At the Edge...

Once more, a picture worth a thousand words. 
Sitting at the edge... of somewhere... contemplating his next move.

Does he believe that he can do anything?  Or nothing?
He must not give in to fear. 
He must be wary of false promises and delusions. 
He must learn to know himself.

Gryphem

An Honest Question about Journalism and WikiLeaks

Alright, readers, usually I am the one giving facts and opinions here on the blog.  But today I need your help. 

You may have read my post, "The Real Danger from WikiLeaks," of 01 DEC 2010.  I condemned those who betrayed their trust by giving up classified information.  I also created some intentional ambiguity by quoting President Lincoln as saying the people should know the facts.  My main point was that we should not allow the government to use the WikiLeaks situation to take away any of our freedom.

As expected, the U.S. government has been aggressively pursuing the WikiLeaks organization and its founder, Julian Assange.  Along the way they have spouted the word "treason" on more than one occasion - which is ridiculous because Assange is not a U.S. citizen or resident.  They have also referred to Assange as an "enemy combatant." 

This worries me greatly.  The Nixon White House used similar tactics to go after Daniel Ellsberg, who acquired and published the embarrassing (and classified) Pentagon Papers in 1971, charging him with conspiracy.  But Judge W.M. Byrne dismissed all charges against Ellsberg, and commented, "The circumstances of this case... offend a sense of justice."

Even the arrogant Nixon administration learned from the experience.  They did not try the same tactic again against any of the reporters who broke stories on the Watergate scandal and cover-up.  Given their rhetoric about WikiLeaks, the current powers in Washington, DC apparently do not see the same moral in the story, or perhaps do not understand the historical precedent. 

Be all that as it may, a commenter on a news website today asked the question that I cannot answer.  Following a CNN story which relied upon "leaked" classified documents, he asked:

"Why is it that when CNN publishes a story based on classified
documents, it's journalism, but when WikiLeaks does the same
thing, it's treason?"

I do not know.  Please... Help me understand.

Gryphem

Discoveries About Life #5: GOOD and EVIL

Uphold that which is good, and don’t let the existence of that which is not good discourage you.

Overcome evil with good.  (Saint Paul)

A world without good and evil is not possible.  Our human understanding differentiates between the distinct things that we perceive.  We characterize things or persons or events or phenomena as better or worse.  This is the root of our definition of good and evil. 

A life filled with anger, hatred, or evildoing cannot be forced upon anyone by another, or by circumstance.  It is the result of decisions that are made over and over with each thought... as is a life filled with goodness.

In its most simple form, ‘good’ is that which enhances life, and ‘evil’ is that which diminishes life.

God made a world in which some animals must kill others in order to live.  This is a mystery.  Protesting will not change the fact; this is the nature of the world in which we have our existence.  We accept because we must, and because we trust. 

The existence of pain is no excuse to condone cruelty. 

God takes no pleasure in death or sacrifice. (Ezekiel, Hosea)

To treat ‘spiritual’ as good and ‘physical’ as evil is to completely misunderstand the meaning of all four terms.  Physical life is a blessing and a joy… as is spiritual life.

The world contains mysteries that are beyond resolution.  Do good anyway.

The web of our life is of a mingled yarn, good and ill together. (Shakespeare)

Time Travel. Has it already happened?

In my last post, I wrote about Robert E. Lee and Edgar Allan Poe.   

     Afterward, while weak and weary,

     I pondered thoughts quite strange and eerie

     Of many a wild eccentric theory

     Worthy to explore.

     Soon I found myself pursuing

     Temporal shifts and advance viewing,

     Things I once called misconstruing.

     I don’t anymore.

Yes, I found myself pursuing unexpected trains of thought.  First, here's how it came about.  Next I'll tell you what it wrought.

