Monday, October 18, 2010
Loyalty
Is it any wonder that workers who were not born and raised in America do not feel the same kind of loyalty to this country and to their employers? This case underscores my point.
Throwing the American worker away in the name of cheaper labor from overseas makes sense to the bean-counters, but there will be many unforeseen consequences.
Throwing the American worker away in the name of cheaper labor from overseas makes sense to the bean-counters, but there will be many unforeseen consequences.
Pea-Brained Security Guards
Two pea-brained security guards in Raleigh, North Carolina ejected a lesbian couple in a shopping mall for kissing in public.
It's a shame that the names of the security guards were not released. There should be a public record stored on the Internet for perpetuity, in case another incident arises involving the same individuals, as I fully expect to happen. It is important to establish a history of abuses. If I were hiring security guards, I certainly wouldn't want to have anything to do with those two!
In a later development, the security guard was suspended, while the supervisor will receive sensitivity training. I suspect the supervisor was the one most to blame, though. It is usually the case that lower-ranked employees receive the brunt of correction, whether they were the ones ultimately responsible for a mishap or not.
It's a shame that the names of the security guards were not released. There should be a public record stored on the Internet for perpetuity, in case another incident arises involving the same individuals, as I fully expect to happen. It is important to establish a history of abuses. If I were hiring security guards, I certainly wouldn't want to have anything to do with those two!
In a later development, the security guard was suspended, while the supervisor will receive sensitivity training. I suspect the supervisor was the one most to blame, though. It is usually the case that lower-ranked employees receive the brunt of correction, whether they were the ones ultimately responsible for a mishap or not.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
The DEA and Terrorism
A man connected to the Mumbai terror attack was a long-time informant for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency. His wife tried to warn U.S. officials ahead of time, but was rebuffed.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
Opposition to Proposition 19
Our Attorney General, fed up with the democratic process, threatened California's voters the other day. Since he hates the people of California so much and doesn't believe their vote is worth anything, why doesn't he just move to Iran and serve their dictator? He should take the entire DEA with him. They could join the Basij, their brothers-in-spirit. As we all know, America is the Land of the Free, which apparently is anathema to the likes of him. Who cares about science? Not him. Who cares about the will of the people? Not him. Who cares what the Founding Fathers said and did? Not him. What's the perfect place for him? Iran. Don't worry, Mr. Attorney General. Be happy. Move to Iran.
It is amusing how Prop. 19 has really brought out of the woodwork ignoramuses from Los Angeles to New York, uttering their two cents in support of alcohol's preeminence over pot.
The sheriff of Los Angeles said he will defy the popular vote and act like a dictator, making up his own laws. Presumably, he knows how to read and write. That will be helpful in writing laws. Maybe he can delegate the actual lawmaking to a deputy.
Future generations will marvel that people could be so ignorant, when factual information is widely available and free of charge. All that is required to learn is a trip to the library at most. What keeps people wedded to lies is plain intellectual laziness. They simply haven't the gumption nor the curiosity to question what they have been told. In this way, some human beings behave in the same fashion as robots.
Individuals should not be elected into public office unless they have a decent education in history, science, and literature. Anyone with a sufficient background in those three areas would be capable of researching the history and science of cannabis. They would understand that the substance is less harmful than alcohol, that it is non-toxic to the human body, and that it cannot cause addiction.
There are far too many ignoramuses in government right now, and they have run the country into the ground. Their wrongheaded notions about the world are costing the taxpayers plenty.
It is amusing how Prop. 19 has really brought out of the woodwork ignoramuses from Los Angeles to New York, uttering their two cents in support of alcohol's preeminence over pot.
The sheriff of Los Angeles said he will defy the popular vote and act like a dictator, making up his own laws. Presumably, he knows how to read and write. That will be helpful in writing laws. Maybe he can delegate the actual lawmaking to a deputy.
Future generations will marvel that people could be so ignorant, when factual information is widely available and free of charge. All that is required to learn is a trip to the library at most. What keeps people wedded to lies is plain intellectual laziness. They simply haven't the gumption nor the curiosity to question what they have been told. In this way, some human beings behave in the same fashion as robots.
Individuals should not be elected into public office unless they have a decent education in history, science, and literature. Anyone with a sufficient background in those three areas would be capable of researching the history and science of cannabis. They would understand that the substance is less harmful than alcohol, that it is non-toxic to the human body, and that it cannot cause addiction.
