Forgotten principle

Salander

6/12/13

APL&C

A Forgotten Principle. 

I am a hopeless romantic and a stubborn idealist who is under constant pressure to grow up and become a realist. When I look at mankind every day I can't help but feel slightly disappointed. I am not disappointed because I feel as if humans are in any lack of accomplishment, I actually feel quite the opposite. I am proud to be a part of this species, I am proud of the steps we have made and I am proud of the steps we continue to make. Yet, being the person I am, I can't help feel that we've lost something. Sure we continue to strive, we make scientific advances and we make leaps in societal goals like steps towards universal equality. Yet, we've changed. Some would say for the better, I say otherwise. I am glad to be stubborn and steadfast, I think it is a powerful trait. It was Emerson who said “To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.” (Emerson, The Poet)

We live in a dangerous world. That is true. It is filled with dangerous things, dangerous places and dangerous people. It is hard, in such a place, to keep compassion. In the past, compassion was something that was a virtue in society, now it is seen as a hindrance and a weakness. In our capitalist world, our dog-eat-dog world, where everyone fends for themselves so that they can survive, such a notion as compassion for others is tossed aside. Instead, we are told by the so called “successful” who tell us such things as “Greed is good” and convince us all, albeit implicitly, that security (especially economic security) are the root to happiness and in order to obtain it, one must step on a few toes and cannot be a “sissy” who stops to give others the time of day. We are told that we need to grow up and face facts, the world is not a kind place and we need to accept that.

Such notions of self indulgence masked by the necessity for survival have spread like a disease in a crowded space. Now because it has been said to be true, it has become true. Humans treat each other as merely steps or tools for creating their ivory towers. One who may be reading this may say to themselves “Well things have always been so, thats just how life is. That is just human nature” It is exactly that defeatist and lazy attitude that has allowed things to be as they are.

At the dawn of civilization, when mankind began to settle down and give up the nomadic life to group farms and homes together to form the first villages, all humans were aware of the symbiotic relationship they had. Not only were they aware of it, they cherished it. Early man knew that he depended on his fellow agriculturalists to keep his family going, they would share the food for nourishment, the herbs for healing and the weapons for defense. Yet how can I prove that it wasn't merely a means to an end that motivated these pioneers? How can I prove that they weren't driven by selfishness? I can say that it was selflessness and affection for one another that drove them forward and allowed for the growth of civilization. This is evident because the life of the farmer and of the villager and of the caretaker (the style of life that would lead to the birth of civilization as we know it) was, near the end of the time of the nomads, more dangerous than that of the nomad. Men who were caretakers and breadwinners for their families would live shorter lives and wouldn't even grow as tall as nomads. Yet they formed the symbiotic bond regardless in order to protect the weak. It was neither motivated by both compassion for one another and a need for survival. There was a balance. However, I believe that the balance has shifted to one side.

I believe civilization was born with the intent of nurturing one another and to escape from the harsh and unforgiving world of the wilderness where every creature must fight for survival, and create a forgiving alternative. An outsider wouldn't know that from looking us today for the first time. Mankind has left one wilderness and created another. We fight for our survival once again. The weak are tossed aside once again. We are animals once again

I think civilization has slowly been shifting to this state since its creation, but I think certain ideologies and practices, such as mercantilism, capitalism and even Calvinism and its idealogical descendants, have hastened the transfer. If only civilization could return to its conception state for as Thoreau reminds us, “I have always been regretting that I was not as wise
as the day I was born.” (Walden, Where I Lived and What I Lived For) Wisdom often decreases with age instead of the commonly held belief to the contrary.

Man has become afraid, afraid of being able to balance taking care of themselves and one another. So what does man do? He lies. To himself and to others. He says that one can only survive in life is if he fights for himself and his own first, and for others second. He says that it is human nature to do so, so that he may rationalize what he has done. He convinces many that what he has done is part of the human condition and it is natural for they to do thus. Now mankind has the excuse to allow them to take each other's rights away and each other's lives away and pretty much anything else. We all think in a Machiavellian sense, looking at what we can gain from each human encounter to help amass a larger treasure which we defend with our lives. My own home is a testament to this current condition mankind finds himself in.

It is here, in Fairfield County the wealthiest county in one of the wealthiest countries in the world and my home, that mankind's selfishness can be seen to its full extent. The fact that this nation's most evident examples of decadence in communities such as Greenwich and Westport, can exist within the same county as, and in such close proximity to, such destitute towns as Bridgeport is an insult to what we call humanity. Bridgeport's slums, which are extremely dangerous due to the low socioeconomic class of the populace, lie only a couple of miles away from the estates of this century's robber barons. It is almost as if America is suffering from a reprise to the age of Rockefeller and Carnegie, when socioeconomic divides were as wide as the rapidly expanding nation was.

