Home Again, Home Again

Holy shit, I'm home! Its been a long and joyful two weeks out and about in the universe but its always good to return to one's own bed. My ladywife and I spent a lesurely two weeks in Prague, punctuated by an all too short weekend in Amsterdam. Of course, for me the rest of my ridiculously charmed life would be too short a stay in Amsterdam, so I'll take what I can get quite gladly. Prague is a beautiful city, with gorgeous architecture and amazing food... that for some reason never really clicked with me. No one's fault, no hard feelings, just couldn't quite find my stride there. That said, if the opportunity arises, definitely go. Seriously, the food is incredible and the cost of living is downright comfortable. The people are a little... brusque, but people suck all over (though they seem to suck a good bit less in Amsterdam) and they seem to lighten up after a couple of the readily available and fantastic beers.

I do feel the need to make a serious comment, however. I spent a prodigious amount of time going from airport to airport this trip, 10 flights in two weeks, and I never felt less safe than when I was returning to this country. We laidover or stayed in half a dozen countries and, with the exception of my own, the border process was streamlined, respectful and complete. Get scanned, confirm your identity, carry on. However, on every occasion upon entering the U.S. the world became a very hostile place. A conspicuous proliferation of armed guards (a disconcerting number of whom had assault rifles), poorly trained K-9 units jumping and snapping at frightened civilians while their handlers laughed. State mandated molestation and intimidation. I couldn't help but feel ashamed at what we've let them do to us under the auspices of guaranteeing safety they do not provide. I really don't want to be preachy about it, but it was a viscerally disturbing experience and I hope one that goes quickly in to the annals of the history of abandoned ideas. Everybody travel safe out there.

Pissing away the Future

So here's the deal. Climate change is a thing, its a big thing and by thing I mean problem. Now by problem I don't mean, "oh we're gonna have to have some really uncomfortable discussions." I mean the world as we know it is changing at a frankly alarming pace and if we don't, as a species, do something drastic about it with a fucking quickness a horrific number of people are going to die. It might not seem like it but I hate to soapbox about this, and not just because I think humanity could probably benefit from a bit of a pruning. I hate to get into the climate change thing because talking about it is largely a meaningless proposition for someone like me. Either you agree with me that its a problem and are taking steps in your own life to do what you think can help, you don't care either way and just want to get on with your business, or you think all this "climate" nonsense is just a conspiracy to control the populace or what the fuck ever. If you fall into that last category, by the way, we can't hang anymore and I sincerely hope you die in a painful and culturally scarring fashion, that others may learn from your failing.

The reason I feel the rather rare desire to approach this topic is because of something said on The Nightly Show last week. Usually, I really enjoy Larry Wilmore, he's witty and direct. But to see him flipping shit to the people trying to come up with solutions to a problem that has been plaguing California (not to mention huge swathes of the rest of the fucking planet) for years, a problem that even more of us are staring down the barrel of, pissed me pretty badly off. All water is recycled. Water treatment is a colossal part of the world we live in and people have been doing it in one way or another for a very fucking long time. Some people feel icky about the prospect of drinking water that used to have shit in it and to some extent that makes sense. Unfortunately for these folks pretty much all water has had shit in it. A goodly amount of it has probably been piss. Odds are you drank a little formerly-piss water today even. That's why filtration systems exist, so that by the time you drink it, your water doesn't bear any meaningful resemblance to the piss (or commercial waste, or industrial run off) that it used to be.

I'm hitting this one pretty hard but its not just water. A while back the U.N. suggested people start phasing insects into their diet to prevent against possible insecurity in the food supply. Of course it was kinda laughed off, but livestock is hard to raise, and costly, and if something goes wrong (like the world smolders and livestock becomes too resource intensive to keep alive) a huge number of people are going to be fucked. We can't afford to laugh off solutions at this point, no matter how icky it makes us feel. There are problems amassing in the world, too many to face down and certainly too many to ignore, and its not just irresponsible to keep calm and carry on, its self destructive. 

The Path to Agoraphobia is Paved with Good Intentions, Poorly Executed.

Over the course of the last several years I've pretty much completely lost the ability to functionally interact with people. I'm not completely sure when it started but it probably had something to do with the fact that I stopped leaving the house. There was a period in which I could only afford to leave the house if I was looking for or going to work and even then bus fare was a prohibitive expense. Preexisting antisocial traits started to assert themselves more aggressively as my whole interaction with society was relegated to news-bites and poorly contextualized academia (thanks higher education!). Over time habits were established in such a way that I could no longer come up with reasons to go out. After I was told outright not to get a fucking job the idea of leaving the house fell even farther from a necessary evil to make ends meet to the least interesting or meaningful way to waste my wife's money, so I just stopped.