There are far too many ignoramuses in government right now, and they have run the country into the ground. Their wrongheaded notions about the world are costing the taxpayers plenty.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Thank you, Joel Burns
Joel has said what many gay men have wanted to say for a long, long time. I only wish that an older and wiser gay man like him had told me these things when I was a severely depressed fifteen year-old living in a conservative, homophobic area. Nobody I knew was gay. I thought I was the only one in the entire world. I remember that I dog-eared the chapter on suicide in a book on psychology and read it often. My ambition was to gather enough courage to do the deed. I never came close, however. I never even progressed to cutting myself. But I thought about it often and took ridiculous chances that I should not have taken. High-risk behavior is a form of attempted suicide. Death seemed like a perfect answer to all my problems. Perhaps death is one kind of solution, but it is boring, and destroys the possibility of anything good happening. A suicide causes pain in the hearts of good people, even strangers that we do not know, who will observe the death with sorrow. It is strange to think, but true, that people that one does not know care about one's welfare. A suicide hands the ignorant, evil villains an easy victory. We must not give in to evil. And make no mistake, the bullies, the homophobes are the forces of darkness, akin to the Nazis.
Evil-Doers are Arrogant
I have yet to encounter a villain that was not sure of herself. Villains are arrogant. They simply do not reflect upon their actions.
I continually reflect upon my thoughts and deeds. This has the disadvantage of making me less confident. I'm seldom 100% certain that I am right about something. I accept a possibility that I might be mistaken. Evil-doers note my uncertainty and interpret it as a weakness. It is not. It is a strength. Their certainty leads them to certain failure. Whatever they undertake is bound to backfire. Their motives are improper. Their apparent achievements will cause harm to themselves and to others.
It is better to be uncertain and circumspect than arrogant. Let the villains crow. Let them carp. Let them jeer. They create cancers within their lives.
I continually reflect upon my thoughts and deeds. This has the disadvantage of making me less confident. I'm seldom 100% certain that I am right about something. I accept a possibility that I might be mistaken. Evil-doers note my uncertainty and interpret it as a weakness. It is not. It is a strength. Their certainty leads them to certain failure. Whatever they undertake is bound to backfire. Their motives are improper. Their apparent achievements will cause harm to themselves and to others.
It is better to be uncertain and circumspect than arrogant. Let the villains crow. Let them carp. Let them jeer. They create cancers within their lives.
Magic Cat-Water
My partner fell asleep with his favorite cat ensconced by his feet. In his dream, he was thirsty. The cat said, "Here, have some of my magic cat-water!" A cup appeared next to him. He drank it, but it didn't satisfy his thirst. He scolded the cat for the ineffectual cat-water. He got up to fill his empty cup with real water, drank it, but was still thirsty. Then he realized he was asleep, and it was all just a dream. He woke up and got himself real water outside of the dream world.
I have had similar dreams that attempt to satisfy bodily cravings, dreams in which I am drinking, eating, having sex, or more often, urinating. I've never woken up to a soggy bed, however, and I'm glad of that.
I have had similar dreams that attempt to satisfy bodily cravings, dreams in which I am drinking, eating, having sex, or more often, urinating. I've never woken up to a soggy bed, however, and I'm glad of that.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
The Importance of Friends
Sometimes talking to friends is the best medicine. For that reason, making friends may be the most important skill that a person can have. Avoid leeches who only take. Seek out those who are generous to others and polite to others, and be so in turn to them, and you will have good friends.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Intelligent Evil-Doers
The majority of evil-doers never experience any conflict with law enforcement and never see the inside of a prison. Rather than fight the system, they enter the system, becoming a part of it, and subvert it to their ends, like a virus. Incompetent college professors and corrupt college administrators are no different from the shoplifter or the con artist in terms of ethics. They are simply more cunning, hence more successful. Only stupid criminals bother with old-fashioned, out-and-out theft by taking. They must defeat security cameras, private investigators, law enforcement, and concerned citizens. Of course, the vast majority will not succeed in the long run. The odds are stacked against them. Law enforcement is efficient, organized, and well-trained, and more than a match for any individual who thinks he can break the law openly with impunity. Cunning criminals realize this early on. They conform to the letter of the law, at least when being watched, and subvert the intent. They neglect their duties and pursue personal and private agendas designed to satisfy their egos and reduce their work load. As is the case with old-fashioned crime, easy money is the name of the game.
Why I Disabled Anonymous Comments
I disabled anonymous comments on the blog because of an ignoramus that abused the privilege. He posted stupid insults in response to three of my blog posts that were picked at random.
To "An Exchange of Secrets," he wrote, "fudge packer". I don't know what bearing that has on my story. Maybe he didn't read it.
To "The Difficult Assignment," he wrote, "shoulda killed the bitch, faggot," suggesting that violence is his preferred solution to conflicts. Some people imagine they are the only ones in the world with a gun and the ability to use it. They find out, too late, that they are not. Violence is easy. Anyone can be violent. Refraining from violence is difficult. Perhaps he is in prison now, serving time for a pointless and stupid violent crime.
To "Meth or Math," he wrote, "some people can handle their dimethylalphaphenethylamine, you fucking fudge-packer faggot bitch." Not counting him, apparently. I am glad I had enough common sense to avoid hard drugs of addiction such as meth and crack cocaine.