Poe was a writer at home in worlds both real and imaginary.  His greatest literary accomplishments and his personal life, though, are remembered as unusual, mysterious, perhaps supernatural.  As I considered his writings and life, I came to a strange frame of mind in which I began to think about the enigmatic.  I began to ponder the inexplicable case of Arthur Gordon Pym.  For those of you unacquainted with this incredible coincidence, if that is what it was, Poe wrote a quite detailed story which actually came true decades after his own death.  Was it coincidence?  Or did Poe somehow know of events that would occur in his future?  If anyone could manage the mystical art of time travel, it would have been Edgar Allan Poe.

Robert E. Lee was much more a man of concrete reality.  He would’ve had no use for such an outlandish concept as time travel.  He was too busy with matters of engineering, maintaining the family estate at Arlington, and managing a war effort.  He did, however, appear as a character in a popular book by Harry Turtledove entitled Guns of the South, in which time travel is injected into a story about the Civil War.  I recalled an image from the cover of that book, an image showing General Lee holding an AK-47.  Once more, my thoughts turned to time travel.

Traveling through time has always been a fascinating topic for me.  I imagine where (or when) I could go, who I might meet, how I might affect the way things developed.  But really, could time travel ever actually happen?  I’m sure the vast majority of you are thinking… No.  It’s fun to imagine, but travel through time is impossible. 

Or is it?

There are theories in the world of physics which allow for the possibility of time travel.  They are esoteric, and far beyond the ability of any human being to master.  And yet, the fact that some scientific disciplines hold open the possibility of two-way time travel should be a reminder that we don’t know it all yet. 

There is precedent for the leap of faith necessary to accept the possibility of time travel.  There was a time when most people believed the Earth to be flat.  Those who said it was round were ridiculed, or worse.  Four centuries ago when Galileo claimed that the Earth moves around the sun, he was put on trial for heresy.  We know now that Galileo was right.  Einstein’s explanation of the workings of the universe was counter-intuitive to Newtonian scientists, who called him a crackpot… until his theories were demonstrated to be accurate.

Did anyone think my use of the word “precedent” in the last paragraph was ironic?

The question becomes:  Can a reasonable person accept time travel as a real possibility?  Can someone who believes in reason and order in the universe possibly believe that some persons or perhaps ideas have actually traveled from future to past in our own real world? 

                                                                                                  

I do not claim to have proof.  I am merely a reasonably intelligent, well-educated person who is keeping an open mind and sharing some thoughts.  I offer, for your consideration, some bits and pieces of information which might tend to to lend credence to the possibility of time travelers in our history.

There is nothing here which will change the mind of one who is convinced that time travel is impossible.  There is nothing here which cannot be explained away as coincidence (remarkable coincidences in some instances), or misunderstanding, or deception.  I, for one, would rather keep an open mind as I look at some amazing facts.

Some prophecies from earlier periods of history seem to have been validated.

Ancient Aztec prophecies were apparently accurate in their prediction of the events of the Spanish conquest.  Centuries before the arrival of the Spanish in 1519, Aztec prophecies predicted the return of the god Quetzalcoatl.  They predicted his physical appearance, which matched the appearance of the conquistador Cortes.  They predicted the means and direction from which he would arrive.  They predicted the specific year of his return, and the eruption of the volcano near their capital city in the year preceding.  All of these predictions were validated in historical fact.

Many biblical prophecies have reportedly come to reality.  I won’t focus on them here because I fear injecting religion into this discussion of an already-controversial topic.

The prophecies of Nostradamus, although intentionally ambiguous, seem to have predicted hundreds of events ranging from the 1500s to some that are still in the future.  Some of the predictions actually provide names, lightly scrambled.  Nostradamus appears to have prophesied Hitler (whom he called “Hister”) and Napoleon (whom he called “Napaulon”).  He also named a third great evil leader, “Mabus,” who apparently has not yet arrived.  Beware when you see a player on the international stage with a similar name.

