreamy way to state it. Is it somehow more or less real than other things I could say? Timeless classics I’ve never heard of don’t bring me to tears. I can understand the marketing behind including artists that span generations and styles. I’ve looked up the biggest names and attempted to listen deeply and hop into the boat of emotionality and passion that you can feel from each person expressing themselves about their respective hero. I’m, often, just not that into them.

There’s so much to be said about the personal nature of experience. To my mind, it’s the difference between creating for personal reasons and the infinitely different ways your creation can be experienced. I think you approach a danger zone that pits “popularity” against “truth” and can only mangle what either could mean.

There can be no doubt as to your reaction. You felt the tears fall, the chills on the back of your neck, the unstoppable butterflies and urge to dance. In the moment, it doesn’t have to mean anything “more.” I imagine it’s the same sort of rush from winning a championship or nailing a job interview. You don’t want to hear about the handicaps working against the other team or that the person they were really after couldn’t make it. Aspects that are just as true, just as immediate and relevant independent of your awareness of them.

I think this is why you can experience, though I haven’t lately, people who are scarily passionate about a band. It doesn’t matter to them how many came before, nothing has moved them “like this” before or since. How could you not understand!? Then be prepared to tread lightly in how you talk about their gem. Objectivity needs to be left outside. Just feel it. But I also think this is the difference between the litany of videos of crying little girls at a Taylor Swift concert compared to the zero crying older women videos after seeing Paul McCartney for the 40th time.

Here I begin again thinking about “truth.” Perhaps that woman was a shrieking crying girl back in The Beatles’ heyday. Perhaps the power of their music then is felt just as deeply as it is today, but her sway and lighter mean as much or more than the tears back then. Perhaps there’s an extremely detailed handbook for making superstars willing to put in the time with a dedicated industry geared towards hijacking the naive, fallible, and inattentive brain. Perhaps that doesn’t matter.

For all my “cynicism,” a word I still use under protest, I’m no less compelled by musical heroes. That is, I can listen to Ringo Starr sing in an annoying “old guy voice” wrapping up the celebration of Rock and Roll’s latest wave of paid respects and think “eh I’m really not into this performance or song...holy shit is it cool to see THE BEATLES and GREEN DAY playing together!” Look at all those legends trading solos and singing about how they get by with a little help from their friends too!

I want to maybe shift down a gear and hit a new tone. I’ve been thinking a lot about the last book I read on empathy. At the same time I’ve been listening to Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History and Common Sense podcasts. At the heart of the messages I’ve received is to work harder on putting yourself into the other person’s shoes. Before you bang the drum of patriotism or rush to signify someone as “evil,” genuinely ask yourself how you’d behave, what you’re government would do, and what’s really at stake.

Here I see the power of music. It’s an open invitation to jump into someone else’s world, cynically contrived or not. Empathy splashed around to be basked in at your leisure or desperation. Justification rendered impotent and insulting. You could no more question divine love for orphans when you absolutely should.

I think transformative artists and compelling work needs to be respected, protected, and inducted. I like feeling a fire or comfort from the right song at the right time. I remain “stuck” more concerned with the truth about Imagine not dictating our foreign policy. I get by knowing most of my friends are stressed, broke, and more lonely than they’d let on. I can actually play American Idiot, and no matter how angrily I sing or loud I crank the amp, we’re still pretty fucking idiotic.

I come back to my truth. I don’t seek to disrespect or degrade the work that has moved me too. It’s just work in a very specific self-indulgent direction. Self-indulgent doesn’t have to mean “bad” or “selfish.” It just needs a more dramatic fissure than a liberal artist getting pissed off at a crazy person co-opting their message and sound.

I pick up on habits of self-justification. How you feel being all that matters. The difference between how an artist speaks to you about war and your appreciation for the reasons we engage in and perpetuate wars cannot be understated. It’s bathing in a pool of empathic feelings not tied to the deeper reality, deeper consequence. I can’t call you “wrong” about what U2 means to you, but I can know how fucked Live Aid left Africa. No one was really trying to walk around in Africa’s shoes, even if they really felt like they were doing something good.

There’s a kind of happiness and motivation that is unmatched when you’re working in service to the bigger picture. I hit large periods of not playing music because I feel too dishonest. I’m not expressing as much as copying or drilling. I’m not telling a story as much as I’m trying to distract myself. I don’t want to see an old nuclear silo, poorly maintained and understaffed in nowhere Ohio, “accidentally” turn the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame into a wasteland. The situation not made better by my favorite bands in hazmat suits standing atop the rubble vigorously belting out a protest song.

The equivocation remains at the level of feeling and awareness. I’m not telling bands to fix war. I’m telling you to not allow yourself the feeling that they might. Your brain doesn’t split hairs about what you feel or can be made to believe. Certain truths need a louder volume. They need to beat harder than your heart and your fist. They need to ring with the many voices of adopted and respected realities you’re not habituated in seeking or figuring out. We sing alone and will die together.

[435] Good Question

Is smart technology making us dumber?