He last posted on 5/31/2010 at 5:59 PM NAEST. Perhaps he is dead now of a drug overdose or facing life imprisonment for murder. It is of no concern to me. If he is still alive, and not comatose in the hospital from a gunshot wound or a drug overdose, perhaps he should read more of my posts and open his mind to learning, instead of hating. It would be a step in the right direction, away from the grave, where he seems headed.
To "An Exchange of Secrets," he wrote, "fudge packer". I don't know what bearing that has on my story. Maybe he didn't read it.
To "The Difficult Assignment," he wrote, "shoulda killed the bitch, faggot," suggesting that violence is his preferred solution to conflicts. Some people imagine they are the only ones in the world with a gun and the ability to use it. They find out, too late, that they are not. Violence is easy. Anyone can be violent. Refraining from violence is difficult. Perhaps he is in prison now, serving time for a pointless and stupid violent crime.
To "Meth or Math," he wrote, "some people can handle their dimethylalphaphenethylamine, you fucking fudge-packer faggot bitch." Not counting him, apparently. I am glad I had enough common sense to avoid hard drugs of addiction such as meth and crack cocaine.
He last posted on 5/31/2010 at 5:59 PM NAEST. Perhaps he is dead now of a drug overdose or facing life imprisonment for murder. It is of no concern to me. If he is still alive, and not comatose in the hospital from a gunshot wound or a drug overdose, perhaps he should read more of my posts and open his mind to learning, instead of hating. It would be a step in the right direction, away from the grave, where he seems headed.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Winning and Losing
The evil conservative Republican professor said this afternoon, "You can't win, you know. I've been doing this for years!" Then she cackled.
Winning and losing. Isn't that the conservative Republican philosophy about life in a nutshell?
I wasn't trying to win. I was trying to learn. I had missed two questions on a ten-question quiz, and I did not understand why one of my answers was incorrect. I was only asking for clarification on a single question. "Ha ha ha, we tricked you! We won again!" she added, in case I missed her point.
Right-wingers like her misinterpret any social interaction with another human being as a contest in which they must prevail. Domination means everything to them. In this manner, she places a cancer in all of her relations with other human beings. But that is her problem, not mine.
Such a cutthroat. I should like to have seen her try one of the medium-difficulty technical problems that I solved during my career. Not the hardest, no, not that. Just a plain, middle-of-the-road, average problem. Yes, that would be amusing, I think.
The crux of the question had to do with whether scientific names for bacteria are italicized or underlined. Her answer, relayed to me by her assistant, is that the genus and species can be either underlined or italicized, even within the same sentence. Consistency is irrelevant, at least according to that bozo. I suspect consistency does matter, because it matters in other branches of English grammar. But I have not yet found any authoritative answer in my online searching. I will remember that in case such a question shows up on a future exam. The question had asked which bacteria were used in a recent experiment. I picked an answer that listed the correct bacteria, but it was wrong, because one of the bacteria was neither italicized or underlined. The right answer had one italicized, and one underlined.
I never intended to challenge the question, anyway. I have no faith in her fairness, impartiality, or sense of right and wrong. I accept that her tests are unfair. Rather than look for correct answers, I intend to psychoanalyze her and choose the answer that best fits her understanding of grammar, science, and logic. I have also decided that a "B" in her class will be sufficient for my purposes and that striving for an "A" would be pointless. She might deduct points on a whim, for personal reasons, and I know very well there is no recourse available for students.
I have decided not to complain about her, even though she treats each class as an advertising medium for her political views and believes that evolution, the backbone of her subject, is a myth. I have already determined, through several experiences, that the college is completely unresponsive to students. I have no faith whatsoever in the administration. Complaints are ignored without any response. It is a hierarchical institution. Students have no voice and are not heeded in any circumstance. "Abandon all Hope, Ye Who Enter," should be engraved upon the entrance-way. My goal is to get what I need and forget I ever attended that little joke of a college. It is a small rural college in a backwards state. Corruption permeates the entire area, and it is only natural that it permeates the educational institutions as well.
Winning and losing. Isn't that the conservative Republican philosophy about life in a nutshell?
I wasn't trying to win. I was trying to learn. I had missed two questions on a ten-question quiz, and I did not understand why one of my answers was incorrect. I was only asking for clarification on a single question. "Ha ha ha, we tricked you! We won again!" she added, in case I missed her point.
Right-wingers like her misinterpret any social interaction with another human being as a contest in which they must prevail. Domination means everything to them. In this manner, she places a cancer in all of her relations with other human beings. But that is her problem, not mine.
Such a cutthroat. I should like to have seen her try one of the medium-difficulty technical problems that I solved during my career. Not the hardest, no, not that. Just a plain, middle-of-the-road, average problem. Yes, that would be amusing, I think.