Leonardo da Vinci was a genius by any estimation.  Still, is it reasonable to conclude that he, on his own about 500 years ago, envisioned both the helicopter and submarine?  He drew fairly detailed diagrams of both.

There are narratives of apparent future events in certain works of literature. 

One of the most striking is from the only full length novel by Edgar Allan Poe.  The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym was quite influential, inspiring Herman Melville (who wrote Moby Dick) and  Jules Verne (who wrote a sequel to Pym).  It also set forth a story which would come true decades after it was published.  The novel, published in 1838, told the story of a shipwreck and events that followed.  The events described in the novel seem to have actually occurred in the year 1884.  One of the characters in the novel even shared the name (Richard Parker) of the corresponding real-world person from 1884.

In his book, The Wreck of the Titan, author Morgan Robertson wrote about the sinking of an “unsinkable” ocean liner.  The similarities between Robertson's work and the Titanic disaster are astounding, the similarity of names (‘Titan’ versus ‘Titanic’) being only the most obvious.  In fact, many modern readers assume Robertson’s book is a fictionalized version of the Titanic tragedy of 1912.   But Robertson’s book was published in 1898, 14 years before RMS Titanic was built or launched.

There have been a few predictions in more recent times which may or may not indicate foreknowledge of future events. 

In the 1988 movie “Back to the Future II” it was predicted that a Florida baseball team would win the World Series by the end of the 20^th century.  At the time the movie was made there was no major league baseball team in Florida.  But the 1997 Florida Marlins did in fact win the World Series.  The movie also predicts the Chicago Cubs will defeat a Florida baseball team in the World Series of 2015.  Place your bets.

Similarly, a 1970s board game called “Offshore Oil Strike” seems to foretell the catastrophic ‘Deepwater Horizon’ oil spill of 2010.  The oil spill occurred on a British Petroleum (“BP”) platform off the U.S. coast in the Gulf of Mexico.  The game has a “BP” logo on the box.  Even so, it uses U.S. dollars, not British pounds, as currency.

Now I am going to stretch a bit.  There are many strangely prescient numerical or linguistic similarities that could be coincidences… that probably are coincidences.  But if time travel is ever actually demonstrated to be possible then we’ll have to start looking for connections somewhere in the past - time travelers who moved from future to past, carrying some of their ideas and vocabulary with them.  I present just two examples.

Have you ever wondered about the origins of the idiomatic expression, “made off with…”?  It makes no sense.  Without learning the idiom, the phrase “make off” is unintelligible.  Idiomatically, of course, it means “to steal.”  Or more appropriately, it means to steal and succeed in the theft, at least for a time.  Could this possibly have foreshadowed the largest Ponzi scheme in history, a fraud of between 10 and 20 billion dollars, masterminded by Wall Street investment advisor and now convicted felon Bernie Madoff.  His last name is pronounced exactly like the words, “made off.”  Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

What about the greatest attack on an American city since the 19^th century, the attacks of September 11^th, 2001?  In the American system of numerical date notation, the date of the attacks (which ultimately instigated two wars) was 9-11-01.  In common language, those events are referred to as “nine-eleven.”  Isn’t it ironic that the number chosen as the nationwide emergency phone number – chosen in the year 1967 – was nine-one-one?  If there had been a time traveler from 35 or more years in the future involved in the 1967 meetings to determine the emergency number, what number might he (or she) have been likely to suggest?  Once again, no proof… just intriguing coincidence.

You may have heard about the Mayan calendar.  The ancient Native American civilization of the Maya reached its peak a bit more than a thousand years ago.  The Maya specialized in time measurement, and their calendar was remarkably accurate.  The interesting point for this discussion is that the Maya calendar, which has spanned more than the entire duration of human history to date, ends.  It ends on December 21, 2012.  

