Dear Progressives: A Word Regarding Your Favorite Candidate

Iowans caucus today, and that means primary season has officially begun. Assuming you intend to vote, when it is your state's turn, do you know who you are supporting? If it's the most progressive candidate in the race, then I know who that is. He's the one that has been tearing it up on the campaign trail and making mincemeat out of the media. He’s the politician whose main funding doesn’t come from Wall Street, so he tends to say things that you normally can’t say if you’re a serious candidate. People love that. Progressives love that. 

That's why progressives love Donald Trump. 

If you consider yourself a progressive and are not totally salivating at the mouth for a chance to see someone like him in the White House, I have to seriously question whether you're a progressive at all. You should be thrilled at all of his plans for how he would make this country great again. 

A progressive is someone that has to close the Parking Panda app on his phone so that he can Tweet about how America produces nothing good. They typically experience contempt on a daily basis, and are strangely directing much of it at Trump himself. 

Right now, the far left is policing the far right, and vice-versa. Each officer in the respective camp is trained to be on high alert when certain words are spoken. 

So let me cut through all this silliness and break it down. Hopefully by the end of this, you’ll know whether “progressive” is a term you wish to use to describe yourself.

First of all, get over your need to criticize Trump. To most, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel anyway, and it doesn’t cost you anything. No one is going to accuse you of oversimplification, insensitivity or intellectual laziness and dishonesty if you describe an American businessman with bad ideas and an absence of tact as being another Hitler. You’re safe, and you know that. 

Second, stop acting like you have nothing in common with Trump. If you’ve ever used his name to grandstand and give a long speech about “the country,” you are probably related to him in some way.

For example, I actually had a co-worker say, regarding Trump supporters, “There’s a lot of stupid f---ing people in this country, it’s scary.” 

This kind of statement is par for the course, but it came right on the heels of another conversation about religion, in which he said, “All of the world’s religions are solely responsible for all of the pain and suffering in the world.” 

I’m sorry, but personally, that is a really dumb thing to say. I find that to be at least as offensive as anything Trump has ever said, and my co-worker probably believes it, too.

I’m glad he said it, though, because it made me realize: isn’t that what would happen if most of us ran for president? Wouldn’t all of us say some pretty ignorant things? Wouldn’t coffee-table politics be capable of ruining everything just like Trump, and isn’t that what we’re seeing? Would my co-worker be any less tyrannical than Trump, if he had his hand on the nuclear trigger, or at the very least, the Treasury? 

Let’s be honest, most of us have dreams of power and control that would be deeply disturbing to everyone if they were broadcast unfiltered. Most of us have said things along the lines of, “What they really oughta do is…” followed by some insane policy that would never work, and would never be considered Constitutional, reasonable, or even sane. 

And the more I thought about why so many people seem to be on the offensive with Trump, despite these lingering and deep-seeded desires for power, the more it made me realize that progressives should actually be in love with him. 

Sure, they may not like his rhetoric, but if they are being honest with themselves, they already love his policies. He’s a better Democrat than Hillary would ever be, and he is popular for the same reason Bernie is popular: he “tells it like it is.” (For more on why Trump is a lot like Sanders, read this and this and especially THIS)

If you are a progressive, then you probably don’t realize that he’s your best candidate. Just look at what he actually wants: a single-payer healthcare system (which Hilary has recently come out against); restrictions on trade with China and other countries in order to bring jobs back to America; higher taxes for hedge fund managers and no taxes for people making less than 25,000; fixing welfare programs, including social security, and encouraging wealthy people to voluntarily relinquish their social security benefits; a ban on assault weapons; and an end to certain attempts to nation-build in the middle-east. 

He doesn’t seem to care about social issues like gay marriage, and although he wants to defund Planned Parenthood, it seems to be more an issue of money than ethics. He’s been fairly pro-choice in the past, and probably still is.

He also supported Obama’s handling of the banking crisis, and has publicly disparaged some forms of excessive greed in the private sector. He doesn’t like the trend of rising CEO salaries and thinks the whole board room system of business management is “disgraceful,” and would keep some form of corporate tax in place. 

Indeed there are plenty of reasons a liberal progressive should want to support Trump, and the only reason they don’t is simply the fact that he’s just plain mean. There really are no other distinctions. 

“But wait…” you’re thinking, “what about all that xenophobia, and stuff…”

In the case of Trump, xenophobia is a red herring. His policies are progressive, and his reasons for supporting them are immaterial. Interesting how that works with progressive policies, isn’t it? 