The crux of the question had to do with whether scientific names for bacteria are italicized or underlined. Her answer, relayed to me by her assistant, is that the genus and species can be either underlined or italicized, even within the same sentence. Consistency is irrelevant, at least according to that bozo. I suspect consistency does matter, because it matters in other branches of English grammar. But I have not yet found any authoritative answer in my online searching. I will remember that in case such a question shows up on a future exam. The question had asked which bacteria were used in a recent experiment. I picked an answer that listed the correct bacteria, but it was wrong, because one of the bacteria was neither italicized or underlined. The right answer had one italicized, and one underlined.
I never intended to challenge the question, anyway. I have no faith in her fairness, impartiality, or sense of right and wrong. I accept that her tests are unfair. Rather than look for correct answers, I intend to psychoanalyze her and choose the answer that best fits her understanding of grammar, science, and logic. I have also decided that a "B" in her class will be sufficient for my purposes and that striving for an "A" would be pointless. She might deduct points on a whim, for personal reasons, and I know very well there is no recourse available for students.
I have decided not to complain about her, even though she treats each class as an advertising medium for her political views and believes that evolution, the backbone of her subject, is a myth. I have already determined, through several experiences, that the college is completely unresponsive to students. I have no faith whatsoever in the administration. Complaints are ignored without any response. It is a hierarchical institution. Students have no voice and are not heeded in any circumstance. "Abandon all Hope, Ye Who Enter," should be engraved upon the entrance-way. My goal is to get what I need and forget I ever attended that little joke of a college. It is a small rural college in a backwards state. Corruption permeates the entire area, and it is only natural that it permeates the educational institutions as well.
A Roman of the Late Empire
I used to wonder how a Roman of the Late Empire would feel about the decay and sense of loss all around him. I wonder no more. If the country is already in an economic quagmire, with two ongoing foreign wars and one domestic drug war, and the environment is showing signs of accelerating global warming, and the country, in its desperation, places conservative Republicans in charge, the authors of so many calamities, there does not seem much basis for hope.
Are we doomed as a world power? The thought would not disturb me if I thought China were a moral nation, but it has its own share of problems, which are greater than ours in many ways. It is possible, as some people have suggested to me, that the U.S. and China are headed for war at some future date, which would be catastrophic on many levels. China was once our ally.
I believe that FOX News is a danger to our country. That media source exaggerates and distorts with apparent impunity. There is a tribe of true believers that simply accept everything they hear. They are "Murdoch's Army." Although the lies are sometimes exposed on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," people just keep on watching. It is like an addiction. I wonder how long it will last.
Are we doomed as a world power? The thought would not disturb me if I thought China were a moral nation, but it has its own share of problems, which are greater than ours in many ways. It is possible, as some people have suggested to me, that the U.S. and China are headed for war at some future date, which would be catastrophic on many levels. China was once our ally.
I believe that FOX News is a danger to our country. That media source exaggerates and distorts with apparent impunity. There is a tribe of true believers that simply accept everything they hear. They are "Murdoch's Army." Although the lies are sometimes exposed on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," people just keep on watching. It is like an addiction. I wonder how long it will last.
Monday, October 11, 2010
Another Ethically Challenged Conservative Republican
When my parents taught, they avoided political subjects and references to controversial issues unrelated to the subject of the class. My conservative Republican professor has no such scruple. Every class period, she devotes several minutes to promoting her conservative, fundamentalist Christian, Republican point of view, although her opinions seldom have any relevance at all to the subject of the course.
Here are some of her viewpoints. Bear in mind that the course subject is science, not philosophy, religion, or politics.
I try to remind myself not to feel threatened by this professor. Sometimes I feel it is my duty to challenge her statements, but then I realize the contest is uneven, and I would likely lose something, either the respect of other students or my grade. By certain of her comments to me, she has revealed an awareness that I want to challenge her, but she is exultant over the security of her position. She crows and cackles like a Hollywood witch--"Eeee-heee-heee-heee!" Her unusual confidence is interesting in light of her general paranoia concerning reality. This leads me to another conclusion. I believe she has solid relations with her higher-ups and has been given encouragement. She is indeed powerful, at least to the limited extent possible within her position at a small college, as well as evil. To the evil person, power is everything, and she has it over her students.
However, there are many things that she does not know or understand. I will not share the things that I know with her, because I do not trust her either to be fair or to listen. I do not think that her strange opinions will gain much currency among the students, who are smarter than she gives them credit for.