Some have claimed that the end of the Mayan calendar predicts the end of the world.  Personally, I am very skeptical of end-of-the-world predictions.  So far, none of them have ever come true.  Maybe the “end of time” implied by the end of the Mayan calendar is just that – not the end of the world, but the end of measured time.  Maybe December 21, 2012 is the day when measuring time becomes irrelevant and unnecessary – because that is the day when time travel will be invented.  It’s just a thought…

Okay, here is one more bit of evidence of time travelers operating in our world.  It may turn out to be a fraud, or it may be the most compelling evidence yet, because it is actual video of a time traveler in the past.  In October 2010 an amazing discovery was made public.  A present-day director (George Clarke) was working with the Charlie Chaplin silent movie “Circus.”  His discovery was not found in the movie itself, but in the film which was rolling outside the theater at the grand opening in Hollywood in 1928.  What he found was video of a pedestrian walking across the field of vision who appears to be talking on a cell phone.  Could it be real documentary evidence of time travelers from the future in the past?  Or maybe it's someone using an early hearing aid.  Decide for yourself.  View the video by following this link: Chaplin Time Traveler Video.

 

Whether or not you believe the character in the video is a time traveler, you should be amused by the frantic outcry from the naysayers.  Their two most vociferous arguments in support of their claim that the video is a hoax:  (1) "This cannot be a time traveler because time travel is impossible."  This is as fine an example of circular reasoning as you could hope for.  They might as well say, “My mind is made up, so don’t confuse me with facts.”  (2) "Cell phones wouldn’t work in 1928 because there were no cell towers then."  But wait... might it be possible that a society capable of time travel might not need 2010-style cell phone towers?  There is a lesson in these illogical objections.  They demonstrate that some who invoke logic to argue against time travel are not logical themselves... which indicates that their objection to time travel likely represents an emotional reaction rather than devotion to reason.

The time has come for you to begin thinking about your opinion.  What do you think?  That time travel might actually be in evidence here?  That Gryphem has flipped his cork?  That Gryphem is a con man involved in a conspiracy to defraud?  That Gryphem himself might be a time traveler?

I know that anecdotal evidence is not proof.  But it is – obviously - evidence.  I do not claim that this collection of stories and comments in any way proves that time travel is real.  I do hope that I have caused a few people to think honestly about things at the edge of our understanding. 

I want to keep us open to possibilities… humble enough to realize that there may be aspects of reality that remain beyond our comprehension… filled with the wonder of creation… willing to discover new things like we did when we were children.

Time travel from future to past seems to contradict the laws of causality.  But perhaps it only seems that way because we do not understand the bigger multi-dimensional context of our universe.  Logical contradictions and paradox are inherent in the concept of time travel.  If the facts convince us that communication from future to past (whether physical or purely intellectual) has occurred, I am confident that we will then make the logical adjustments necessary.

As Sherlock Holmes once said, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth.”  Of course, that logic might cut both ways.  Now that I think of it, Sherlock Holmes himself was once reputed to have dabbled in time travel.  Of course, he was a fictional character.  For all we know.

Or it may be, as Shakespeare’s Hamlet pronounced, “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.”

Now that I think about it, I believe Isaac Asimov wrote a story (“The Immortal Bard”) in which William Shakespeare himself was also a time traveler.

So, it all may be coincidence.  Or it may be that the time travelers are everywhere.  What do you think?

I conclude where we began.  With Edgar Allan Poe.  He wrote:

I have reached these lands but newly

From an ultimate dim Thule —
From a wild weird clime, that lieth, sublime,

Out of Space — Out of Time.

Now I challenge you.  Make what you will of that.

Gryphem

Robert E. Lee & Edgar Allan Poe –More than a Shared Birthday?

Today is January 19^th.  First and foremost for me, this is my parents’ anniversary – 54 years of love, honor, and dedication.  Thanks, Mom and Dad.  I appreciate you.

Now on to the Topic of the Date.