If you think his authoritarian approach to crime and national security makes him different, you would be wrong. There is no right-wing progressivism and left-wing progressivism. It is the same thing.

For instance, the notion that the government should never have the authority to take a human life cannot be regarded as a progressive idea. It is a classically liberal one (i.e. Libertarian). Therefore, when Trump throws his support behind capital punishment, he is merely signaling his approval of yet another government solution. 

I know some of you probably won’t see the parallels between right-wing progressivism and left-wing progressivism, but that’s cool. I know that cognitive dissonance is a hard thing to deal with, so let me give you a few more examples. 

When Trump says that the way to handle the riots in Baltimore is to send in the National Guard, he is thinking like a progressive. When he talks about surveilling, raiding, and shutting down mosques, he’s thinking like a progressive. 

When he uses (and abuses) eminent domain for the sake of “urban renewal,” he’s also thinking like a progressive. He’s admitted that there would be no Trump without eminent domain. This is one that Democrats really like to take advantage of, as most major cities in which this sort of thing is commonplace are run by Democrats. If your city has ordinances banning or restricting the homeless, as well as certain breeds of dogs, it is also probably governed by Democrats. Them Dems love progressivism!

And finally, when Trump talks about immigration, he is super duper progressive. He talks about it like it is a big central planning project, saying, “it would take 18 months to 2 years to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants with ‘really good management.’” It doesn’t really matter if some Trump supporters love these policies because they are xenophobes, or because they are just ignorant. Folks like the very hispanic Marco Rubio have recommended much of the same fence-building, business-babysitting policies, and the idea of Rubio being a xenophobe (on immigration, anyway) is something I just don’t buy.

When local governments fail, send in the big dogs. It’s a perfectly acceptable excuse to use whenever justifying policies that often destroy lives. That is the path of progressivism. 

It doesn’t stop there, though. If you consider yourself one of those liberal progressives I’ve been talking about, listen closely because I’m about to blow your mind. 

If you take progressivism to its logical conclusion, it necessarily leads to war. It has to. Once you accept that force is a legitimate tool for change, you open the door for it.

Why wouldn’t you? You would feel like not going to war was the inhumane thing to do. 

If you really believe that there is so much injustice in this country and you need to use force to fix it, not going to war for humanitarian reasons with other countries that are guilty of human rights violations would basically be akin to those Nazi enablers who chose not to get involved. Wouldn’t you be a hypocrite for not wanting more war? 

Wouldn't you feel morally obligated to go to war with as many countries as possible until they all stop being cruel (or until we run out of taxpayers to plunder in order to pay for it)?

History actually proves this to be true, especially for liberal Democrats. In fact, most of the wars the U.S. got into during the 21st century were started by Democrat administrations. Korea, Vietnam, Bosnia and both World Wars were started by Democrats. The Republicans had the Gulf War, and later Afghanistan and Iraq, but even though no administration has had the decency to wait for an official Congressional Declaration of War since WWII, the Republicans at least had those wars authorized by Congress. 

Sorry for the history lesson, but it’s kind of important that you see this connection that I’m about to make. 

The narrative of the left during these later wars was a mish-mash of “war… what is it good for?” and “no blood for oil.” Those are two different narratives, but in reality, no one on the left really seems to care about the first one unless a Republican is in office. If you don’t believe me, grab your nearest liberal friend and ask them how many countries we’ve bombed since Obama took office. 

The answer is seven, and your liberal friend probably doesn’t know that. 

None of his friends care that Pakistani children have nightmares that the next drone strike will “accidentally” hit their house, as has happened many times. They probably don’t even know about the Nobel-Peace-Prize-winning Commander-in-Chief bombing the Nobel-Peace-Prize-winning Doctors Without Borders, and they would probably dismiss it if you pointed it out.

So why is the left so hush-hush about all of this bloodletting being carried out by the president they supported? Are they simply being partisan? I think not.

Deep down, war is completely legitimate to a progressive. It’s simply another manifestation of the skewed perspective progressives have about what justice and human rights looks like. 

Progressives will keep quiet about it, so long as it’s their guy doing the warring. They will learn to be silent about it, just like they suddenly became silent about warrentless wire-tapping and meta-data collection, along with many other things that seemed to have had them at wits end during the Bush years. 

They’re ok with these things now, because they always were.

So if you’re a progressive, you should learn to love progressivism, no matter which party. It’s all the same thing.

So you should support Trump.

Today, I Enjoyed My First Un-Birthday

-->

I made a concerted effort this year not to mention my birthday to anyone, and I’m so glad that I did. I don’t like birthdays, and I definitely don’t like mine. I never have.