In the end, her kind will find the conflict they crave, the war that satisfies their blood-lust. I know that she seeks war, longs for it, thinks herself a hero, although she is not. She is a minor servant of darkness, nothing more and nothing less. I have had teachers like her before. She thinks young people turn atheist after listening to atheist teachers. The opposite is true. Rabid believers transformed me from a believer into an atheist during my teenage years. Listening to her makes me ever more sympathetic to atheism. Sometimes I feel sorry for God, that he is misrepresented by charlatans that know nothing about spirituality. Their sole concern is power in this world and dominance over others. The message of Jesus has been lost in the distant past. They would rather shout the name Jesus a thousand times rather than discuss the specifics of his message, which is inconvenient for their political agenda. I think this is what I felt as a boy of thirteen, that the church-goers were hypocrites, and that they had nothing to do with goodness.
Here are some of her viewpoints. Bear in mind that the course subject is science, not philosophy, religion, or politics.
- Evolution is a myth. "You can't get a pig from a dog." I never expected to hear that old canard from someone with an advanced degree in science.
- The homosexuals are responsible for the AIDS epidemic.
- Teenagers should be taught abstinence, not about safer sex, because condoms don't work. (Certainly no one would want to use a condom with her, and trouble with a condom would be a great excuse for her partner, akin to "honey, not tonight, I've got a headache.").
- "Middle school students are meeting in the restroom to have sex and use drugs." Perhaps they are in her imagination.
- Internet pornography is turning everyone (presumably including herself) into sicko's. (I really don't know where this came from--she just blurted it out of the blue.)
- You have to have faith in God to be healthy. "This has been scientifically proven," at least according to her satisfaction. Trust in God, she says, is required for a functioning immune system.
I try to remind myself not to feel threatened by this professor. Sometimes I feel it is my duty to challenge her statements, but then I realize the contest is uneven, and I would likely lose something, either the respect of other students or my grade. By certain of her comments to me, she has revealed an awareness that I want to challenge her, but she is exultant over the security of her position. She crows and cackles like a Hollywood witch--"Eeee-heee-heee-heee!" Her unusual confidence is interesting in light of her general paranoia concerning reality. This leads me to another conclusion. I believe she has solid relations with her higher-ups and has been given encouragement. She is indeed powerful, at least to the limited extent possible within her position at a small college, as well as evil. To the evil person, power is everything, and she has it over her students.
However, there are many things that she does not know or understand. I will not share the things that I know with her, because I do not trust her either to be fair or to listen. I do not think that her strange opinions will gain much currency among the students, who are smarter than she gives them credit for.
In the end, her kind will find the conflict they crave, the war that satisfies their blood-lust. I know that she seeks war, longs for it, thinks herself a hero, although she is not. She is a minor servant of darkness, nothing more and nothing less. I have had teachers like her before. She thinks young people turn atheist after listening to atheist teachers. The opposite is true. Rabid believers transformed me from a believer into an atheist during my teenage years. Listening to her makes me ever more sympathetic to atheism. Sometimes I feel sorry for God, that he is misrepresented by charlatans that know nothing about spirituality. Their sole concern is power in this world and dominance over others. The message of Jesus has been lost in the distant past. They would rather shout the name Jesus a thousand times rather than discuss the specifics of his message, which is inconvenient for their political agenda. I think this is what I felt as a boy of thirteen, that the church-goers were hypocrites, and that they had nothing to do with goodness.
Carl von Ossietzky
The popular interest in the life and times of Adolf Hitler represents a failure or a perversion of the human imagination. German Pacifist Carl von Ossietzky, who opposed Hitler, was a better man and worthier of the numerous biographies, books, and films that have been made instead of worthless, evil scum like Hitler.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
The Death Penalty
A horrible crime made the headlines recently, and the death penalty has again come up as a topic of conversation. I have had different opinions on the issue in my lifetime. Up to the age of twenty-something, I supported the death penalty for murderers. Then I began to notice many problems related to the real-world implementation of the death penalty. The main problem is that murder suspects typically cannot afford adequate legal representation. The trial and sentencing tends to be a foregone conclusion. When rich men commit a crime, they often receive a lenient punishment, whether their crime was murder or not.
When I read the details about certain murders, my heart breaks, and my blood boils. I would be loathe to provide any assistance, legal or otherwise, to someone that committed a horribly violent crime against another person. That is why the death penalty is seldom discussed on my blog. I concede that the death penalty is not a perfect solution, but it may have a therapeutic effect upon surviving friends and family members. They at least will know that the murderer is not alive to boast about his deeds.
People think that the death penalty equates to being "tough on crime." However, in my estimation, life in prison is not more lenient than death. To never be free again, to never walk in the sunshine without being monitored, to be among other murderers and assorted scum--that seems to me a fate much worse than death. One positive aspect of the death penalty is that, in the United States at least, the implementation tends to be painless. Most of us can only hope for a painless death. Cancer or heart disease await, and they are not painless.
Like all things, the human implementation of the death penalty is not perfect. Mistakes happen. There are cases where an innocent man may be put to death for a crime he did not commit, although this is probably rare. An even more troubling scenario involves official corruption. Law enforcement officials may pervert the course of justice in order to cover up inconvenient details. Dead men tell no tales!