I've come to understand, with some work, what a bad idea this was. Justification became rule, rule became habit and habit became neurosis. Now the thought of doing anything at all, much less anything out of the house is accompanied by a combination of panic, apathy, and rationalizing my inaction. Now I can't even trust myself to be able to break the habit without outsourcing my motivation to someone else. I will get better, I have to.

Thanks for playing therapist, beloved internet. Now I'm going to go psyche myself up so I might be able to do something today.

Doctor Bond, Professional Spider-man

James Bond, Doctor Who, and Spider-man. What do these three people have in common? All of them are caucasian, male, and have racist fans. OK, that might seem a little hyperbolic, and it is, but its also mostly true. I bring this up because last week a certain sycophantic, obnoxious, racist ass-hat said that Idris Elba couldn't be Bond because he is black. Not only did he get his facts wrong by claiming James Bond is always supposed to be white and Scottish (despite that he has been played by Scottish, English, Australian, and Welsh actors), but he openly admits to being racist about it.

Look, I get that people who like pop culture tend to want to see more of the same with no changes lest it ruin their show, but grow the fuck up. It doesn't fit with the way you think it "should be" so its automatically ruined? Is James Bond being white (or even male for that matter) that integral to what makes James Bond,  James Bond? I always thought Bond was a badass because he did all the cool spy stuff and was charming and witty while he did it. Race and sex have nothing to do with it.

The same type of thing happened when Peter Capaldi got cast as the current Doctor. In the weeks leading up to the announcement people argued about who should get the part, and a disturbing amount of fans only wanted to see a white, British, male get the part. This is ridiculous, just because it is a change doesn't mean that the show won't be as good. It might be better. Spider-man being biracial also sparked an outcry from people. They all claim to be purists, and I think they are, just not in the way they think.

Basically, what I am saying is that the best part of pop culture artifacts like the Doctor and Spider-man are cool because of what they do and how they do it. Gender and Race have nothing to do with that, and thus don't matter. Spider-man could still swing around and lay out "hilarious" one liners even if they were African American. James Bond could still kill everyone in spectre in cool spy-y ways even if they were Jane Bond. Stop trying to enforce your insecurities on other people.

For the record I think Idris Elba would be a good James Bond. I would also Love to see Chiwetel Ejiofor get the part as well, but thats mostly because I have had a man crush on him since I saw him in Serenity. Natalie Dormer could also do a good job with Bond. Make the casting call on ability, not to fit the character people expect. Hell, maybe they will shake up these over-done characters. The second one of these "white male only" roles gets someone who is not a white or male and does a great job with it, the more people will get over this prejudice. And if they don't, fuck em, the world will turn on despite their hangups.We can't expect to survive (even in a pop culture sense) if we keep pandering to the weak and stupid.

Please, Please Let it Be Dead

Alright lets kill this lumbering, convoluted beasts. I've written about education, I've written about testing procedure, all under the auspice of discussing the status quo. Now, that's a term that gets bandied about quite a bit in various contexts, but all it really means is the way things are. The problem arises (as it often does) when we try to normalize those things.

We can't help but seek to maintain what we consider to be normal for ourselves, its a basic function of the human mind and it can be quite helpful. For instance, if you can maintain an "abnormal" behavior, like exercise or regular study, it becomes normal and you develop a positive habit, a new status quo. However, there is also a natural inclination to believe that the way things are for you is also the way things ought to be for everyone else. It's a reaffirmative impulse, if other people live the way you live and value the things you value, not only are you apparently more likely to be living "right", but you have an easier and clearer point of connection with other people. Community building is great, empathy and support and whatnot, but we live in a world that is conceptually large enough that our communities require a relatively high degree of diversity to lubricate global relations and counteract exploitation.

Here's the rub though, standardizing education has difficulty when forced to engage social or creative fields, which are key points in diversification. Things like science and mathematics are naturally organized for standardization, but art and social sciences are highly nuanced fields that are both vital to the development of well rounded, well informed people, and almost impossible to effectively prioritize value metrics.

There's also the issue of establishing behavioral recursion, like deference to police authority causing police to expect blind deference to their authority causing people to be expected to defer blindly to police authority. But we've gone on quite a bit about how fucked up cops can be lately and I really don't want to get back into that right now, so if you're curious refer to previous posts.