The only birthday I can remember enjoying was my 18^th, and for reasons you can probably imagine. I really enjoyed that one, and it was probably the last one I had during which I did not care how anyone else treated me on my birthday.

I went to the store and I bought one of everything I could finally purchase legally: a scratcher ticket, cigarettes, spray paint, BB’s, a lighter, pipe tobacco, a rated-R movie and a Playboy. I might actually still have the BB’s somewhere, because I never wanted to get rid of them. That birthday was one that I enjoyed because it was symbolic, and I could enjoy that fact on my own.

After that, it was all downhill. I’ve worked all but one of my birthdays since, and most of them sucked. My 21^st was one of the worst, as a really close friend of mine canceled plans we made three months in advance for a new squeeze she’d been dating for about two weeks. (I’ve since forgiven this person, and we are really good friends again)

Early on, I had this belief that everyone should be celebrated on his or her birthday. I never doubted it, even on my 21^st.

But I must have reached a point, not long after that birthday, when I gave up. Everyone I knew, up to that point, would get something from me on their birthday. It might have just been a phone call, but it would be something. And I would soon realize that when my birthday came around, these same people were absent every time.

The number of those recognizing my birthday existed at all, pre-Facebook, never exceeded ten.

So pretty soon, I stopped caring. I became bitter about birthdays, as I was about Christmas and various other days.

Then when Facebook took over, birthdays always just seemed like a convenient way to pretend you care about someone. Your news feed tells you when someone is having a birthday, so no one actually has to know you that well in order to care. I now blame Facebook for this more than my friends, but I used to take it really personally.

It finally came to a head for me about three years ago, when the only people who even mentioned my birthday at all were the ones on Facebook. The only exception was a text message I received, and that was it. I thought, “Well, there’s no excuse. Everyone knows it’s my birthday, but all I’m getting is a post on my wall. No one’s even bothered to call me and ask how I’m doing.”

Yet so many of my friends don’t go through what I seem to go through on their birthdays. They either don’t care (as I now don’t), or they get huge parties thrown in their honor. People bake cakes for them and buy them expensive bottles of Scotch or tickets to a fancy theme park. Those are not things I get, and I haven’t gotten them in years. That’s just because it’s me, though. Or so I used to think.

Nothing much has changed in reality, but I’ve realized that thinking about this day as if it was any other day seems to make much more sense to me.

This year, I told no one about my birthday. Some co-workers at one of my two jobs knew that my birthday was coming up, but none remembered. I found some interesting results, though.

In my email, I received a birthday greeting from astrology.com, linkedin and Creative Cow. At work, the system greeted me when I clocked in, too.

Some of my family reached out to me on Facebook (where I removed my birthday entirely), and a client of mine sent me an email. But that was it this year.

And I felt this odd sense of relief.

I figure, if I don’t advertise my birthday and you STILL remembered it, and thought well enough about me to reach out to me on my birthday, then that’s something I want to hang on to.

One friend told me months ago that I should care more about birthdays, and assured me that mine would not be forgotten. Not only did this person forget, I just discovered that I was recently unfriended by them (I don’t know why or when). Par for the course.

But I’m not surprised that my family reached out to me, and I’m kinda glad because this proves the point.

Many frustrating things happened to me on my birthday this year. My smoke alarm went off for no reason while I was in the shower. I was almost late for work because I forgot my shirt. My bank confirmed it doesn’t know where my new debit card was sent, and I was over-charged for an omelette. A two-hour shift turned into an eight-hour closing shift because another guy quit.

And yet, only when I think this day should be any more special than the rest would I be tied to feelings of sadness and frustration. Why is this happening today of all days, I could have asked.

But yesterday was a day like any other. And I shouldn’t take it as personally as I have in the past that I won’t be noticed on this day unless I scream from the rooftops.

I’m with Humpty Dumpty on this one: Un-birthdays are the way to go.

Sandy Hook Is A Call For Kindness

I hadn't even heard the news of the shooting before reading several new political rants about gun control and other things. In fact, it was these rants that informed me of the days events, and upon reading of the Sandy Hook tragedy, the rants faded into the background completely.

I stared at the headline: "26 Killed, Including 20 Children In CT Elementary School Shooting."

I was horrified, and I cried. I couldn’t scroll down to read the story for at least a full minute. I didn’t need to know the details. It was a moment that felt like an eternity, when the need for the ‘why’ is overshadowed by sadness so great, you want to believe it didn’t happen.