Perhaps the best answer lies in prevention, rather than punishment. If we can stop the birth of human beings that lack a conscience, then murder can be eliminated from the human family. If we can develop a social philosophy where each man respects the other like a brother, then violent crime can be eliminated. I believe it can happen, although we are far from achieving such a solution today. What is needed is more scientific knowledge about human growth and development.
I believe that much-maligned eugenics offers a potential solution to many ancient problems, such as crime, war, poverty, mental illness, and physical diseases. I do not know enough about science to describe the ways in which a successful eugenics program could be implemented, but I will say without hesitation that skin color is irrelevant. Eugenics received a setback from the racists of the 19th and 20th centuries, who made sweeping assumptions based upon pseudoscience. A new word needs to be coined in order to avoid comparisons to the horrible eugenics programs of the past. Right now, anyone speaking in favor of eugenics has to play defense, as I have, in order to avoid the charge of racism. Of course, any eugenics program would have to be voluntary, compassionate, and focused upon clear and certain advantages, and even so, it would not be without risk. Tampering with Nature is not without risk, as we have discovered from our use of pesticides. But taking a chance is preferable to accepting the status quo.
When I read the details about certain murders, my heart breaks, and my blood boils. I would be loathe to provide any assistance, legal or otherwise, to someone that committed a horribly violent crime against another person. That is why the death penalty is seldom discussed on my blog. I concede that the death penalty is not a perfect solution, but it may have a therapeutic effect upon surviving friends and family members. They at least will know that the murderer is not alive to boast about his deeds.
People think that the death penalty equates to being "tough on crime." However, in my estimation, life in prison is not more lenient than death. To never be free again, to never walk in the sunshine without being monitored, to be among other murderers and assorted scum--that seems to me a fate much worse than death. One positive aspect of the death penalty is that, in the United States at least, the implementation tends to be painless. Most of us can only hope for a painless death. Cancer or heart disease await, and they are not painless.
Like all things, the human implementation of the death penalty is not perfect. Mistakes happen. There are cases where an innocent man may be put to death for a crime he did not commit, although this is probably rare. An even more troubling scenario involves official corruption. Law enforcement officials may pervert the course of justice in order to cover up inconvenient details. Dead men tell no tales!
Perhaps the best answer lies in prevention, rather than punishment. If we can stop the birth of human beings that lack a conscience, then murder can be eliminated from the human family. If we can develop a social philosophy where each man respects the other like a brother, then violent crime can be eliminated. I believe it can happen, although we are far from achieving such a solution today. What is needed is more scientific knowledge about human growth and development.
I believe that much-maligned eugenics offers a potential solution to many ancient problems, such as crime, war, poverty, mental illness, and physical diseases. I do not know enough about science to describe the ways in which a successful eugenics program could be implemented, but I will say without hesitation that skin color is irrelevant. Eugenics received a setback from the racists of the 19th and 20th centuries, who made sweeping assumptions based upon pseudoscience. A new word needs to be coined in order to avoid comparisons to the horrible eugenics programs of the past. Right now, anyone speaking in favor of eugenics has to play defense, as I have, in order to avoid the charge of racism. Of course, any eugenics program would have to be voluntary, compassionate, and focused upon clear and certain advantages, and even so, it would not be without risk. Tampering with Nature is not without risk, as we have discovered from our use of pesticides. But taking a chance is preferable to accepting the status quo.
Monday, October 4, 2010
A Batch that Parses Filenames in a Directory
This batch file is deceptively simple. What does it do? Absolutely nothing. However, each filename within a directory is parsed and made available for use. A programmer may add commands to manipulate each file within the :process subroutine. I created this for my brother, who needed this particular capability. Many thanks to innumerable strangers on the Internet that have written guides and tutorials on Batch language, because I often forget the syntax of the FOR command, which must be the most complicated in Batch language. If it were not for Google, I would be tempted to abandon Batch altogether, as most programmers have. But there is something cool about running a program straight from Windows that doesn't require compilation or any additional interpreter.
---------
---------
@echo off
cls
dir /b /a-d *.mp3 > temp.txt
if not exist temp.txt echo No Mp3 files found!
if not exist temp.txt pause
if not exist temp.txt exit
echo Temporary file has been created.
pause
rem -----------------------------------------------------
rem The following FOR statement must be one line, not two
rem (Beware of Blogger's word wrap.)
rem -----------------------------------------------------
FOR /F "usebackq tokens=1,2 delims=-" %%a in (temp.txt) DO call :process "%%a" "%%b"
rem -----------------------------------------------------
echo.
echo Alas, We Have Reached The End.
echo.
pause
exit
:process
set VAR1=%1
rem Trim quotes
for /f "useback tokens=*" %%a in ('%VAR1%') do set VAR1=%%~a
echo VAR1=%VAR1%
set VAR2=%2
rem Trim quotes
for /f "useback tokens=*" %%a in ('%VAR2%') do set VAR2=%%~a
echo VAR2=%VAR2%
set filename=%VAR1%- %VAR2%
echo %filename%
pause
goto :EOFSunday, October 3, 2010
Social Darwinism
I emerged from an impromptu debate this morning with a conservative Republican more convinced than ever that social Darwinism is the belief underpinning many right-wing views.