Reliance on the status quo causes lag in progress, but its lag that is usually mitigated by curiosity and the inevitability of progress in general, so there's nothing wrong with a bit of normalcy. The trouble is that everyone has a different normal, and some people's normal is really disappointing. Since many of those people aren't capable of functioning on the level of some others, we play to the lowest common denominator, we make the weak the standard. People who want to rewrite history, or push poorly veiled fundamentalism as science, or assign political bias to reality (seriously fuck those guys), are seeking to make their normal the Status Quo for everyone. It goes from mitigating an existential fear and building communities to manufacturing consent and silencing opposition. I kinda hate to imply conspiracy, because I don't think its organized enough to qualify, but I do think its a bit too insidious to be allowed, and certainly too damaging to continue. Unfortunately, any solution to this issue starts to look worryingly like "sinking to their level" or worse, treading on any of various misinterpreted freedoms. So fuck it, knowing is half the battle or whatever.

Status Quo Part 2: This is Only a Test

Last time, I mentioned having an issue with standardized testing as it pertains to a school environment. I chose to refrain from really exploring testing because while it does tie into my larger point about the status quo it pertains to more than just the education system and is significant enough to warrant it's own post.

Before we go to far down this little rabbit hole, I don't have a problem with making sure people are competent, I don't have an issue with gauging people's knowledge or skill sets, there are just some significant problems with the way we tend to go about that. First, testing in general is somewhat of a troublesome idea in that most tests can only really measure one's ability to take a test if for no better reason than a testing environment is unnaturally stressful. It is essentially impossible to ensure that someone is properly prepared for a test without placing focus, and thus stress, on the test itself. People respond fucking weirdly when under stress, and test stress comes from all angles; parents, teachers, society, self, or authority figures. Anything and everything can stack stress onto a performance situation. Some people respond to stress by exceeding their normal capabilities in regard to the relevant material, thus potentially invalidating the test through abnormal over-performance. Other people panic massively and blank out any skills they do have, invalidating the test through unreasonable incompetence. Tests necessarily diverge from the normal course of affairs, so using tests to determine a person's abilities under normal circumstances is a bit unreasonable; not everything can be a test.

The second major concern I have with standardized tests is essentially the standardization. In an effort towards fairness and consistency we establish baselines and core criteria for success in tested fields. That's great, except for the nature of reality. In any given situation, unforeseen variables will arise that are both more integral to performance and more persistent than were anticipated. Which makes any standardized test necessarily incomplete. Standardized testing is culturally biased, unreliable, and deeply misunderstood. Honestly my biggest problem in this vein isn't even limited to testing, its the persistent idea that a uniform practice cannot be discriminatory despite it's noted illegality.

Standardized testing occurs on more levels of society than many of us are willing to admit, and has more adverse effects than I think most of us know. Fairness and consistency are relatively noble goals, but when they justify the problems that arise from this sort of system it brings to mind tropes about unfortunate roads and the good intentions that pave them.

Status Quo Part One: Book Leanin'

I may be a day late and somewhat deficient of appropriate remuneration, but insomnia is a hell of a thing. If possible, I'll try to make up for doubling up on Brian's day with all the wit and vigor sleep deprivation affords me. Its been suggested that I discuss problems I have with the idea of a status quo. I like that idea, but in order to do it proper justice I need cover a fair bit of additional ground. I've chosen to start this little journey by exploring education.

My first target here is standardization. On paper, setting a standard is great; it seeks to ensure maximum saturation and retention of information while minimizing the percentage of the population abandoned to hopeless ignorance. The problem (as has been discussed ad nauseam by everyone from ivory tower academics to the self-congratulatory "wont someone think of the children" idiots) is that the size and relative complexity of our society demands that focus be placed on that second part. This means that in order to keep that percentage of failure low, the limited resources of our education system tend to be funneled into greater standardization. Some of this is problematic because those standards tend to define success at progressively lower levels of retention, dragging the whole system ever closer to incompetence. We manage this by taking a page from capitalism and rewarding success. We give more subsidies to schools that have a higher pass rate on standardized tests (more on this next time) which allows them to afford better teaches and more classroom resources, it also leaves schools that were already struggling pretty well fucked. As more of these schools start to suffer the habit is then to essential only teach children how to pass the relevant tests, forgoing anything like actual education. More schools "succeed" but the actual value and density of the information students receive has less context and less use outside of passing a given test. But, rather puzzlingly, that isn't the part I find most disturbing. High level standardization of education demands an increasingly rigid structure in the classroom. Which would be great if childhood wasn't a thing.

