Monthly Archives: November 2016

About the Presumption about Shapes and Genomes

Posted on by
2

Thoughts about the last post, A Presumption – Is it true or False? which assumed that a preference for a given shape is stored in the genome, are far ranging. Many arguments don’t address the genome-memory presumption; rather the responses provide evidence that would allow the presumption to be true or false.

Mariner lists different ideas submitted by readers, responding to cogent arguments. Many responses from readers were edited for length. The mariner’s response is in italics.

  • About the Presumption about Shapes and Genomes. This is more evidence that aliens visited Earth in prehistoric times.May or may not be relevant; did visiting aliens morph our genomes to prefer certain shapes or sizes?
  • Primitive cultures did not need the sky to explain their theology; they worshiped what they saw in nature. One might ask why low round shapes dominated religious edifices in a region that has several large mountain ranges with Mount Ararat topping out at 17,000 feet. Did the genome prefer round shapes?
  • It wasn’t until the Iron Age that humans had the materials to build upward. A good assumption in its own right – linking religious shapes to emerging paleontological skills. What decided what the shape would be – a genome or a committee?
  • The American Indian worshipped Mother Earth, a view of which was limited to the horizon – a circular view that influenced them in their religion. A good metaphor. Circles are everywhere in American Indian culture. Did the Indian genome prefer circles?
  • The genome drives everything. In birds especially, instinct predetermines nest shapes, height and building materials; plumage is an ingrained judgment to make decisions about mating, etc. Free will is not as prevalent as humans would like to think. I vote for the genome. A strong argument. The mariner considered birds as well. Do birds have a religious culture – the other side of the presumption?

The presumption is much ado about little. The human brain is a montage of experience, genetic instruction and external reality as humans interpret it. Completing the puzzle or not won’t change anything or mean anything. It’s just a puzzle.

Still, by following one’s thoughts, there are many side streets that help the brain stay supple and alert. For example, there is an old pop-psych quiz about preferred shapes: One is asked which of four shapes is most appealing – a circle, a square, a triangle or a squiggly line? Purportedly, a personality that chooses the circle likes things to be simpatico, undisturbed and pleasant; the person that picks the square likes things to be orderly, secure and well defined; the person that prefers the triangle is comfortable with change, conflict and existential attitudes. Finally, the one who picks the squiggly line is artistic, comfortable with surrealistic solutions, and dislikes redundancy. Which do you prefer?

4-shapesIn the end, does a personality select the edifice shape?

Is widespread use by others of an original religious shape simply practical and the simplest path?

In Washington D.C., edifices abound. Consider the Washington Monument, Saint Paul’s Cathedral and the Viet Nam Memorial. Which chose, the architect, the committee, the religion, or a shape preference in our genome?

Could it be all of the above?

Ancient Mariner

A Presumption – Is it True or False?

Posted on by
1

Mariner begins a new series of posts that presume some idea is applicable to some process or result that may not be in the mainstream of history, science, or behavior. The posts will occur occasionally and unexpectedly.

Presumption – Over time, preferred geometric forms become ingrained in the genome. True or false?

To present a broad example, very early forms of religion (7,000 years ago or earlier) were not interested in height or divine sexuality until, abruptly, new gene pools from western Turkey and early Greece introduced a preference for vertical structures to express religiosity. The earliest gene populations built structures with rounded domes while later ones, like Egyptians, Babylonians, Mesopotamians and classic Greeks went with super large vertical architecture and focused on kings as gods (more a cultural preference). To a noticeable extent, the change in architecture was a rapid shift in preference for religious edifices; further, from the view of genetic anthropology, it is relatively clear that a new gene pool suddenly changed visual shape preferences.

Another illustration of circles dominating vertical architectures are the giant, geoglyphs discovered in the Peruvian desert; then there’s the example of soaring cathedrals and office buildings in large western cities. We could go on.[1]

On the other end of the European expansion, round edifices were preferred – consider Stonehenge[2] before the Roman occupation…

Another example occurs at the beginning and end of the great migration out of Africa – the one that travels through China, up to Japan and Russia, across the Bering Strait, down through North America and into Central and South America. Compare the architecture of the Xia Dynasty of ancient China to architecture at the end of the migration in Mayan and Aztec cultures – separated by 3,000 years and three continents.