I thought it hadn’t, at first. In that eternity of seconds, a war raged within me. I could see this happening in a movie, right as the hero is the most lacking in his faith. I could see it happening in a dream, where I get to wake up and ponder what it meant in the comfort of reality. But this happened in reality.

I finally scrolled to read the details, none of which stuck out to me at the time. I still had my Facebook open, so I returned to post a status about how I felt, and then went for a walk.

A storm system that arrived after many dry months in Southern Arizona had just peaked. Tucson was covered in a dark blanket in the middle of the afternoon from one horizon to the other, and it all felt terrifyingly synchronistic. 

I had a lot to think about. 

I thought about how this would change our world and specifically our country. I thought about how it would change me. I thought about the devastation of those parents and teachers directly affected.

I was shocked to realize that this shooting affected me more than 9/11 ever did. We all knew 9/11 was big, and it changed everything. But somewhere deep down, even as a high schooler watching the footage of the towers live, I always knew something like this could happen. I knew there were bad people who would stop at nothing to get what they want, and to destroy us.

But Sandy Hook was different. It is still unclear why the killer did it, but I don’t really think it matters. There is no reason that would make sense.

9/11 made sense, in a jingoistic sort of way. But this makes no sense. I cannot understand what the thought process would be of a person who would slaughter not one, but twenty small and screaming children. Even as I type these words, my hands shake.

It upsets me that we blame each other for this, too. In times like these, we bargain and blame, because we can’t make sense of it as a society, either.

And I was also angry. I was angry at the blame game I saw on my social network. The bodies of the victims were still warm, and already the drumming had begun for one political agenda after another. If only we had less guns… If only we had more guns… If only we had universal healthcare that covered mental health… If only we hadn’t turned our backs on God… If only we hadn’t chosen to follow God… If only…video games. If only…the parents. If only…public education. And on and on and on.

I would have jumped into this constant torrent of opinion, and it was my first instinct to do so when I first read the headline.

But this one is different. It is too serious for that. The truth is, how in the world could you treat someone who disagrees with you politically as if he was one and the same with this killer? I don’t care what your political stripes are, nearly no one is this evil. This is as evil as it gets. 

Even the most insensitive, selfish TV pundit would never do anything like this, and so it’s important to place your very genuine and legitimate rage where it belongs: the killer.

This is the exact sort of event that should bring us together, not give us cause to turn on one another. There is no doubt we will learn and grow from this tragedy, but it is in vain to do so if we disrespect these losses with our own selfish preaching.

And I have to be honest: I have been guilty of this, too. It is so easy to hear a story and take the bits from it that serve your purpose, so that your reason for relaying it has less to do with its own significance and more to do with your own ego. I have sinned big here in the past. I have been part of the problem, and it is my wish that my friends would smack me down if ever I do it again.

I also learned another lesson: Even I can forget the goodness of people. Though some people on Facebook took to ranting, most did not. Most offered up condolences and prayers, and nothing more. Some of them are those who are otherwise very political people, and it tells me a good deal about them that they chose not to do it now.

As an optimist, I tend to see the good in all people, and I believe most people are good. When a tragedy like this happens, our tendency is to give the killer the most face-time, but I believe this changed with the Batman shooting. The majority of those who posted stories about that killer were met not with approval but with indignation and criticism.

I responded to the news of the Sandy Hook shooting by going to a movie. 

I don’t have children, but if I did, I would have played with them instead. What I do have is movies. It’s why the Batman shooting hit me as hard as it did. As Kevin Smith explained: for fans and makers of movies, the theater is like your sanctuary, and an event like that shooting is like an attempt to rob you of something sacred.

I saw The Hobbit in the new HFR 3D format, and even as I had the massacre in the back of my head the whole time, I reveled in the magic that was the next great evolution in cinematic technology. I might as well have been in a pre-historic forest during a cold night, huddled with others over a fire and listening avidly to the storyteller, whose story offers yet another account of that rebellious, beautiful and kind human spirit.

When I got home, that was when I discovered the backlash on Facebook against those seeking to politicize the events. It seemed more and more like I was not such a loner in my genuine grief, or in my stubborn reluctance to cave to cynicism.

And I’ll end on that note: The love of people for each other will eventually conquer all. The cliché is accurate. We are capable of such great and beautiful things, even if we are capable of acts as heinous as this shooting. I won’t say what I think needs to be done just yet, but one thing is almost certain: more kindness. We’ll never know if a pat on the back from a respected elder or a genuine hug from a sibling or peer would have been enough to remind a killer like this what kindness feels like, but it couldn’t hurt.