I learned this morning that this is also the birthday of some very influential people.  Robert E. Lee, greatest general of the American Civil War, was born January 19, 1807 in Stratford, Virginia.  Edgar Allan Poe, famed poet and author, was born January 19, 1809, in Boston, but soon moved to Richmond, Virginia, where he was raised.

Who knew these two were so close in age – only two years difference?  Who knew they were from the same region of Virginia?  To go one step further, both were in the U.S. Army for some years in the 1820 and 1830s.  In fact, both were cadets at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.  Lee completed his time at the academy in 1829, graduating near the top of his class.  Poe began his cadet experience in 1830, but left the academy a few years later without graduating.  Did they ever meet?  I have no evidence that they did, but it is quite possible.

I would love to have been there to observe the meeting. 

Robert E. Lee.  Military man, traditionalist, devoted father, committed to duty and honor.  Skilled engineer and military strategist.  A paradox of a man, U.S. Army veteran and supporter of the Union, who openly wished for the end of the institution of slavery, who became the top general of the Confederacy.

Edgar Allan Poe.  Homeless child whose life was characterized by loss, beginning with the death of his mother when he was two years of age.  Capable and aspiring son who failed at one undertaking after another. Compassionate, even romantic man who wrote stories of great cruelty.  Creative genius who took many years to find professional success, who along the way redefined American literature.  Finally successful author who still found little joy in life.

Two Virginians, only two years apart in age, similar in early endeavors but worlds apart in attitude and aptitude.  One a man of great faith and confidence, one a man of little faith and filled with self-doubt.  One firmly grounded in the traditions of the past, one adrift and free to create the traditions of the future. 

Two great men, from the same time and place but from dissimilar circumstances.  Two men, largely misunderstood by their contemporaries. 

 One succeeded, then failed, and took some comfort in the failure. 

"So far from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that Slavery is abolished…  I would have cheerfully lost all that I have lost… to have this object attained.”

 

One failed, then succeeded, and was despondent in his success. 

“…From the same source I have not taken
My sorrow; I could not awaken
My heart to joy at the same tone;
 And all I loved, I loved alone.”

Two men well-acquainted with melancholy.  Protagonists in different spheres, yet strangely similar in their fatalistic affirmations.  Two men, from the same time and place, each of whom made his unique and indelible mark on the world.  Maybe not as different as they seemed at first.

Beau & Bambi Have Arrived

My good friends Beau and Bambi Brooks have finally created their own blog.  They're just getting started, but if I know them at all, it will be very much worth reading.  Here's a link for those of you who might be interested.

http://www.beau-bambi.blogspot.com/

A Surprising Seahawk Story

Gryphem has posted several very serious articles and stories recently.  It's time for a break in the tension.  
-  -  -  -  -
 Here's a Seattle Seahawks press release from Gryphem that explains a great deal.  And you were wondering how they beat New Orleans last week... 

Tom Brady, after living a full life, died. When he got to Heaven, God was showing him around. They came to a modest little house with a faded Patriots flag in the window. "This house is yours for eternity, Tom," said God. "This is very special; not everyone gets a house up here." Tom felt special, indeed, and walked up to his house.

On his way up the porch, he noticed another house just around the corner. It was a 3-story mansion, blue with aqua green trim, a 50-foot tall flagpole with an enormous "Seahawks" flag, in every window a stained glass "12th Man" emblem, and a tiled sidewalk with a mosaic "8" in front of the door.

Tom looked at God and said "God, I'm not trying to be ungrateful, but I have a question. I was an all-pro QB, I hold many NFL records, and I even won a few Super Bowls." God said "So what's your point, Tom?" "Well, why does Hasselbeck get a better house than me?" God chuckled, and said, "Tom, that's not Matt Hasselbeck's house. It's mine."
-  -  -  -  -
I wouldn't want to be the Chicago Bears on Sunday. 