In between were civilizations that did not create similar forms. Instead, one can see that these western civilizations, like the early religions in Turkey and Stonehenge, seemed to prefer round structures. The circle is prevalent in everything from igloos and tepees to religious symbols, to garment decorations to the Peruvian giant circles in the desert. Because these intervening civilizations existed in vast terrains that did not require reactions to mountainous geography, (the civilizations in between lived on islands, flatlands and ocean front) the theologies and godheads were vastly different yet none preferred vertical architecture until mountains were the primary topography.

There are historians who suggest that migrations traveled from the Indonesian area and settled in the middle of South America and are ancestors to a more primitive culture – remnants of which still exist in the great forests, Chile and Peru. However, in the deserts south of the Amazon basin, huge geoglyphs, well above normal size and often based on geometric design, reflect the same pattern of super sizing as the Mesopotamians.

It is agreed that terrain, over time, alters geographic preferences. But over generations, do certain cultural shapes become preferred as well? Darwin’s finches proved that finches developed new beak shapes and in England, feather colors matching local tree colors. Is this true about humans as well?

Can we presume that the genome carries a preference for certain geometric shapes – a preference ingrained over generations?

True or False?

Given the challenge, it will be hard to avoid association with successive generational adaptation.

Ancient Mariner

[1] The mariner cheats by including large, tall office buildings because they are neither religious edifice nor caused by one’s genome. They exist because there are too many people and not enough space. However, allowed to be taller than a religious edifice, one wonders whether capitalism is the actual religion.

[2] Weak example; It was a calendar. Nevertheless, circular architecture dominated the British Isles until castles came along.

Back to Real News

Posted on by
Reply

In an effort to recapture the eclectic, more typical style of the Blog of the Ancient Mariner, the mariner revisited his list of must-read web sites, magazines, newspapers and, after a brief respite, television news. In fact, his wife tipped him about an article in VOX, a digital magazine.

Two odd issues that one wouldn’t think would capture broad interest (even the mariner’s local paper) are the Electoral College and the Emolument Clause of the Constitution. A third topic that should, perhaps must be at the center of voter discussion is the future of jobs.

The mariner shares the two sources with his readers because they are EXCELLENT sources that continue to provide above average articles that one must read to keep up with the personal duty of managing a free democracy.

ELECTORAL COLLEGE (EC)

The first source is VOX. VOX is a grown-up, fully commercial version of The Blog of the Ancient Mariner. VOX negotiates with smaller web site journalists to have them contribute posts through VOX. Occasionally VOX will buy more developed websites and integrate them with the VOX publishing team. The result is a current and unbiased presentation of topics that are related to substantive issues, ideas, and more informative than other commercial publications like cable news. Mariner recommends VOX as a member of the reader’s favorites list.[1]

To tickle your fancy, here are a few phrases from the article.

– Why not rely on a popular vote like other democracies do?

– The EC allows states to count slaves, each as 3/5 of a person.

– Why do we still have an EC?

EMOLUMENT CLAUSE

The New York Times is the second source that should be checked regularly. NYT is an influential newspaper around the world. To a surprising extent, its priority of topics reported sets the focus of many other news sources and discussions about the US, politics, finances, and the important information about business, health, nature, science, etc. – even what new books individuals may want to buy. The paper edition works near New York but the digital copy is of-the-moment and organized for faster perusing. Also should be added to the favorites folder.