It is easy to judge the poor and to assume that their failings are the result of inferior blood. I do not believe this is so, but it is a commonly held viewpoint. The homeless, in particular, are not easy on the eyes, in some cases, and they are visible, whereas rich business criminals are invisible, cloistered away upon private estates. The poor are tainted by the accusations of laziness, ignorance, and criminality. How do I explain to someone that a rich person is not necessarily superior in virtue and merit to a poor person? It seems like an uphill battle. Conservative Republicans are enraged by the thought that a poor black man may be sitting on his front porch all day long without working. The thought of a wealthy business criminal cheating the city out of millions of dollars inspires not the faintest annoyance--in fact, the behavior is defended in the name of freedom! I suspect that racism plays a role in the appeal of social Darwinism.
Many people say that they oppose Obama's health care plan because they do not want their tax money to be used to provide medical services to the poor. They would even prefer that the poor die, if it comes to that. In their view, the poor are poor because they are lazy or stupid. That is sometimes true, but not always. Should our society allow the lazy and the stupid to die? The Republican answer appears to be yes. In the name of evolution, or a stronger country at any rate, we should dispense with the weak, and favor the strong, or so it is thought.
I believe that the rich are often made so by their parents. They receive the right kind of encouragement and reinforcement and go on to be successful or at least inherit their parent's wealth and become adequate stewards of the savings bonds, real estate or other investments. Some people become rich through their own efforts. They may have been honest in doing so, although some are corrupt and become rich through dishonest schemes that harm the public.
The poor are often born into poverty or may have been disadvantaged in any number of ways. Why should we keep them alive? What benefit accrues to society when the poor are offered free medical care? That question, I cannot answer with statistics or sound bites, because I'm not a policy wonk. I don't know whether any practical benefit accrues to society by offering free medicine to a poor person. Perhaps there is no benefit at all. Even so, I would prefer to be in a society where we do not throw people away. It is an aesthetic choice, like my preference in art or music. I want a beautiful world, a compassionate world. I think it will be better and even stronger, but can I prove it? I cannot. Perhaps someone like Richard Dawkins could prove it--he has tried, at any rate. See "Nice Guys Finish First," his 1987 video on the practical benefits of cooperation.
If material success is, indeed, the end-all and be-all of a human being, then the obvious implications would come as a rude shock to many conservative Republicans that are far from wealthy. Those that society deems inferior are not necessarily so. Society has many delusions. Assumptions that are made in one generation can be turned upon their face in the next.
Once a human being is born into this world, he has become a member of our extended family, and his medical needs should be attended by the government. In our modern world, no one should have to face injury, cancer, or heart disease alone without any resources to assist them. If a man is troubled in his mind, then he should receive psychiatric care. If a man has a bodily ailment, he should receive the care of a physician or nurse. Lack of medical care assists the enemies of humankind, pathogenic bacteria and viruses, and it is not only the poor who will suffer, but those that they later infect. We are not isolated beings, but networked in a multitude of ways, and what afflicts one can afflict others. Lack of medical care results in more crime, more traffic accidents, more tragedy, and unintended consequences. Furthermore, when people find themselves in desperate situations, they sometimes lash out against society, with unpleasant consequences for everyone. I believe it is correct to avoid unpleasant circumstances or at least seek to mitigate them.
It is easy to judge the poor and to assume that their failings are the result of inferior blood. I do not believe this is so, but it is a commonly held viewpoint. The homeless, in particular, are not easy on the eyes, in some cases, and they are visible, whereas rich business criminals are invisible, cloistered away upon private estates. The poor are tainted by the accusations of laziness, ignorance, and criminality. How do I explain to someone that a rich person is not necessarily superior in virtue and merit to a poor person? It seems like an uphill battle. Conservative Republicans are enraged by the thought that a poor black man may be sitting on his front porch all day long without working. The thought of a wealthy business criminal cheating the city out of millions of dollars inspires not the faintest annoyance--in fact, the behavior is defended in the name of freedom! I suspect that racism plays a role in the appeal of social Darwinism.
Many people say that they oppose Obama's health care plan because they do not want their tax money to be used to provide medical services to the poor. They would even prefer that the poor die, if it comes to that. In their view, the poor are poor because they are lazy or stupid. That is sometimes true, but not always. Should our society allow the lazy and the stupid to die? The Republican answer appears to be yes. In the name of evolution, or a stronger country at any rate, we should dispense with the weak, and favor the strong, or so it is thought.