Yet, the rich sit in their mansions and watch the rest of us like a 17th century European aristocrat watching his serfs and peasantry. They have little care or concern for anyone else or their plight. In fact, some may even argue that the poor have earned their lot. They claim that things are so because of “Social Darwinism”, a term meant to coax the rich into feeling not-guilty about being rich, but instead to feel superior to their common, less successful, man (Ayn Rand would be so proud). To the bourgeois menace, a self made rich man is rich because he is genetically superior and therefore more likely to succeed. The philosophy of Social Darwinism dictates that all peoples are created equal in opportunity and that environment, economic situation and certain media exposure have little to do with monetary success compared with genetics. Such a way of thinking was behind all manner of European genocide including but not limited to the colonization of Africa and Germany's holocaust in the 20th century (rationalized by the Nazi's twisted concept of “Ubermensch”) It is also the same concept of thought as “divine right” that justified the rule of the European monarchs and nobility. These thoughts allow America's wealthy to sleep peacefully at night while their brethren lie starving and dying without a job just a ways off. Though, they may throw their money at a charity or a public service they vaguely understand once in a while to make themselves feel better and gain some morality points with their peers or with their god[s]. God is a topic commonly brought up by the puppets of the oppressors through media outlets. How demented it is, that Christianity is manipulated and twisted to form political agendas and the root of the message, compassion for all human beings, is forgotten.

“But Jesus makes his appearance here only as a corpse; the living man, the wine-guzzling vagrant and precocious socialist, is never once mentioned, nor anything he ever had to say.”

-Barbara Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed

Then they convince many of us with their nationalist propaganda that we are the freest peoples on earth and our rights supersede all others. I believe the words of Frederick Douglass describing the conditions of the slaves in America and their perspective of the fourth of July are true also for the poor of America today: “To him (the slave), your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sound of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciation of tyrants brass fronted impudence; your shout of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanks-givings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, are to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy -- a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages.” To call a person free who is surrendering an ungodly amount of hours of their life performing demeaning acts to earn a wage that is barely enough to make a living, or one who lives off of the streets, is an insult. Yet such is the condition of the poor and working man.

As I see it, Social Darwinism is refuted by every basic version of human morality and ethics and would/should therefore be seen as wrong if it were a perfect world. However, realism dismisses such ethics and morality and claims them to be mere romantic notions concocted to create an effect similar to dopamine in the bloodstream, easing the pain experienced yet not offering anything healthy and/or practical. Well I say realism can go eat it. It spreads like the bubonic plague, killing our hopes and aspirations and covering us with lesions of despair.

However, This is not who we are. This is not who we were born to be, who we were meant to be. In the words of Jamaica Kincaid:

“You are not an ugly person all the time; you are not an ugly person ordinarily; you are not an ugly person day to day. From day to day, you are a nice person. From day to day, all the people who are supposed to love you on the whole do......”

-Jamaica Kincaid, A Small Place

Humanity is capable of kindness and compassion and I believe it to be our natural state. Even the rich, whom I have so harshly criticized, have a place in the world should they take up the cause of the betterment for humankind.

“Once you cease to be a master, once you throw off your master's yoke, you are no longer human rubbish, you are a human being, and all the things that adds up to.”

-Jamaica Kincaid, A Small Place

Whatever I do in my life, whatever I choose to do (I have no idea what I wish to do yet) I know that I will be someone who takes up the common gauntlet of an idealist fighting for a change in human thought. Such a change shall be accomplished by inspiring others through my own actions, for I am also someone who has fallen victim to the cancer of hyper-realism. I have lost faith in humanity before (or at least, seemingly so) and I still have my doubts, but I do believe our compassion is innate and a radical shift towards becoming more compassionate would be revolutionary. However, I do not claim to be a revolutionary, nor to be the sole proponent of my cause, but I believe my place in the world is to rally some sort of faith in the humanity of humanity through action and example. I think I am someone who has the capability to call people out on their wrongdoing and I think I can help to inspire others to do thus. My place is to help to unlock the doors to human potential that have long been shut.

Barf Blog?

Barfblog has a self proclaimed criteria. In the "about us" tab on Barf blog it states that their posts are and must be:
- evidence based opinions
- backed with reliable and relevant sources
- related to food safety issues
- edited by fellow barfblog bloggers

The goal of the sites infosheets is claimed to be:
- surprising and compelling messages;
- putting actions and their consequence in context;
- generating discussion within the target audiences’ environments; and
- using verbal narrative, or storytelling, as a message delivery device.