Particularly at the time the Constitution was written, the forefathers were afraid that a US president could be bought by foreign monarchies and competing commercial interests who would want to block competition from the US. Further, the President was to govern by the authority of a democracy and could not be influenced by special interests. Donald has a strong desire to keep his world-wide business empire while he is President. For those who fantasize about some method to remove Donald, if he is denied Trump corporate authority, he may resign on his own. This conflict with the emolument clause will persist as a top news item likely to reach the Supreme Court.[2]

JOBLESS FUTURE

VOX again publishes an insightful article about how, in just a few decades, there is a chance we may all draw our wages not from commerce but from Government. This is hard to imagine when today it is all we can do to hold on to Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and what there is of single payer insurance. How could we be prejudiced against lower class people on welfare? We would all be on a government handout!

Granted, the Services Employee International Services Union (SEISU) considers the idea a valid argument. We have known about the disappearance of jobs because of automation; even worse, job sources are dropping retirement, benefits packages and do what they can to avoid government mandates like minimum wage, equal pay for women and maternity leave. Because this cultural transition is already underway – and has been for at least 20 years, it is close to becoming front page news as a national and Federal issue instead of a right to work issue on a state-by-state basis. Something as serious as keeping 300,000 people alive is better handled by the Federal Government. The managers of a free democracy should be schooled on this jobless issue and not be caught up in a class war like the 2016 elections.[3]

 

Ancient Mariner

[1] http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/12/13598316/donald-trump-electoral-college-slavery-akhil-reed-amar

For a procedural description issued by the US Government see

https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about.html

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/21/us/politics/donald-trump-conflict-of-interest.html?_r=0

[3] http://www.vox.com/conversations/2016/10/17/13245808/andy-stern-work-universal-basic-income-technology-artificial-intelligence-unions

No better. Chicken Little still is Afraid.

Posted on by
Reply

 

What is that old adage about you can take something out of something but you can’t change the person? It is clear that Donald – no matter how hard government and the media may try – will remain an autocrat to the bone. In any milieu, only his view counts. There is no value to a person being sensitive, or educated, or skilled or straightforward in their own right; what’s important is how loyal and how acquiescent a person is. That’s because autocratic personalities make all the decisions.

Many seemed relieved at Donald’s change of demeanor and acquiescence on terrible objectives advocated during the campaign. Do not be deceived. If you think Hillary has an alternative plan, that plan is merely a light breeze compared to Donald’s 70 mph shear winds. Never forget that Donald always is looking out for self-serving objectives we will never know about.

For example: what is behind all this niceness and favoritism once Donald became President Elect? Donald is stroking as many targets in the Republican Party, the media and important personalities – even democrats in politics as he can. Good ol’ Donald. Humph. He is against the wall on keeping his business and the Presidency at the same time. He knows it will be a squeeze and likely to be challenged. Donald, of course, is saying he is surprised there were no restrictions on a President doing personal, profit based business in the oval office and besides, a President can choose his own “conflicts.” When Donald starts lying, we have learned (it is hoped) that the reality discounted by his lies hides a conflict with Donald’s self-serving objectives.

Something our insightful electorate will have to accommodate is that justice will not be determined in the Department of Justice; it is defined and pronounced in the Whitehouse. If someone like Rudy Giuliani is appointed Attorney General, the conflict may never be prosecuted. Important decisions of justice are adjudicated in the White House.

The point is this: Autocracy is not democracy; autocracy could be the confrontation that curbs the abuses of corporatism – leaving it unprotected from loophole laws and legitimate, self-serving political manipulation. However, not likely; the nature of autocratic governing has the same objective as corporatism, just more crude. Autocrats turn commerce into something similar to mafia-like favoritism and strong-armed tactics if one doesn’t get with the program.

Let’s take a tour of “democracies”

Official classification:

Full democracies are nations where civil liberties and basic political freedoms are not only respected, yet are also reinforced by a political culture conducive to the thriving of democratic principles. These nations have a valid system of governmental checks and balances, independent judiciary whose decisions are enforced, governments which function adequately, and media which is diverse and independent. These nations have only limited problems in democratic functioning.

Flawed democracies are nations where elections are fair and free, but may have issues (e.g. media freedom infringement), and basic civil liberties are honored. Nonetheless, these nations have significant faults in other democratic aspects, including underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the functioning of governance.