I believe that the rich are often made so by their parents. They receive the right kind of encouragement and reinforcement and go on to be successful or at least inherit their parent's wealth and become adequate stewards of the savings bonds, real estate or other investments. Some people become rich through their own efforts. They may have been honest in doing so, although some are corrupt and become rich through dishonest schemes that harm the public.
The poor are often born into poverty or may have been disadvantaged in any number of ways. Why should we keep them alive? What benefit accrues to society when the poor are offered free medical care? That question, I cannot answer with statistics or sound bites, because I'm not a policy wonk. I don't know whether any practical benefit accrues to society by offering free medicine to a poor person. Perhaps there is no benefit at all. Even so, I would prefer to be in a society where we do not throw people away. It is an aesthetic choice, like my preference in art or music. I want a beautiful world, a compassionate world. I think it will be better and even stronger, but can I prove it? I cannot. Perhaps someone like Richard Dawkins could prove it--he has tried, at any rate. See "Nice Guys Finish First," his 1987 video on the practical benefits of cooperation.
If material success is, indeed, the end-all and be-all of a human being, then the obvious implications would come as a rude shock to many conservative Republicans that are far from wealthy. Those that society deems inferior are not necessarily so. Society has many delusions. Assumptions that are made in one generation can be turned upon their face in the next.
Once a human being is born into this world, he has become a member of our extended family, and his medical needs should be attended by the government. In our modern world, no one should have to face injury, cancer, or heart disease alone without any resources to assist them. If a man is troubled in his mind, then he should receive psychiatric care. If a man has a bodily ailment, he should receive the care of a physician or nurse. Lack of medical care assists the enemies of humankind, pathogenic bacteria and viruses, and it is not only the poor who will suffer, but those that they later infect. We are not isolated beings, but networked in a multitude of ways, and what afflicts one can afflict others. Lack of medical care results in more crime, more traffic accidents, more tragedy, and unintended consequences. Furthermore, when people find themselves in desperate situations, they sometimes lash out against society, with unpleasant consequences for everyone. I believe it is correct to avoid unpleasant circumstances or at least seek to mitigate them.
Friday, October 1, 2010
What if I Lose My Two Pet Issues?
On this blog, it must be obvious that my two pet issues are gays, or at least gay rights, and marijuana prohibition, to which I am opposed.
Once pot becomes legal and regulated in a similar manner as alcohol, and gays achieve parity with straights, the question arises--what do I blog about next? I see victory on the horizon on both fronts, at least in the long-term. The facts are out there for people to access via the Internet, and I don't think the misinformation that was used in the past to block reform will be able to survive for much longer.
If homosexuality were no longer an issue, then I would be most concerned with issues that are held in common with many others. Primarily, the environment would be of concern to me. I am for government regulation and intervention in order to protect our shared heritage, the planet Earth, for future generations of human beings. Even though I won't be contributing any future generations myself, I still consider the human race my "family" and want what is best for them. I think that underneath the skin, we are pretty much the same, regardless of sexuality, race, and so on.
There are many other issues, of course, such as corruption in government, the electoral process, and immigration. However, the only issue that really seems of paramount importance is the environment. Global warming seems like a threat to our comfortable modern lifestyle, and I would be interested in seeing the problem addressed in an effective manner. At a minimum, our leaders should be discussing it in an informed and realistic manner.
Once pot becomes legal and regulated in a similar manner as alcohol, and gays achieve parity with straights, the question arises--what do I blog about next? I see victory on the horizon on both fronts, at least in the long-term. The facts are out there for people to access via the Internet, and I don't think the misinformation that was used in the past to block reform will be able to survive for much longer.
If homosexuality were no longer an issue, then I would be most concerned with issues that are held in common with many others. Primarily, the environment would be of concern to me. I am for government regulation and intervention in order to protect our shared heritage, the planet Earth, for future generations of human beings. Even though I won't be contributing any future generations myself, I still consider the human race my "family" and want what is best for them. I think that underneath the skin, we are pretty much the same, regardless of sexuality, race, and so on.
There are many other issues, of course, such as corruption in government, the electoral process, and immigration. However, the only issue that really seems of paramount importance is the environment. Global warming seems like a threat to our comfortable modern lifestyle, and I would be interested in seeing the problem addressed in an effective manner. At a minimum, our leaders should be discussing it in an informed and realistic manner.
Monday, September 27, 2010
If I Were President
If I were President, I'd abolish the DEA and transfer their budget over to the Department of Energy. And when the Prohibitionists started weeping and moaning, I'd point out that the DEA did not exist for most of our nation's history, yet somehow the country got by just fine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)