Doug Powell writes a humorously titled blog, "Chicks still making people sick in other states" on an outbreak of Salmonellosis in Minnesota. Powell is Professor of food safety at Kansas State University and one of the publishers of Barfblog.

Powell successfully meets the criteria of Barfblog in this short but succinct blog. He cites the Minnesota Department of Health and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as sources for his data. These sources are reliable and dependable but Powell fails to produce a link or footnote to a website or pdf proving the validity of his citation. The blog reads a bit like a news article rather than a blog, as it lacks a sense of personality or opinion. It is almost as if the author vomited (or barfed, rather) factual statements all over the screen. This is a major problem as the website states that this blog is meant for evidence based opinions. If this is truly a goal of the website's bloggers, then it should be the priority of the author of any blog on said website to make their agenda clear and not to assume its inferred. Powell doesn't even attempt to take the data from the blog, and make some sort of statement with it. I guess you could argue that the title of his blog could be some sort of comical quasi-argument but it is hardly so.

I'll give it to Powell that the blog is relevant in that it is related to food safety, but that’s hardly enough. The reason people use blogs as a new source is because they have a degree of bias to them that makes them interesting. It is a lot more entertaining to hear a story or report from someone who isn't being paid to appear neutral or isn't implicitly inferring their opinions in an underhanded fashion. Many people prefer the bluntness of blogs to the monotonous tone of  newscasts. If the writer of such a blog does not include a personal opinion or insight, like Powell has done, then the blog is stale and not differentiable from other news sources. Neutrality takes the very essence away that makes blogs unique. 

Swedish Chef part 2

In my household, the men cook. This is how it has been in my paternal family for generations. Not only is a household duty for the men in our family, but it has become a hobby and a passion for some of us.
Throughout my life, i have known my father's greatest creative outlet to be cooking. Although he is an artist, he makes money off of commissions and has little time for free composition. Cooking is an art that doesn't require too much time and has allowed my father to experiment with new ideas or concepts. He will always try new recipes and play around with new ways of cooking old ones. 
The only other chefs alive in my paternal family are my father, my grandfather Sune and my uncle Jens (yes he is also named Jens). My grandfather and uncle are both also artists. My Grandfather worked with artistic carpentry all his life and my uncle is a painting and photography professor. When not in a kitchen, these men might be found quarrelling and tearing open old wounds from childhood in vicious arguements. When preparing a dish together, however, all ill will is forgotten. Cooking is therapeutic for the men of the Salander family. The three of them work cooperatively and move around the kitchen like a team of professional dancers who seem incredibly focused on the task at hand despite the jokes, old stories and general warm-heartedness that accompany these sessions.
My grandfather displays his patriarchy at the stove as he lectures my father and uncle on their cookery like a teacher to a pair of schoolboys. The two middle aged men listen to their father, taking mental notes, then right their mistakes and continue their work. This knowledge allows him to restore his fatherly role and provide wisdom to men who are already well into life. The two brothers listen to him without protest and follow his instructions carefully. "Sune is the Master" says uncle Jens.
 I, being the third generation of cook, am an amateur. I still have much to learn from the Swedish chefs. That is not to say I am particularly unskilled, just unpractised. I thoroughly enjoy cooking, especially alongside my Grandfather when visiting him. My poor Swedish and his poor English create a barrier between the two of us that is seemingly broken when I am helping him prepare Schnitzel or Cordon Bleu. He'll display his inherit silly nature, a mirror image of my father's, by interrupting my dicing of vegetables with a Frisbee toss of a flat-bread circle. I have learned more about my grandfather and what I hold in common with him from the fun we've had in the kitchen together than the broken conversations we've had. I've learned that my Grandfather is a dedicated and focused man who is also a charismatic goof and exhibitionist almost to a fault. Sune is truly the master of the kitchen.
 Past the threshold of this room, Sune loses his aura of authority and we are once again reminded of his feebleness and growing age. In the kitchen he is king and unlike his eyesight and sense of balance, his prestige as a chef can never fade.
Sune is 92 and is currently in the hospital in Gavle , Sweden as we speak and is fading fast. His health has been deteriorating at an increased rate in the last month or two. My father believes he will pass away before our annual visit in August. Even if this is not so, I don't think he will be able to fill the  role he had because his vertigo, frailty and loss of eyesight will live him practically bedridden. My grandfather's connection to his sons through food and the art of cooking are the adhesives that hold my paternal family together. I don't know what the absence of this will mean for my father or his relationship with his brother.
For me, this is truly devastating because although my grandfather and I have shared some truly intimate moments the language barrier still separates the two of us. I have not heard his fantastic tales nor recounted old memories with him. It is painful to listen to him speak so eloquently and watch the rest of my family be completely enthralled in his oratory when I can only understand a few phrases. Of course, my father retells them to me in English but I am reminded "they're just not the same, I can't do it like Sune can" or "its better in Swedish" I feel guilty and left out of a grand experience. But I am reminded that any time I wanted to view my grandfather, the glue of my paternal family, In his fully glory all I need do is go to the kitchen and watch him work.