A Chicago Bear come Monday

-  -  -  -  -

And now a late note from the evening of Sunday, January 16, 2011:

The Seahawks played some inspired football, scoring 21 points in the fourth quarter alone.  Unfortunately, it was not enough to overcome the first three quarters, and the final score was 35-24.  The Seahawks have a lot to be proud of this season and postseason... but they will now have to go be proud at home in front of their televisions watching someone else in the champoinship games.  So, about the Chicago Bears as little girls in Seahawk skirts..... well, never mind.

'To Kill a Child' - A Story

Stig Dagerman

This is not a normal thing for the Gryphem blog.  It's not usually a place to reprint literary works.  It may be the shootings in Arizona this week that motivate me to present this to you.  Or a devastated friend half a lifetime ago.  Or a personal experience a decade ago.  Or  it may be that this story is so simple and poignant and meaningful.  In any case, I present to you the short story, "To Kill a Child," by Swedish writer Stig Dagerman, as translated by Steven Hartman and found at http://blog.luciolepress.com/2009/09/13/the-incredible-thoughtprovoking-short-story-to-kill-a-child-by-stig-dagerman.aspx. 

WARNING:  If you are emotionally sensitive, this may devastate you.  If you can handle it, understanding this experience will make the pain worthwhile.  The story will affect you, and that may be a good thing in the long run of your life.
   

- - - - -
After a few days with this story posted on Gryphem, I have decided to pull it.  It is simply too gut-wrenching for this child-friendly location.

I still wish for every adult to read it, if you are up to it.  The link above will take you to the story as posted on the site where I first read it.  It's about 1340 words - quite short for the impact.  Best wishes.

Gryphem

Advertising #1 - Mirroring

One of the recurring themes in modern American life is the pervasive presence of advertising.  It is everywhere.  Advertising has become the background noise of our society.  So what is the purpose of advertising?  The purpose of advertising is to get you to purchase a product, usually for the purpose of generating income.

To get you to purchase a product, some advertisers utilize a pseudo-instructional format.  They show you how wonderful the product is, persuade you that the product is something you want or need.  Some use subliminal influence, showing their product in the hands of people we admire, or in situations we'd like to experience.  The subconscious mind then associates that product with desirable personal qualities or situations, so that we are more likely to purchase it.  Other advertisers go for the blitzkrieg approach.  To achieve their effect they force awareness of the product into your brain through constant repetition.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with advertising   It serves a purpose.  As long as it is not deceptive, offensive, or too loud, we shouldn't have any objection.  But never forget: The advertiser is not there to inform you... not there to enlighten you... not there to make your life better.  The goal of the advertiser is to get you to do something for the betterment of his situation, or that of the people who are paying him.


Now that we understand that, what is the most challenging part of the advertiser's job?  Is it to describe the product?  No.  Is it to be entertaining?  No.  Is it to inform you?  No.  The most difficult part of the task, for the advertiser, is to grab your attention.  The advertiser is competing for your attention - not only with every  other advertiser (for every product), but also with all the ordinary matters of daily life that occupy your mind.  It is tough to overcome not only that other glitzy ad you just saw, but also the fact that your kids are tugging on your sleeve, the dog is barking, and you have new responsibilities at work to think about.  The advertiser has to be really creative to get past all that... and they usually are.  There are more ways to grab your attention than you might think.  Some advertisers manage to do this while maintaining their integrity, remaining honest, considerate, accurate, and inoffensive while still accomplishing the objective.  Many more do not.

Personally, I am most irritated - even offended - by advertising that insults my intelligence.  Automated insertion of personal information into ads isn't really fooling anyone.  Even if your pop-up calls me by name ("Gryphem, singles in your town are waiting to meet you!"), I know it isn't true.  Besides, all the singles around here know I am happily married.  I do not believe that anyone really lost 800 pounds using your diet product.  The president did not really tell people to go back to college.  I don't think you have the secret to winning the lottery. 