Hybrid regimes are nations where consequential irregularities exist in elections regularly preventing them from being fair and free. These nations commonly have governments which apply pressure on political opponents, non independent judiciaries, widespread corruption, harassment and pressure placed on the media, anemic rule of law, and more pronounced faults than flawed democracies in the realms of underdeveloped political culture, low levels of participation in politics, and issues in the functioning of governance.

Authoritarian regimes are nations where political pluralism has vanished or is extremely limited. These nations are often absolute dictatorships, may have some conventional institutions of democracy- but with meager significance, infringements and abuses of civil liberties are commonplace, elections- if they take place- are not fair and free, the media is often state-owned or controlled by groups associated with the ruling regime, the judiciary is not independent, and the presence of omnipresent censorship and suppression of governmental criticism.

It is left to the reader to classify the United States – especially considering that Donald is about to be President/business CEO.

Ancient Mariner

Chicken Little is Afraid!

Posted on by
1

Slowly, the mariner and his wife begin to peek at the political news. Like small fishes in the coral reef, quickly we dart away. The similarities between the Hitler takeover of Germany and Donald’s takeover of the United States are eerie. In both elections, neither won the popular vote; large numbers of citizens were ignored by the establishment for years and therefore wanted a leader who was good at kicking down sand castles and toy block bridges; a leader who didn’t understand what the word egalitarian meant or was capable of implementing egalitarian policies that would right the wrongs of a recently defeated Germany or a recently destroyed US democracy.

Hitler filled his administration with people who did not fit well with complicated, nuanced organizations; the appointees possessed extremist attitudes and opportunistic ethics; Donald is doing precisely the same. Against a background of political incompetence in the elected government, both administrations, despite D-league leaders, were (are) quickly capable of installing a white nationalist nation, permit horribly abusive punishment on citizens who dared to disagree with the administration; and further utilize mafia-like tactics and confiscation techniques to take possession of property, financial opportunities and remove worker rights from government contracts; finally, appointing only cronies and those each felt he could trust regardless of instruction or circumstances.

Henry Kissinger thinks Donald is manageable. With all due respect, mariner disagrees. Donald is a hard core narcissist raised in a manner where he cannot, even in the face of absolute evidence, admit he lost or is wrong or even that someone else contributed. “If people think you never lose, you can do anything” (Donald). Further, Congress is too incompetent to steer Donald – only take advantage of his presence. Sadly, two wrongs don’t make a right.

Finally – though there is more – instead of engaging democratic allies to assist Germany in its economic crisis, Hitler turned to another autocratic dictatorship: Mussolini’s Italy. One cannot help but notice Donald’s preference to solve “the world’s problems” by associating with Putin’s Russia – an autocratic dictatorship.

Chicken Little, to use his colloquial style, is running about shouting “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”

And very important to the personal sense of things represented by this post, a woman who is the best friend of the mariner’s daughter and equally a friend of the mariner and his wife has written a poignant accounting of the recent election. Please, please go to http://www.refinery29.com/2016/11/130338/trump-womens-health-care-social-security . It says a lot about the intellectual demands and knowledge required of the electorate to manage a democratic republic founded on freedom.

From a different angle, at least two major futurists see this moment as the end of world polity and the associated economic model – the end of a global culture in place since World War One. This perception may be wise, even hopeful. However, the Antichrist enjoys meddling in times of great change. What can be said that is positive? Hitler and Mussolini invented the V2 rocket and made trains run on time. What will Donald and Putin do?

Ancient Mariner

 

Consider This . . .

Posted on by
2

The last post did a short analysis of the causes and voting behavior of the electorate’s response to the candidates. In this post, we look forward – not so much about the cabinet and key players in the White House, which looks neither republican nor democrat but certainly a team who will fumble as the weight of running a democratic republic falls upon them. We must give them time to fumble and see how they recover.

The Guru still is contributing to the mariner’s thoughts so our focus will address – in the looong view – well rooted troubles evidenced by the election and the consequences that will occur if they are not addressed.