Paul Ryan and Tom Morello Should Get Married

Why Paul Ryan and Tom Morello are NOT making mad passionate monkey noises together in the back of a roach coach is beyond me. Maybe they are, actually.

They are the perfect marriage. Political allies of the most curious kind, bound to one another by hypocrisy like big government foot-stink.

I’ll bet the conversation went something like this:

Agent: “Hey Tom, guess what? Your band has a fan!”

Tom: “A whole fan? Really?! Oh please tell me who!”

Agent: “Paul Ryan.”

Tom: “Seriously?”

Agent: “Yup.”

Tom: “Um. I don’t know what that means.”

It means a bromance made in heaven. I don’t know if that’s how it went down, but I know he eventually came to his senses and attacked Paul Ryan anyway. It seems to be quite popular.

And God bless Mr. Morello for his passion. He’s placed his rage in all the right places. Definitely. It’s good to have a powerful man worth $60 million going after the embodiment of the 1%, because…

Oh wait a minute. $8.4 million, that’s the threshold for the 1%, right? (shhhh… don’t tell Tom he’s in the 1%…)

Anyways, it’s good to experience such brilliant anti-establishment art as the music of Rage Against the Machine. I just love that they donated their time and energy to those so-called Warner brothers who are just like you and me. That indie film – oh what was it called?

The Matrix. That’s right.

And it just warms my heart that they’ve decided to stick with an indie label, too. I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of Epic Records? Probably not. That’s because…

Oh. Owned by one of the “Big Four”? You don’t say.

Well, it’s no matter. At the end of the day, I just prefer my rock idols to be really really angry. Doesn’t really matter why, just as long as it’s directed at the right people. And I don’t care how much they make. I know in the end they really care about me. Like all the folk that also write for that newsletter that published his article. Small newsletter called Rolling Stone. You may have heard of it?

But I know he wouldn’t just try to capitalize on people’s hatred of Paul Ryan, because he has every reason to love Paul.  Paul Ryan is Tom’s representative in Congress. I mean, surely he sees that.

Paul Ryan does hate things. And if the system Tom’s group has raged against was to be changed into a system of the very kind of rage that fuels his own, it would come in the form of someone like the Congressman. So be proud of your Congressman, Tom. He’s got your back.

Or, to put it another way: They would go down with the ship together in honor. The women and children would still go first, then the real men. Then, the people like you and the Congressman would stay. Because douchebags go down with the ship, and they feverishly play “Fight The Iceberg” on the cello while those who know how to save themselves fail to care.

“Fist in the air in the land of hypocrisy,” you once raged.

I agree completely.

4 Arguments Against the Dislike Button

I know it might be an unpopular position to take, but I don’t think Facebook having a Dislike button is a good idea. I know that disliking things is very popular right now, and a good many of my friends really want the chance to dislike things openly. Disliking things is fun, requires zero effort and allows you to put a dent in a reality that you find offensive without getting involved. But that’s sort of why it’s a terrible idea. There is nothing constructive about the Dislike button, and I believe the narcissism already present on the Internet would be only intensified and made destructive if allowed to exist. That is because the desire for the Dislike button comes from the remnant of a primitive brain which seeks to tear down and control the reality of others, and rejects communication, cooperation and respect for other people.

First of all, there is a practical reason why Facebook shouldn’t have a Dislike button, and it’s the same reason why it never will: A Dislike button is bad for business, especially if your business is social networking. Think about it. Why in the name of all things sacred would a business based around the idea of creating and building relationships introduce an element that could only break one down? How soon after they introduce the Dislike button would you see a rapid decline in activity on Facebook? How could a dislike button possibly contribute to a dynamic that is supposed to be all about sharing, and not about division and hate?

Some argue that using a Dislike button to show empathy could build relationships, such as for comments like “I just lost my job,” or “My wife and I are getting a divorce.” But why wouldn’t you rather leave a comment for these types of posts anyway? Why would you clamor for an alternative that allows you to sympathize without actually doing any work? I would sure rather see a comment from a friend as opposed to a bunch of dislikes. Not to mention there have already been suggestions for alternatives, such as a Hug button, to differentiate these sorts of things.

But in the absence of these alternatives, how would Facebook differentiate these types of posts from others that people just don’t like, such as, “That new Katy Perry song is awesome!” If Facebook filters its feed on the basis of how many likes a shared item or status update receives, wouldn’t it just bury the “My dog just died” posts as well? The list of problems goes on.

But let us not forget the other reason it’s bad for business: Sponsors. Imagine you were Coke, and Facebook just announced it was adding a Dislike button. Do you think Facebook would be a good place to advertise after that? I don’t think so.