One really obvious trick is using spyware to capture a word I just entered into a search engine, and then turning it around at me.  Just because I want to learn how to make an omlette does not mean I want information about skiing near Denver or a program to teach me to speak Spanish.

Most of all I am not fooled by mirroring.  Mirroring is an automated function in which whatever words an internet user types into a search engine are automatically reflected back at him in the results.  Mirroring is a moronic attempt at deception.  The automated function has no idea what the words mean, and the guy who created the mirroring function doesn't care what you are looking for.  He just wants to get you to his website in any way he can. 

Those who use mirroring tactics come in two varieties.  Some are simply ignorant or desperate business people.  They believe, like the stereotypical bad used car salesman, that if they can just get you onto the lot (their website), then they can sell you a car (or something). Others who use mirroring are more nefarious.  They use mirroring to trick you into visiting a site where there is a danger of identity theft or virus infection.  Either way, their purposes are not honorable. 

I have a couple of questions I'd like to ask the mirror-crooks.  (1) Do you really think that every time I enter a word into a search engine that I am trying to buy something?  Apparently you do, since you always offer to sell me whatever word I just put into the search engine.  (2) Do you know how foolish that makes you look?  I guess you don't care... It only takes one person in a thousand being foolish enough to fall for your little deceit to achieve your objective.


We'll wrap up this talk with a real-world example.  A few months ago I was attempting to locate the source of a quotation for an essay I was writing. The quote I was attempting to find, which turned out to be an adaptation of something Nietzsche said, was, "You become what you hate."  Take a look at what the search returned.  The highlighting is mine.

Imagine my dismay when I discovered that I could have done that for free!  If only I had know before I PAID to become what I hate!

Gryphem

Change is a Choice

• This is not a political commentary. 
• It is a commentary about our society, attitudes we maintain about how our world works, and what is possible. 
• We have more choices that most of us ever realize.

- - - - - - - - - -

The presidential campaign of Barack Obama in 2008 was very successful with the slogan “Hope and Change.”  People bought into the attitude of implied optimism.  They needed some hope, some relief from the intense negativity and divisiveness of previous administrations.  But there was a problem. 

“Hope” and “Change” are abstract concepts.  They are fairly meaningless unless they are defined in terms of some event or effect, empty and insincere unless they are coupled with some specified action or result.  The problem with the “Hope and Change” campaign was that it never got too specific about what was being hoped-for, or how change would be effected, or what would be the actual outcome of the change imposed.

In modern politics, change is almost axiomatic.  Both conservatives and progressives (liberals) tend to either identify or engender dissatisfaction, and then seek to CHANGE the object of the dissatisfaction.  The left-leaning politician promises something new and improved (and better), whereas the right-leaning politician promises something tried and true (and better).  Most conservatives promote change just as much as progressives.  The difference is that conservatives and progressives envision positive changes from opposing historical perspectives.

But “Change” should have no positive or negative connotation.  Change can be either good or bad.  Change can mean that you will get a promotion, or that you will lose your job.  Change can mean that your cancer will go into remission, or that it will start spreading aggressively. Change as a goal in itself is irrational.
- - - - - - - - - -

Most people in our nation and society, if they were being honest, would admit that change is not always good.  But let’s go one step further. 

There is an accepted assumption about change that most people in our nation and society accept as axiomatic, self-evident, obvious, not needing proof.  That assumption, often repeated in all venues of society from the halls of Congress to the halls of the local elementary school, is that change is inevitable.  The surprising truth is that it is not.  Change is not inevitable.

To those who are having a sudden violent reaction because I just committed a heresy against a popular culture truism – Yes, I did say that.  Change is NOT inevitable.
 

Cases in point: (1) Ancient Egypt survived with very little change for several thousands of years.  (2) The Dark Ages in Europe lasted six centuries with only a few significant blips on the historical record.  These are historical examples of times and places where change was conspicuously absent.  They demonstrate that cultural change is absolutely NOT inevitable.  