Consider religion –

Guru blames our religious difficulties on Puritans and other fundamentalists who relocated in America because their practices did not fit well with a rapidly liberalizing Church in Europe. Even today, employees of Planned Parenthood may be shot, burned off the property, forced by a government who ignores the US Constitution to dismantle financial support, lay debilitating regulations upon them and otherwise ostracize Planned Parenthood from their presumed right to pursue basic human rights. When was it that Protestants stopped slitting open the length of every Quaker’s nose just because they were Quakers?

The current fundamentalist unrest should not even be an issue. The nation was clearly founded on freedom of religion. The pettiness is not really religious; it is the belief that because our money references God, the nation is a theocracy – just the conflict our founders wanted to avoid. If this conflict cannot be put to rest, the conservative theocratic movement will keep our politicians from dealing with tough issues through politically democratic compromise. The tea party folks came close to bringing down the US for good. Further, throughout time since the beginning, religious practices have changed as society changed – but not without questionable abuses of religious doctrine in defense of tradition. It is not enough to be an American Citizen and be safe from beheadings and genocide by ISIL; we owe our own nation loyalty to its premise of freedom for all citizens. Being citizens of the only nation in the world that defines itself as ‘freedom for all citizens’ requires even the religiously devout to – in this nation at least – be loyal to that principle. Religious faith is relevant or it becomes destructive if not meaningless.

We need all three branches of the Federal Government and state governments as well to deal successfully with international politics, greed-based corporatism, scientific knowledge that may leave us on a pile of extinct species before we may want to do that and a planet that is pretty much fed up with us. The new world of governance cannot be held back by regional faith; virtually every issue will require international agreements involving many faiths, cultures and races.

 

Consider economics –

The United States is founded on principles never before used to run a nation. US citizens were required to manage themselves. True, there was a republic but that was for serious things like war, taxation, balance of national economy, and dealing with other nations. In practice, citizens believed in freedom – the principle that everyone could pursue a successful life without oppression; they were free to believe independent religious beliefs – the principle that ethnicity and prejudice would not interfere with the pursuit of happiness; and they believed in loyalty to their fellow citizens to support the principles of freedom of faith, freedom of opportunity, and the personal and cultural loyalty to believe in freedom for everyone. In other words, citizens had to believe in their nation’s principle and manage themselves as keepers of freedom.

Freedom includes citizen wellbeing. If one citizen takes from another unjustly, or prevents a citizen from opportunity, or fair exchange for labor, in public discourse protects a citizen’s equal rights under the Constitution but consciously interferes with citizen freedom as a shared right, to a just and fair economy owned by everyone, then the US concept that everyone has freedom to pursue life and liberty has disappeared. Mariner does not suggest every citizen be equal in assets but taking more than is deserved, necessary or leveraging dishonestly is not in the interest of the US – which depends on each citizen to be loyal to the right of equality and freedom.

Corporatism is the belief in profit above freedom; Corporatism provokes class prejudice; Corporatism is free of allegiance to freedom, compounded by guaranteed protection as a human participant, a corporation is a double-barreled abuse of the founding fathers’ intentions.

 

Consider Globalism.

The mariner groups several diverse movements under this term: corporatism, technology, biological progress through medicine and chemistry, protection of the biosphere, and competition by war for greedy and ideological reasons. All these activities have one thing in common: they are not based on the concept of nationalism; they are not based on one nation’s philosophy of government; and by definition, globalism cannot be allocated to nations individually.

If the reader thinks it has been a hard row to move humanity from 1760 to 2016, prepare for even more from 2016 to 2272. A person alive today cannot fathom what civilization will be like 256 years from now.

One wonders what events, provocations, inventions and changes in principles of governance will be required – either collaboratively or with great conflict – to achieve insights and rules that achieve solutions to global issues humanity has never experienced – let alone survive in the process. The triangle of strength and success written by Os Guinness[1] and resurrected by Eric Mataxas[2], that is, “Freedom requires virtue; virtue requires faith; faith requires freedom” is the only tool set available. Considering advancing historical eras by government ideologies, The United States is the beginning of a new, common governance that may be the only ideology capable to take on Globalism:

Freedom, if you can keep it.