But in case you think that’s just as well, realize that it applies to ALL businesses, including that concert that you and your band were thinking of creating an event for. Your local mom and pop could get slammed with dislikes, making Facebook no longer a place to network and communicate with its fanbase. Not only would Facebook be hit with a loss in advertising revenue, which would affect how well it operates and whether or not it can expand, but it would make it even harder for smaller businesses to compete.

Again, this is all to say that the Dislike button would do very little to build relationships, but would do everything to break them down.

It is very fortunate for everyone involved that the Dislike button will never become a reality. But why would people keep arguing that it should?

Well the second argument that it shouldn’t is a philosophical one: A Dislike button wouldn’t add more choice, but it would make choosing unpleasant for everyone. People act like they have a fundamental entitlement to a Dislike button, and the fact that they don’t is an affront to their freedom of choice. They want to be able to dislike something, and they can’t, and it’s just not fair. Well this view of choice is very immature, because it reflects a very poor understanding of what choice actually is.

The word “choose” comes from the latin verb gusto, which means “to taste.” It is also the origin of the modern “gusto,” which means enthusiastic enjoyment or pleasure. The action of taking, tasting, eating and enjoying is inherent in the idea of choosing. If you did not enjoy something, then you couldn’t say you chose it. To NOT pick the apple from the tree is NOT a choice. You can’t say, “I chose not to pick that apple.” You could say, however, “I didn’t chose to pick the apple.”

So if you decide not to pick the apple, what is that called, if not a choice? I would call it a rejection. I would even say it is an inaction until you consciously decide not to pick the apple. Once you decide you don’t like the apple, then you move on. But it’s not a choice, it’s a rejection. In other words, there is always a yes involved in choice, because that’s what choice IS. It’s you saying yes to something. Even when you use the word, that’s understood. If you choose red not blue, you don't say,“I choose not blue.” You say “I choose red."

So if you see something come up on your Facebook feed that you don’t like, don’t choose it. And if you really want a Dislike button, you won’t be getting the freedom to choose, you’ll be getting the freedom to reject.

Having said that, it should be clear just how unpleasant it would all become to ACTUALLY choose something in an environment filled with rejection. If something comes up in your feed that you like, but others publicly dislike, your liking it is now an open invitation to be harassed for it. The more dislikes, the more likely you are to get hassled for liking it, making you less inclined to like anything. The repercussions of your decision to like something would always have to be considered when choosing to like something. And that is very sad.

Facebook should be a place where everyone can have the experience they choose to have, to like what they want, even if there’s only one other person that agrees with them. You don’t get to decide that for them, even if you know they’re crazy.

That leads me to the sociological argument: When it is known how unpopular a thing is, the quality of the discourse diminishes. This seems like a no-brainer. Think about how kids react to knowledge that a certain kid is unpopular. All they need is a little bit of encouragement and they turn into monsters. Many of them are good kids, actually, but if lead by the hand and given the ok, they will go along with all of the awful things the truly awful kids are doing.

We like to think that we are not like them, that we are grown adults. But we are kidding ourselves if we think that’s the case. Think about every alliance that formed in your workplace between those looking for a scapegoat and those few whipping boys who actually pull their weight. Think of all the gossip magazines we read and all the popular TV shows where we all get to watch a family fall apart. We enjoy it because we know that millions of other people are watching it too, and so its ok. But imagine a world in which watching “Hoarders” made you more deplorable than its own subjects. Imagine if you didn’t have the support you needed in the dislike of celebrities and politicians. What would you do?

You would make your case, that’s what you would do. You would have to do so intelligently, coherently, concisely and passionately. This is what happens on discussion boards and forums where the article or subject did not include a like or dislike button.

If you do not know how many people are on your side, you are more inclined to form your own opinion, or abstain when you feel you are lacking in the knowledge with which to comment.

To be fair, this argument is true for the Like button as well, since the popularity of an idea often carries the ethos of credibility. But undoing the damage of a bad idea with a lot of Likes is as simple as posting a link in the comments section. Undoing the damage of a good idea with a gazillion Dislikes is close to impossible. Plus, in most cases, there is no harm done by clicking Like.

 If you are reading this and you really want to help create a better world both on- and offline, then the final argument should matter a lot to you: The absence of a Dislike button is Facebook’s version of “innocent until proven guilty,” and that’s a very good thing. This is the moral argument, and I’m not sure that many of the people I talk to about the Dislike button are aware of this.