This was the question during a debate that I think speaks to a place where my thoughts have begun to converge. It's a place that's reminded of how important it is to clarify questions and work out definitions. It's a place that often wonders whether there are any real “debates” and not simply opportunities to be spoon fed good or bad “arguments” towards presumed fair estimations of where someone is coming from.

To me it's a little like asking the alcoholic if they're an alcoholic, or if they're in denial. “Yes,” they may say, “but I feel perfectly fine!” A presumed acceptance of the question and understanding of both alcoholism and denial, but an entirely different mechanism of reasoning is used to justify continuing the behavior.

Take having a car. I'm in the first couple chapters of “One Dimensional Man” by Herbert Marcuse. In it he criticizes “modern” commercialization of the 60's that's eerily on point today. He asks if having a car has enabled us and made us more “free.” Conceptually, it's tied us to fossil fuels. Personally, I've got no bigger burden financially than paying when mine breaks down. To the extent that it arrests your willingness to walk, it's not freeing up the mobility of your muscles. If you primarily use it to drive yourself to a job you hate or other obligation that you couldn't reach without one, the snowballing seems readily apparent.

It's the same kind of catch-all-isms that I read about “Millennials.” For my part, born in 1988, I can draw dramatic differences between me and even my brother born in '91. Also, people who were old enough to have truly suffer the death of Kurt Cobain seem to share a kind of nostalgia or reference package slightly removed from mine. Kids born in the mid-late 90's are practically alien to me, and my forays in trying to work with or converse with them (as they creep into the bar scene and apply for jobs I post to Craigslist) have made me long for an era of relative complacency when it came to contemplating your place in a job.

But how would I even arrive at asking a better question without the little extrapolations and focusing in the broader theme? I don't know, that's why I feel frequently compelled to write. Nothing about my experience on reddit or facebook prompts me to explore the degree to which I hate the word “Millennial.” If anything, those places would suggest no one cares what I think or am abjectly unreasonable for framing the question in such an obtuse way. To the extent you agree with that level of “critical analysis” you'll perhaps allow yourself the window as to why I side with the “smart technology makes us dumber” camp.

Of course reading and comprehending something are two different things. Merely engaging verses applying. And I think it's a question that is almost impossible to answer “in general.” I also think this is kind of unfortunate, as there are new studies frequently speaking to our interrupted attention and impediments of retention. Yet, at least with me, when I feel the information overload, I put it down to examine it. I shut the smart stuff off and look for a compatriot to talk to or give myself time to decompress. I'd argue it's making “us” dumber, but has allowed me to be “smarter.”

Access isn't style when it comes to engagement. I use my car to make money in time efficient ways. I hate paying to fix it, I hate more not being able to conceive of the money fixing it as an investment. If I only drove it around town, which has buses and nowhere I'm contractually obligated to show up, and it cost me $1000 a year to maintain, my car would be making me dumber. Because I fix it to make a few grand every month, I internally estimate more freedom than burden. It's worth noting I hate being tied to money in the first place, but one level at a time I suppose.

Of course big questions like that are supposed to comment about culture though. We can justify anything to ourselves. How would we make a meaningful contribution as to how to conceive of society? Would it even be meaningful? Are you going to be burdened by the knowledge that the “overwhelming consensus” is that you're dumber by being on your phone? It seems we're not persuaded, at least in the U.S., that even things more tangible and obvious like climate change matter. How then to prioritize where my pocket window of “sociability” fits?

A lot of questions, not a lot of answers. And I think that's the kind of pool from where we can hopefully get glances at wisdom in a way you can't by looking at the internet. The internet is, perhaps arbitrary, answers. The internet is our pre-planned and publicized selves. It's the internal monologues thrust at each other under the guise and respectability of the word “debate.” I often lament that I don't know what people are thinking, which is the most depressingly ironic thing you could ever say in the modern era. I know they think they're correct. I know they think what they say matters. I know sometimes they feel motivated to share a link that allegedly encapsulates the depth and capacity of their position. But I rarely get a feel for what they're actually thinking.

And I think the degree to which we lose those distinctions will speak to whether the big picture question leads towards “dumb or smart.” Just because a new technology is here and people always complain with the same complaints doesn't mean those complaints don't hold water. Maybe TV when used to marathon shows for weeks on end was/is as culpable as dumbing things down as the internet for some people. Maybe the radio too when it wasn't employed to give fireside chats.

It seems the best thing you can do is to try and practice awareness. Think about when you're overloaded. Think about whether the answers you're always finding are actually speaking towards meaningful decisions and opportunities in your life. Think if your conception of “friends,” “thoughtfulness,” or “freedom” are enriched or sinking into a pit of endlessly reinforced noise. And if you're not the kind of person to do that before new technologies, I doubt you'd take anymore from this digression or that sentiment given your “modern sensibilities.”  

[434] Human, Too

I'm hung up on the idea of “people are only human.”

I think this is often employed when someone has reached the end of their ability to justify or explain something. Imagine a child asks, “Why are we still fighting wars?” given that not enough adults seem to care to ask, and they'll receive a pat on the head with an explanation that humans are violent and irrational and we can only expect as much given how unbelievably afraid of everything they are.