Think for a moment about all the things that are going on for a child. They are (hopefully) starting to develop the awareness of other people as people, dealing with these newly extant people, learning empathy, constantly expanding a rudimentary understanding of a massive and complex world and themselves, growing and changing at a frankly terrifying rate, and trying to construct a conceptual universe that can justify all of those experiences. That is completely ignoring any schooling and all but denying anything other than an optimal home life. Now imagine how a fucking disgustingly high percentage of these children are dealing with some form of abuse at home. Oh, and all the while they're being told that if they lack focus in class it could ruin their lives. In the midst of this clusterfuck of, what is to them, completely new and complex experience we tell them to sit down, forget all of that and focus on poorly contextualized facts and over-abstracted maths for between four and eight hours a day, depending on age. Now pack thirty or forty of these things into desks together and see how many of them "fail to perform to expectations".

The other major concern I have with the bastion of competing ideology that is education is just that, we can't seem to agree what its supposed to accomplish. Some people argue that schooling is meant to make children into well rounded adults, others argue that it's supposed to prepare children for the "real world" usually meaning the job market. Now, I'll reign in from the bile-spewing polemic about children spending all their time learning how to best sell themselves into slavery and try to only address these issues in themselves. If the idea is to produce well rounded adults then school would be more of a guided discussion with teachers and students interacting with concepts and generally progressing toward relevant details. Alternately, if the goal of education was to prepare children for the "real world", there would be a much greater emphasis on understanding social roles and the mechanics of various industries. The really tricky part is that either interpretation on its own would demand a higher regard for practical application. Unfortunately, the prevailing combination of the two is a gross maladaptation where general concepts and contextualization are largely ignored and the realities of economies and market factors are denied in favor of either hollow optimism or cynical resignation. Practical skills are all but left out entirely.

We place so much weight on the importance of education that these holes in the system don't just fuck with our children, they end up tearing at society as a whole. Because we don't really give children the opportunity to become real people, we end up with a population where many of us never get past stupid high school bullshit. Because we can't agree on what purpose education ought to serve, it largely ends up doing nothing for those twelve mandatory years, and even if you pursue high education you'll still have to fight through the shit to get anything out of it.

I know this might not seem like it leads into a critique of status quo mentality, but give me a couple posts to work through the details and I'll try to lead us into a coherent narrative.

Ferris Bueller You're My Heeeeerrooooo

So here's a tricky bitch. The only thing that can make a hero is actual heroism. I know that sounds like a pretty obvious thing but apparently it's difficult for some people. Anyone who goes beyond the realm of reasonable expectation to save another person is heroic. Be they cop, fireman, civilian or solder. Now here's where that gets tricky. When saving people from harm is your job you really only deserve the hero title for going way above and beyond.

That last bit is pretty important. I'm not saying that the fireman who runs headlong into a collapsing building to save someone isn't a hero. I'm not saying the cop who manages to deescalate a tense, possibly terminal, dispute isn't heroic. I am saying that just being a cop, fireman, solder, doctor, or (insert your favorite hero job here) does not fucking make you a hero.

The first point that I feel needs to be made on this front is that all of those things are, at their core, occupations. Now an occupation is something you do, in our society, for compensation in the form of monetary recognition. If nothing else this means that, well, its their fucking job. The fact that their job is hard or potentially dangerous isn't enough to warrant exceptional respect. Heroism requires a degree of exceptional behavior, by definition if you do something for a living there's nothing exceptional about it. Now, if someone from one of these fields helps you personally, sure give 'em a pat on the back and a hearty thank you. But pursuing a career doesn't entitle you to special fucking treatment.

Now, I came to this conclusion (trying as hard as I can not to be a bitter, hateful bastard) for one very simple reason. There is no real way to ensure that someone goes into a line of work for the "right" reasons. Since in this instance that right reason is a desire to help people its an important distinction to make. The fact that a relatively capable sociopath or passingly convincing martyr complex can find their way into the "heroic" vocations necessarily removes the intrinsic heroism of the job.

Its unfortunate, but these things need to play a bigger role in how we think about our society. The term, "hero" comes with some pretty heady perks and if we're just handing it out to anyone willing to go through the right training program its inevitable that the kind of people who will abuse those perks will find their way into those programs.