I think the Dislike button represents something in all of us that needs to die out. It is the power to destroy, motivated by the desire to control the reality of others.

It is much bigger than simply being able to say, “I really don’t like lolcats.” It is as if you think that every piece of media that passes before your eyes begs the question, “Do you think this should exist?” People have been exposed to so many things that they don’t like, they just really want the chance to make it go away, and they feel like they ought to have a right to do so.

The Dislike button at least gives you the gratification of saying, “No.” You don’t even have to be personally involved in the thing you don’t like, you don’t have to think about it for very long, and beyond that you can just let your gut tell you if it's good or not. No regard needs to be paid to the person who made it, or the others who like it.

But here’s the thing: It still exists. You are not going to get rid of something in cyberspace just by disliking it.

Maybe you think, “People will stop making this sort of thing if enough people dislike it, and that is alright with me.” Not only is this an unrealistic assumption, it once again demonstrates your desire to control the reality of others. What is actually happening is people are connecting to one another by an experience, and you are trying to destroy it for them. It is not your experience, but you don’t care because you don’t think it was fair that you were exposed to it in the first place. Well I say you need to grow up, if that’s what you think.

To be clear, I’m not saying that actually disliking something is wrong, and I’m certainly not saying that making a comment to that effect is bad. In fact, I’m saying the opposite. Your efforts to voice your displeasure should be one-to-one and co-operative, not top-down and authoritative. The Dislike button is a replacement for conversation, and it contains no insight, criticism or respect for the content's creator.

Part of that conversation that MUST be present is evidence. If you are displeased with something and voicing your displeasure in the form of a Dislike could have a very negative impact on the content’s creator, you should be required to explain yourself. You should not be allowed to take an action like Disliking a video without having to – or at least being able to – defend it.

This is crucial for building a better world for all of us. Only in the last few hundred years did we learn a very important moral lesson which has helped us become better people. One of the core principles of Western philosophy is the idea that a person’s guilt should never be assumed, and that everyone has the right to defend themselves. You shouldn’t be able to send me to the chair just by pointing your finger at me, and I should never be able to do the same to you.

This is such a profound ethical achievement on humanity’s part, and we’ve come too far in our real life to allow this idea to die out in our digital world. Once it disappears online, we will see it less and less in the real world. We will go back to the way things used to be decided: By tyranny, where a totalitarian ruler decides. or by mob rule, in which an individual is defenseless against the many.

We are already seeing it now with every major criminal case, from Gabby Giffords to Treyvon Martin. Everyone has an opinion, but nobody knows the facts. And nobody cares that they don't have the facts.

The argument doesn’t even have to be that big. Think about it on a personal level: How would you tell someone to their face that you don’t like what they’ve made? I suppose a few of you reading this might actually be just as blunt in real life. But even if you are, wouldn’t you then include your reasons or would you just say, “It sucks,” and leave it at that?

I suspect most of you would either lie and say you liked it, or you would try to find a nice way to say it. You might even re-examine your dislike and find that it’s not that bad after all. There are many reasons why a Dislike button eliminates avenues of communication that would lead to relationship-building, but instead it drives a wedge between two people who are potentially very much alike.

If nobody likes something, it won’t get shared and it won’t last long. The Dislike button is not necessary, and it will introduce much harm to a world that is just starting to get built. There are so many problems in the world, and we can’t let it fall apart just because we’ve introduced a relationship-destroying element into our community. There is no content that is so Disliked that it can’t either be debated with or flagged. As human beings, we should be wanting to like and create, not finding things to dislike and destroy.  

 If you would like to hear more about this from others, I would recommend this guy, who has a lot to say about it. I would really like to know what your thoughts are on the subject, so please leave a comment!

2012: Lessons Learned So Far

I’ve been feeling for some time like a great change is occurring, if not in the world at least in myself. This could be just me emerging from that quarter-life crisis we all have, when we finally find footing after being flung into a world that looks and feels and acts nothing at all like we were told it would.

I’ve been taking it one day at a time in everything I do, trying my best to live by a philosophy that maintains simply that if you don’t like your life and your world, change it. It is further driven by a sense of rational optimism that is informed merely by the good results it produces.

I’m certain now that the recent and abrupt termination of an otherwise awesome relationship with a wonderful woman was absolutely meant to occur. The dedicated crew of impassioned and creative people I’ve been fortunate enough to acquire is also, I feel, no accident.

As cuckoo as it sounds, at this very moment in my life, I’m prepared to accept that forces beyond my power or control are guiding me in a certain direction.