 

[1] Os Guinness is an English author and social critic. Born in China, where his parents were medical missionaries, he is the great-great-great-grandson of Arthur Guinness, the Dublin brewer. He was a witness to the climax of the Chinese revolution in 1949, and returned to England in 1951, where he went to school and college. He received a B.D. from University of London in 1966 and a D.Phil from Oriel College, Oxford in 1981. Guinness first stated the Freedom Triangle when promoting his book, A Free People’s Suicide. Guinness is still alive at age 75.

[2] Reference to the Freedom Triangle is resurrected by Mataxas in his book If You Can Keep it, the Forgotten Promise of American Liberty. 2016 best seller. Mariner believes this book is required reading for every American citizen.

Ancient Mariner

The Campaign in Retrospect

Posted on by
Reply

Mariner, like millions of the electorate, was shut down for a few days while reasoning skills and dozens of new inconsistencies had to be rewoven into something that represented a functional reality. Guru was called in to help.
The broadest overview of the 2016 election revolved around the idea that it was time for the US to make a legitimate turn toward present and future reality. It was time to step out of the Reagan model of economy and early twentieth century social constraint. It was time to rebalance, indeed restart, the democratic model that was the foundation for creating the US Republic. It became obvious that democracy and the principles of liberty and justice were disappearing faster and faster.
More targeted were the widespread issues of race and employment. The elitists of the US have ignored the lower classes – which have long suffered, and quite severely, the loss of manufacturing, misunderstood movement of jobs overseas, influx of immigrants seen as a direct threat to any jobs that may be left. In an excellent column about the results of the election, Fareed Zakaria added urban versus forgotten rural which may be where the surprise Electoral College results emerged.
For the 2016 campaign, three prominent candidates emerged to wrestle with the unrest that was obvious among much of the citizenry: Hillary Clinton, who defended the Reagan “establishment” feeling it should continue but be a kinder and gentler government; Bernie Sanders, who championed major changes to governance that would stop the systemic abuse of democracy by republicans and special interests; and Donald Trump, who had no public service experience but had marketing and sales skills that resonated with those citizens who most desperately felt the Government had deliberately failed them.
– –
Bernie has been in government his entire life and was championed by those citizens who wanted to toss out the Establishment – replacing it with younger, more idealistic leaders. Donald was championed in similar fashion by older citizens who had lost jobs and did not share in the oligarchic wealth. His lack of experience in government, his narcissistic personality and disregard for decorum made him a perfect candidate; a good metaphor is a battering ram used to break through castle gates. His citizen base wanted the government dismantled lock, stock and barrel. Casualties be damned. Hillary carried the baggage of thirty years of Clinton management. Clearly pragmatic rather than principled, Hillary had public and private agendas which led to widespread mistrust among the voters.
The Democratic Party failed to recognize, similarly to the Republican Party, that the party had lost the support of its base. As Zakaria pointed out, the American culture displayed urban entertainment, music, movies, advertisements, and all the jobs and unshared profits; rural culture was absent and unrewarded. The democrats were pegged with a moniker: elitist democrats.
None of the three voter bases liked the other two candidates. The two democratic finalists for the Presidency would not get much voter support from the opponent’s base. From the beginning, whoever between Hillary and Bernie won the primary, the base would not receive full support from the democratic opponent for the final run. On the republican side, Donald clearly would receive little help from the republican ‘Establishment’ base but had no other republican competitors. Further, a percentage of Bernie’s base would switch to Donald because they had the same disadvantaged life as Donald’s base. The ‘silent majority’ (stressed rural populations) chose to vote for Donald – flipping the Electoral College. Hillary wins the popularity count with the Elites but rural precincts win the Electoral College.
– –
Donald swiftly is changing his platform to move to the political center. It is too early to understand what issues he actually will take a stand on to impose his platform. The people he knows and trusts are a ragtag bunch of sensationalists, racists, gofer business types and political class D ball players, e.g. Rudy Giuliani.
Guru is most concerned about the Supreme Court. Donald and the antique congress could do significant damage to the future of the US for decades. China, Russia, the Middle East and Central Banks likely have their fingers crossed on this issue.
Infrastructure may get a start but it will be a bruising experience at the state level with no compromises offered to local distribution of profit. FDR will roll in his grave.
Congress will become even more draconian about governance and liberal issues like PBS and abortion.
As far as Donald is concerned, who knows? Guru is the first to say Donald is unpredictable.