MR. CLEMENT: Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court:

The issue of same-sex marriage certainly implicates profound and deeply held views on both sides of the issue, but the legal question on the merits before this Court is actually quite narrow. On the assumption that States have the constitutional option either to define marriage in traditional terms or to recognize same-sex marriages or to adopt a compromise like civil unions, does the Federal Government have the same flexibility or must the Federal Government simply borrow the terms in State law? I would submit the basic principles of federalism suggest that as long as the Federal Government defines those terms solely for purposes of Federal law, that the Federal Government has the choice to adopt a constitutionally permissible definition or to borrow the terms of the statute.

This is Clement's opening statement for his argument. It leads into his point quite well and provides a clear foundation for the rest of his argument. Mr. Clement is trying to argue that despite the differing morals that play into the argument over what marriage's role are, the state should be primarily concerned with what is within their legal reach. He argues that the Federal government does not have the jurisdiction to overstep the authority of the states and must leave the decision up to them.

Clement uses a solid tactic and provides a small variety of rhetorical devices in his statement. Most notable, Clement employs a sort of flip tactic through his rhetorical question. He turns his point around to the judgesby asking, " does the Federal Government have the same flexibility or must the Federal Government simply borrow the terms in State law?" he is keeping the judges on their toes and drawing them in knowing full well that a judge's duty is to the law and nothing else.

Clement is playing to his audience both with his rhetorical question and with his use of logos. He acknowledges the true role of the Federal government in the affairs of states and challenges the justices to disprove his argument that any attempt made by the Federal government on this issue would be in direct violation of the law the justices have sworn to uphold.

Clement also makes a nice attempt at avoiding a bias by avoiding speculation on the effect of gay marriage on society. He gives neither side criticism but instead tries to convince that he is primarily concerned with what is law and what isn't.
Overall, Clement provides a pretty logical argument that is well targeted and well constructed.

The Swedish Chef

In my household, the men cook. This is how it has been in my paternal family for generations. Not only is a household duty for the men in our family, but it has become a hobby and a passion for some of us.
Throughout my life, i have known my father's greatest creative outlet to be cooking. Although he is an artist, he makes money off of commissions and has little time for free composition. Cooking is an art that doesn't require too much time and has allowed my father to experiment with new ideas or concepts. He will always try new recipes and play around with new ways of cooking old ones. 
The only other chefs alive in my paternal family are my father, my grandfather Sune and my uncle Jens (yes he is also named Jens). My grandfather and uncle are both also artists. My Grandfather worked with artistic carpentry all his life and my uncle is a painting and photography professor. When not in a kitchen, these men might be found quarrelling and tearing open old wounds from childhood in vicious arguements. When preparing a dish together, however, all ill will is forgotten. Cooking is therapeutic for the men of the Salander family. The three of them work cooperatively and move around the kitchen like a team of professional dancers who seem incredibly focused on the task at hand despite the jokes, old stories and general warm-heartedness that accompany these sessions.
My grandfather displays his patriarchy at the stove as he lectures my father and uncle on their cookery like a teacher to a pair of schoolboys. The two middle aged men listen to their father, taking mental notes, then right their mistakes and continue their work. This knowledge allows him to restore his fatherly role and provide wisdom to men who are already well into life. The two brothers listen to him without protest and follow his instructions carefully. Past the threshold of this room, Sune loses his aura of authority and we are once again reminded of his feebleness and growing age. In the kitchen he is king and unlike his eyesight and sense of balance, his prestige as a chef can never fade.
Sune is 92 and is currently in the hospital in Gavle , Sweden as we speak and is fading fast. His health has been deteriorating at an increased rate in the last month or two. My father believes he will pass away before our annual visit in August. Even if this is not so, I don't think he will be able to fill the  role he had because his vertigo, frailty and loss of eyesight will live him practically bedridden. My grandfather's connection to his sons through food and the art of cooking are the adhesives that hold my paternal family together. I don't know what the absence of this will mean for my father or his relationship with his brother.