That I should choose to include a pomegranate as a decidedly important symbol in my music video, only to find that my art director himself possesses a pomegranate bush. Added to this the odd fact that it began leafing the very first day I met with him to discuss the project, and may very well begin to flower at precisely the same time we shoot. The full moon on the day we begin pre-production, as well as the solar storm we are currently experiencing and various other little things of this nature all seem very synchronistic.

That this all is circumstantial is obvious, but there is also the feeling of it. I have become very much intuitive about everything now. Even my body has found a way to tell me exactly what food to eat, and it seems stubborn in its refusal to accept anything else. Beer, for some reason, is in great supply these days. The hearty type, with lots of body and very dark.

All this is to say that I am feeling more and more like a player in my own life, and not just an actor or an observer. All my life I’ve judged the merit of my own actions on the sensibilities and successes of others. I wasted time in college in this futile attempt to gain acceptance and to depend on the advice and opinions of others.

But as monumental a task as learning to truly form your own opinions can be, it is still only half the battle. If you truly want to carve out a niche for yourself and be a free spirit, there are things you will learn that may leave you with that feeling of existential dread in the pit of your stomach keeping you up at night. Just know this is temporary.

I believe the lack of appetite I’ve had these days is related to this. No longer do I care what people think, but no more do I care to change what people think about anything, even me. I can help them to understand me, but no expectations should be made of it.

The truth is, I just can’t care enough anymore. It’s not possible. It has taken all of the energy and passion I can muster just to forge on for myself. Perhaps someday when my hair is gray, I will have something to say, when I can no longer be a player. Or sooner, if I can obtain any sort of mastery which others would want to hear of.

One thing I can speak of, though, is that oft-neglected aspect of optimism that even the most positive person can forget: the valley. If you’re a pessimist, your world is pretty flat. Ever so often you find a mountain that might reach into the heavens, but it will be rare. An optimist, though, lives in the Alps. There are peaks and valleys galore. It can be a most beautiful sight, but the hardest part is that no mountain looks more intimidating than when viewed from the valley. The relativity makes the valley unbearable.

I imagine a world where the sanctimony and pretension that pollutes most human interactions will wither away, and I believe that we are seeing it happen today. The rebel spirit in all of us that decries intolerance and cruelty has never been louder. The wretched fuel normally reserved for heated political discourse is now dwindling and the loud cry of justice bellows through bottom-up forms of media like Youtube and Facebook.

That our economy will be wrecked by runaway inflation is inevitable, as will be the panic that follows. But never underestimate the power of human ingenuity and goodness.

I can’t describe my place any more clearly than that. That everyone has a path to walk is a fact not needed to explain my own path. I may talk about humanity’s desire for knowledge to combat ignorance, but this just may be my purpose.

One thing is certain, though, and this is perhaps my purpose for writing this: If you are not on the right path, the universe will tell you! To a Christian, this is akin to turning your back on God. To a scientist, this is like choosing to abandon good logic and sound reason. You will find success to be very difficult if you stray from the path.

I don’t know who chose the path – if it was some god or angel or alien or even me, before I was born – but it exists. The universe is set up in a specific way, and a reckless life isn’t any more sustainable than a snowflake on the Tucson asphalt in August. All that matters is taking the hints the universe gives you and the rest is up to you.

Ode to The Mint

To Kricket, who, together with a young Justin, beat us at pool and won a free pint of the finest Natty Light a Tucson dive bar has to offer, and who greeted my friend and I with the joke, “That break was a Dolly Parton break: all bust and no balls,” I say: Thank you. To Louis, who complemented me on my Stetson hat and concluded a ten minute diatribe with the words: “I just can’t stand the sound of rocks under my feet,” I thank you. To the woman who slapped her hands together, proclaiming, “Alright! Let’s do this!” Who then emerged from the restroom with a rake, together with a gentleman wielding a mop, and proceeded to play a most impressive game of pool with said tools in the accompaniment of her Toxic Avenger and concluded her evening with the aforementioned Louise on the dancefloor – as if it was made for her – I say: Congratulations, you’ve got it. And finally, to the remarkably gracious bartender who let me into the holy of holies to gander at the beer selection and left me with a tab I could have paid with the change in my pocket: I am very grateful.

There are people in this world who continue to inspire me, and they are the ones who seem to care the least about social norms, or about intellectual endeavors. They don’t care about politics or class, or where you come from. You meet them, and the meeting is the best part. The real human moments occur in the most unlikely of places. They occur when people gather to express – with stubborn optimism – their desire for a better life. That they should succeed is beside the point. The pursuit is its own justification.