REFERENCE SECTION

 Definition of an existentialist:


pema-chodron‘To be fully alive, fully human, and completely awake is to be continually thrown out of the nest. To live fully is to be in no-man’s land, to experience each moment as completely new and fresh. To live is to be willing to die over and over again.’
– Pema Chödrön
A spot-on description of one who experiences an existential world. Pema Chödrön is an 80 year-old Tibetan monk and US citizen. Pema is a Buddhist nun and follower of Rinpoche Trungpa Chögyam. Meditation is central to Chögyam. Dozens of websites, many with videos, are available.

About civic duty and self-governance:


eric-mataxas‘. . . So it’s not the role of the government to solve all our problems through legislation. But they [problems] must be attended to nonetheless.
And here’s the problem: The less the culture attends to these things, the more the government will attend to them and the less freedom there will be. The greater the role the government plays, the more it crowds out the culture’s role, the role of the people – and the true freedom of the people.’
– Eric Metaxas

From Metaxas’s book about the unique role of self governance in the creation of the United States and relating to the bonded relationship between the three principles of the Golden Triangle: (Os Guiness, author): The Golden Triangle of Freedom, or freedom, virtue, and faith. This triad of cultural goods is mutually reinforcing. “Freedom requires virtue; virtue requires faith; faith requires freedom.”
Ancient Mariner

We will Live Forever or Die Trying

Posted on by
Reply

The mariner was re-reading a few of the more interesting articles in back issues of magazines. One from The Economist (August 13 2016) provoked thoughts about how culture would change if we lived a lot longer and how the economy and international relations would change and….

To share some thoughts with the reader, part of the article is copied below:

“Humanity must avoid the trap fallen into by Tithonus, a mythical Trojan who was granted eternal life by the gods, but forgot to ask also for eternal youth. Eventually, he withered into a cicada.

The trap of Tithonus is sprung because bodies have evolved to be throwaway vessels for the carriage of genes from one generation to the next. Biologists have a phrase for it: the disposable soma. It explains not only general senescence, but also why dementia, cancer, cardiovascular problems, arthritis and many other things are guarded against in youth, but crammed into old age once reproduction is done with. These, too, must be treated if a long and healthy life is to become routine. Moreover, even a healthy brain may age badly. An organ evolved to accommodate 70 or 80 years of memories may be unable to cope when asked to store 150 years’ worth.”

There are other social points made in the article. If the reader is interested, see: http://www.economist.com/printedition/2016-08-13 Page 14.

Using these thoughts as a springboard, one can take off running in many directions. The mariner provides a few:

How will family life change? Today, children typically are born before parents are forty; later adult partnership has a few awkward adjustments which may have to be taken seriously on a cultural level and dealt with differently than the present decorum provides. Will a lifespan become two or three life spans? The Economist says having children at 100 could be possible.

Today, one of the serious issues that confront us is the economics of older workers; not just at age 65 or 70 but the prejudice against the middle-aged worker – say someone approaching 50. If workers lived healthily beyond 100 or 120, should they be bumped off the first team so younger blood can move up the ladder?

Retirement is a growing problem today. Depression, boredom, lack of personal value and raison d’être are psychological traps even if one lives only a decade into retirement. How about living 50 or 60 years?

The economic side of the retired lifestyle is an even larger issue. Is a retiree required to carry a pension for self support? Where does the money come from to live another 100 years?