Offshoring and Outsourcing Blog #3

           The United States and much of the Western world have been off-shoring business for decades now. This practice has seen the growth and flourishing of many industries happen, but it has also allowed some nations to find "surrogate countries" for their more devious practices. One such practice is the torture of individuals for the purpose of extracting information. On October 31st 2005, President George Bush announced "we do not torture (in the USA)" in response to rising critique of CIA's interrogation methods. Yes, we do not torture in the USA. We, like many other western nations today, have developed a keen system of off-shoring torture to one of our allied nations (probably in the third world) and hire their officers to do our dirty work.
           In Macedonia, Khaled El-Masri is bringing up charges against the Macedonian government for torture. Masri was tortured for months and then was dumped on the side of a road in Albania. El-Masri was originally in CIA custody but was later turned over to the Macedonian government and was "held incommunicado and interrogated in a hotel for several weeks at the behest of the United States, and then handed over to CIA personnel at Skopje airport." (Al Jazeera 1) This way, the United States could use the barbaric methods it sought to use without suffering the repercussions.
          Masri was under suspicion of using websites to try to recruit for a terrorist organisation in the USA. In October 2012 the United States Embassy in London (where Masri was being tried) announced it wanted Masri extradited to the USA ‘‘as quickly as possible’’ (Haaretz 1)

  Associated Press. "Radical Preacher Abu Hamza Al-Masri to Be Extradited to U.S., British Court Rules." Haaretz.com. Haaretz Newspaper, 5 Oct. 2012. Web. 08 Mar. 2013. <http://www.haaretz.com/news/world/radical-preacher-abu-hamza-al-masri-to-be-extradited-to-u-s-british-court-rules-1.468471>.

 Li, Darryl. "Khaled El-Masri and Empire's Oblivion." - Opinion. Al Jazeera Newspaper, 17 Dec. 2012. Web. 08 Mar. 2013. <http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/12/20121217143214129234.html>.

          

Offshoring to the Middle East

As of September 2012, Israel has held negotiations with the Palestinian Authority over outsourcing gas fields off the coast of the Gaza strip. The Israelis view it as mutually beneficial because they would be developing Palestine's marine oil reserves and create more available jobs for Palestinians. The agreement entails that Palestine would also have the liberty to tax any foreign companies seeking to pump there. Peace envoy Tony Blair states: "the PA would alone levy tariffs on any eventual revenues from private pumping in Gazan waters, though breakaway Hamas Islamists govern the coastal enclave."(Aljazeera 1.) implying that Hamas' governing of the coast would prove to be problematic due to their well known conflict with the Israeli government. 

This represents both an economic and political shift as Egypt was previously responsible for 40% of Israel's oil production prior to the Egyptian Revolution of 2011 and also represents a stride towards peace between Israel and Palestine. This way, outsourcing is providing not only an economic but also political function. Israel's high tech companies have also begun to outsource to Palestine, specifically the West Bank. "Israeli CEOs say it's their way of bringing a little bit of peace to their troubled corner of the world. But the real reason they're hiring Palestinians, they acknowledge, is because it simply makes good business sense" (Haaretz 1.) It seems better to concentrate on the more beneficial reason. The Israeli government has, in the past, outsourced its IT industry to eastern europe, and article from Israeli newspaper Haaretz claims "In the past three years, however, some have turned to Palestinian engineers and programmers. They are cheaper, ambitious, work in the same time zone, and — surprisingly to many Israelis — are remarkably similar to them." Again, this is important not only for the economic development of Palestine but also for the cause for eventual peace in the region. 

Here, outsourcing succeeds triumphantly not only because it helps to develop the economy of one nation and expand the economy of another, but also because it improves the relations between the two nations.   

                                                 Work Cited

Al Jazeera News. "Israel and PA Discuss Gaza Offshore Gas Plans - Middle East - Al Jazeera English." Israel and PA Discuss Gaza Offshore Gas Plans - Middle East - Al Jazeera English. Al Jazeera Newspaper, 23 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Mar. 2013. <http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/201292316466184221.html>.

Al Jazeera News. "Israel and PA Discuss Gaza Offshore Gas Plans - Middle East - Al Jazeera English." Israel and PA Discuss Gaza Offshore Gas Plans - Middle East - Al Jazeera English. Al Jazeera Newspaper, 23 Sept. 2012. Web. 05 Mar. 2013. <http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/09/201292316466184221.html>.