Already this seems to want to bump into a set of cliches. One being “give it time.” The other, “it doesn't matter.” We can explain to that child that history is on our side. As horrible as we think war is now, what we're getting is merely a snapshot of the amount of people who have died from not only war but terrible diseases too. As well, you're just a child, it shouldn't concern you that people are killing each other. Just hang on to your childhood because holy shit are you in for a ride.

I think these kinds of sentiments carry a certain wisdom of the past. Until recently, there wasn't much you could know. You were as enabled or restricted by your area or family. If you were a genius farmer, there was no Mensa waiting ready with open arms, you were just going to farm until you died, maybe with some pretty sick modifications to your tractor.

It's fair to say I have an extremely bleak conception of humanity. I don't do well with stories about our achievements. I've never experienced much “awe” whether we're learning more about the universe or figuring out how to replace blood cells or cure cancer. I think all that shit is cool, don't get me wrong, but I haven't really experienced a “calling” if you will. I'm suspicious of people who have.

The closest thing I had to it was when I finally started to run a business. But, it was nothing to do with my love affair with coffee, it simply got me dreaming about experimenting. Just playing, essentially. There's a laundry list of businesses I think I'd like to get into. I think my habits and ideas would do a lot to spur motivation and inspiration in a lot of people. I think I could do a lot of good for people or the world in general. I'm realizing as time goes on, I don't know why I'd care to.

In the mash-up of my thoughts at the moment, I watched a video of a homeless guy talking about having it all, going to jail, and trying to connect with people in the digital age. 1 in 10 he estimates might stop to help you if you're bleeding on the side of the road. 1 in 1,000,000 will sit there and talk with him after being moved by his song. He tries to connect with people who he “thought were pretty good friends from school” and they don't have the time for a ten minute conversation but will airily text for 2 hours. While my experiences may not have reached the extremes of his, the sentiments ring with the kind of dark truth you rarely find people willing to talk about.

I wonder how much of his complaints can be blamed on the digital era or how much the digital era just brought out and put on display the worst of humanity. Of course you don't need ISIS videos of people cutting off heads, but you're now aware of something in a kind of way you never were prompted to feel reading a history book. Every beleaguered voice gets to share the witticisms of their particular trolls. Groups that are demonstrably terrible show you their impact by using our modern tools to usher us back into repressive ignorance.

I struggle with hearing about “great men.”I can sit and watch all day documentaries about people who have shaped the country or are currently shaping the planet. The stories often seem to uplift, intimidate, or exhaust you. Most people don't function well perpetually nervous or mildly psychotic, but then, at least one was Teddy Roosevelt. A man with certainly enough personality flaws and personal tragedy to choke a mere mortal to death also punched a hole straight through history. You can read about Elon Musk feeling a “pain point” having to stop working to eat because he knows how far we are from the kind of innovation needed to keep people in perpetuation. He tells share holders not to expect their money back any time soon. Is he one of the most amazing and selfless fools in existence? It's that, what are we supposed to take away?

I try to humanize. I try to think about the context. The Roosevelt's are not the Roosevelt's without money. A smart person is at the behest and limits of their brain, the one they were born with or how it was conditioned. A brain can rise to the level of it's tools and playground. If your playground is littered with violence and ignorance the odds stack against you. If you're environment is quickly killing off species and making it harder to breath, the problem further still. If you're floating through space amidst an infinite black void of cold impersonality, fuck the Panama Canal you egomaniac.

How do people make the case for “will” or “morals?” I don't mean to sound obtuse or that there aren't philosophers. The best I can land on is to try and strike a “balance,” whatever that is supposed to mean. As in, we know shit hurts and how to alleviate it. So to the extent we're not balancing out our knowledge with the ability to alleviate the hurt, “the universe” shouldn't be happy. I'm not talking about a kind of personality or god.

I think there's a certain point where you have to blame people for their ignorance more than ignorance itself. If we're truly tired of war, stop voting for people who fill the pockets of companies that build war machines. Years from now when I read this back, it's today a couple thousand hummers we gave to Iraq are now in the hands of ISIS. So what are we doing as well? Militarizing Africa. The balance between our information and courses of action are clearly fucked.

It doesn't matter if you're selfless when the majority of people can or only want to take advantage. My grandparents gave everything to their kids who, apart from my dad, shit all over their memory. The Venus Project can talk all day about a resource based economy and how to innovate and allocate our way out of much of the world's problems. I don't point them out as “saviors” as I do for what happens when you try to persistently apply “the future” onto people steeped in capitalism or selfishness.

I think it's after you watch so much of the same pattern and feel nothing or too much over and again, you start to find a nobility in death. Once you prove to yourself that you're not “as bad” or maybe “as merely human” you can drift away telling people all you can do is try for other people because you're not getting shit in return. Or maybe you got everything you deserved in being born into the life you got; an equally self-aggrandizing and provoking suicide sentiment.

I don't know. I'm on my couch. I just watched Bicentennial Man, where a comedian I eulogized depicts a robot who just wanted to die recognized for all his humanity.

This pairs well.