Sociologists say that a neighborhood has a span of 60 years. Built in 1960 as a new, upscale neighborhood with lots of young people, new houses and streets, and a bustling social culture – in 60 years it will be old houses, old people, lots of rentals and a slip in economic class. What if the neighborhood has to remain dynamic for 100 years?

Will there be senior pro sport leagues? Where does Roger Federer go to play when he reaches 50 given medicine will keep him young enough not to lose that step most athletes lose around 30?

Will hotspots like Sandals move their fantasy advertisements out a few decades? What do healthy 120 year-olds fantasize about?

Malthus[1] would be in a frenzy if he heard people would live virtually forever. He believed that overcrowding would force humans back to primitive cultures because resources would become scarce. Well, how will we manage excessive population when people won’t die?

Presented a bit tongue in cheek, actually these questions will require immense change in H. sapiens’ arc of life.

Joseph Campbell isn’t here to help us make a new one.

Ancient Mariner

[1] — Thomas Malthus, 1798. An Essay on the Principle of Population.

 

Amid the Smoke of Battle

Posted on by
1

The mariner hasn’t returned to tracking human events. It isn’t that a return to childish daily news and tragic global news is too distasteful (which it certainly is) but that this time of the year – the first hard frost – is a busy time in the gardens. Mariner has been forced to take his shop lights outside to continue grubbing in the night for buried lily bulbs like a raccoon, moving shrubs and accent plants around to improve the garden, planting new bulbs for next year and finally addressing hardscape issues like new patio features, sidewalks, lighting, etc.

Mariner is thankful for the sympathy of readers, family and friends –most are commiserating as well. But we must, whether victor or victim, don our cultural uniform and return to the fray.

Mariner consulted with his alter ego team, Chicken Little, Prophet Amos and Guru to compile a set of questions to research as we venture back to the fray. These questions are compiled blindly since they have not been vetted by exposure to media.

 

Will Donald appoint family to significant positions of government?

Who will run whatever TRUMP business exists in the private sector?

How much policy independence will Donald grant to Mike if any? Related, how many secretary positions will Donald leave unfilled?

How many argumentative campaign issues will Donald forego to create a broker position with Congress?

For reasons of complexity and time, mariner will pass for now on international policy and economics.

Finally, for the reason that one can stomach only so much, mariner will ignore Rudy Giuliani, nothing more than a remora fish.

For those who have suffered greatly, like the democratic advocate who worked in the White House whose mother had health insurance only because of the Affordable Care Act but voted for Donald; or the typically uninformed acquaintance talking with the mariner’s wife, confessing she voted for Donald because he said Hillary was crooked: shape up and return to action – we have a Reagan Supreme Court to deal with.

Ancient Mariner

 

There is despair in life.

Posted on by
1

If the reader hasn’t experienced it, the reader has not experienced life. All humans, to be recognized as complete souls, must experience the five stages of grief: 1. Denial and isolation; 2. Anger; 3. Bargaining; 4. Depression; 5. Acceptance.

To varying degrees of emotional strife, these five emotional reactions can be applied to many situations in life; certainly the loss of family. But these feelings emerge when a worker is fifty-five and is discharged before retirement becomes available. These emotions are felt when risk and violence emerge as a potential threat to life. And yes, these feelings emerge when one doesn’t belong and has no validating proof of personal community value. Apparently, in the election of Donald, indeed in every campaign since Bobby Kennedy, the mariner has been odd man out.

There aren’t many elections left for the mariner. Realistically, The Supreme Court will not be capable of rational decisions working in a world believed still to exist since 1985. But others must charge on. The millennials are a powerful generation. Already in their young lives they are bonded, they are not satisfied with the old fogeys. It will, however, take most of their lives to overturn a useless Supreme Court.

The mariner must press on. His mind still rebels at idiocy, racism, greed and self satisfying ignorance. Whether the ignorant accept it or not, free access to information, the sophistication required to live in an overcrowded world, and the scary environment of the Earth weighing in on survivability, will move us on whether we desire it or not. Just not today.

In an era of Donald and a Reconstructionist-minded republican government, may God have mercy on our souls.

Ancient Mariner