Before I go any further, let me clarify what I mean.  There are different levels of the human experience.  Certainly personal lives will continue to experience life changes simply by virtue of being human. 

Changes at a personal level are what make a lifetime.   Personal changes will indeed happen to all of us, and we wouldn’t want it to be otherwise, because these kinds of change are the punctuation of the story of our life.

Babies will be born, children will become adults, older generations will be replaced by younger generations, and in the end, all will finally pass on.  The cycles of human life will endure. 

The sun will rise and set, spring will follow winter, and the tides will rise and fall.  The cycles of nature will continue as they always have, regardless of human attitudes or interference. 

Sometimes change will be imposed upon individuals or groups.  A company will downsize and a worker will lose his job.  A distracted driver will disable a loved one.  A friend will graduate from college.  A child will marry and move away from home.  These personal life changes will always be a part of our existence. 

Our societies, however, do not have to change constantly, as our personal lives will.  When I say change is not inevitable, I am talking about changes at the level of our society or civilization.  Cultural context can be stable and enduring, and constant or complex cultural change is not inevitable.

Those who assert that change is inevitable almost invariably use personal examples to justify their statement, then proceed as if they have proven society will inevitably change.  Their logic is flawed and their conclusions are erroneous.  The unsettled nature of our constantly-changing society is not inevitable.  It is operating according to patterns that were established a long time ago by those who came before us.  This characteristic of our society is a CHOICE that our predecessors made, and a CHOICE that we make anew with each generation.   It doesn't have to be this way.

A partisan may argue that people should support his or her cause because progress is inevitable, and if the people do not support the cause then some other undesirable consequence will follow.  But that tactic is dishonest, an attempt to trick people into abandoning their choices.  Once the people accept the limitations the partisan imposes, it becomes easy for the partisan to manipulate them with threats and false hopes, by painting the future in terms of impending doom or glory.  The partisan, with his "bias for action," will not tell the people that there are always more alternatives, and free will often includes the option of NOT changing.

You may or may not want to live in a world without change, but the relevant point is that constant change is NOT inevitable.  Living in the midst of constant change is a CHOICE that we make as a society.  You might argue that change is necessary, that it is desirable, even that certain changes constitute a moral imperative.  But you cannot logically assert that change will come whether we want it or not.  Change is always the result of our collective choices. 

Many readers are now loathing the thought of a world in which the status quo is simply accepted.  They are either unwilling or incapable of quickly letting go of that false axiom about change being inevitable.  Many are focusing, no doubt, on the injustices which exist in the world, wondering how I can argue that they should not be corrected.  They are missing the point.  I affirm that there are some cases in which there is a moral imperative to correct injustice.  Accepting the change necessary to correct an injustice, though, does not mean automatic assent to continuing unrelated change.  The fact is, precious few of the changes we experience in our ever-changing society have any basis whatsoever in moral or ethical considerations.  And beyond all this, the question of whether something OUGHT to change and whether it WILL change are not one and the same question.  Human beings have free will and may choose to act or refuse to act, regardless of moral implications. 

It seems to me that we in the 21^st century United States (and to some extent all of western civilization) live in the most tumultuous society humanity has ever produced.  Others have lived through greater changes imposed by conquest or calamity, but no historical culture has made a collective decision to include such constant and culturally-imperative change a part of its very fabric.  I suspect that a stable society would be preferable in many ways to one that is constantly flailing in ongoing attempts to reinvent itself.  I think it might be possible for a society to remain relatively changeless while constantly striving to improve itself.  As long as the values that motivate the society are consistent, the changes will be miniscule - evolutionary rather than revolutionary. 

Would low-impact evolutionary change be a better pattern for our culture and society, going forward, than the existing pattern of constant transformation and endless adjustment?  I think it would lower my stress level.  Yes, it would.  That settles it.  I am now looking for a candidate who will promise me NO CHANGE.

Gryphem



"Change We Can Live With."