Catullus 85

In another forum, Hope reminds us of the timelessness of experience.

Odi et amo. Quare id faciam, fortasse requiris.
Nescio, sed fieri sentio et excrucior.

I hate and I love. Why does this happen, perhaps you ask?
I know not, but I know that it happens and I am tortured.

Catullus lived and loved and wrote in the first century before Christ.

The modern scholarly resource Wikipedia notes that Anakreon laid down a similar riff four centuries earlier.

I love and yet I do not love,
I am crazy and I am not crazy.

This is exactly what I've been saying. I've been saying I'm crazy, that I love, that I don't love, that all this trouble stems from actually being sane.

It ain't workin'.

I wrote a lot more and deleted it. It suffices to say I must be crazy. The poets say so.

Short Post in Celebration of Life

I'm pretty much hating on life these days -- all of it is entirely my own fault, and knowing that does wonders for my mood -- so I'm following the advice Roy gave awhile ago to just blog a little every day. Makes me feel better, somehow. Even just a little bit. Not that this will improve my writing. But surely it can't make it worse.

I want to know what the expected outcome is of being married a long time. Through both the internet and actual real conversations with actual real people, I've seen that there is a lot of ambivalence out there. People, both sexes, not really excited about who they're devoted to, but it's too god damn much trouble to make a change. Now, the dumb ones, who think they're clever, go and explore and have affairs and get caught and wind up in the shit, and if they're well-known and powerful they make the news and we all get a laugh. But the rest of us don't act up like that, we just sort of live the habits and accommodations and look up once in awhile to notice, wow, another year has gone by, fancy that.

I'm struggling because on the one hand, I'm sick of living a half-ass life, and though I married someone who never lives her life half-ass -- in fact, she pretty much kicks ass, every day -- I can't just flip a switch and start wanting to be full-ass specifically with her. No: Ambivalence; and a long history; and way too much shit boiling up from the state of our lives when we got together as well as from all the years before, dating right back to when I was a one year old. Seriously. All those long arcs of personal history are converging to this point, focused like sunlight through a lens, and that intense light beam is slowly but surely lighting the fuse.

Sort of a crisis that strikes at mid life. That's why they call it a, erm, you know. But what I'm wanting to know is, what do all the other poor saps (and sapettes) do? Right, some go off. Maybe I will too, at least something happens. Some (men particularly) push it deep inside where it twists around and they wind up being seriously outlived by their wives. Some manage to look (at least outwardly) quite happy. Typically those are men of faith. That fact bugs the shit out of me.

I understand faith. I understand it as a form of mental organization that human beings evolved as a means to survive. More accurately put (because too often, evolution is described backwards, as if changes are adaptations when in fact they are accidents that happened to turn out as advantages), the mutation that allows for faith and god and all that provided a psychological advantage that, in the unforgiving primal forest, led to more successful reproduction. So we all have it. I just don't choose to use it. Faith is like fire with all its risks and benefits, but now that we have central heating, why set part of your house on fire just to keep warm?

Yet there they are: Men of faith who have defined and narrowed (or maybe broadened, wtf do I know) their lives and found their bliss is in what they've spent the past couple three decades building. Well. BULLY FOR THEM.

I have to get back to work but my whole hating on life point is that this conundrum and a number of related side issues that I'm not going into here have me so distracted that my job performance sucks which only makes things worse and I'm supposed to feel better now that I've written it out and done so publicly. Yeah.

The Trouble With Opening Up Trade With Cuba

Those wicked-cool old cars will become collector's items and get auctioned off on the Speed Channel and the taxi drivers will all get used Sentras from Mexico.

Wingnut

I just realized that since

• There's no problem with gay marriage
  
• CCW (Concealed-Carry Weapons) permits should be issued to anyone who applies and meets the requirements
  
• Marijuana needs decriminalizing
  
• As does independent prostitution (i.e. non-pimp non-brothel)
  
• Illegal immigrants should be deported
  
• Illegal immigrants' medical bills should be reimbursed by their home countries
  
• Public school funding should be tripled
  
• Public school employees should be hired/fired/compensated on professional criteria rather than as though represented by some labor union
  
• Private school vouchers should be encouraged, based on models where they help the poor
  
• Rent control should be eliminated
  
• Capital gains taxes should be eliminated for anyone worth less than say $5M
  
• Any community can and should define areas where nudity is legal
  

(and I could go on) I must be some sort of nut. Am I a wacko liberal or a crypto-conservative? Do I care? Do you? Why am I still up?

Obamanauguration

It was a fine day to watch the big screens in the company cafeteria and listen to the normally very restrained employee base erupt into occasional applause.

It was inspiring to see that if you strip away the network hype and the camera positioning and the bands and parades, the inauguration of a new president is really a very brief and simple affair. A few words earnestly spoken, and done.

People I was with thought that

To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

was a great line. So did I. I'm sure further analysis will show most of the speech came from a combination of prior speeches -- they always do. But that doesn't matter. A presidential inauguration is a time when we remind ourselves and the world what we are about.

* * *

What are we about? The countless examples of Bush Derangement Syndrome don't tell us, and I look forward to them fading away. In some quarters they will be replaced with a naive disappointment over Obama's inevitable grappling with reality. Those of us who were not deranged will offer respect, if early indications are to be believed. Further afield will be some people who simply can't be pleased.

Out of all this our diversity is forged; and from diversity, strength and, eventually, prosperity. Forget about peace. Peace follows when enough people do enough of the right things right. But until every one of humanity's countless diverse communities embrace the values of tolerance, understanding, and negotiation, peace will remain an elusive dream. What we have to do is remain (in this order) strong, free, and prosperous.

* * *

Who said this? Guess, don't Google.

"So it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world. This is not primarily the task of arms, though we will defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary. Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way."

Everywhere, Everything the Same

I got an email from LiveJournal. I have an account there. I don't write in it. I don't even know the password offhand. I opened it once so I could more easily comment at other people's LiveJournal pages. I don't remember the last time I cared about that.

The email said they were very sad to cut staff but it was all part of a "restructuring". Global design and product development is now in Moscow. The new server farm is in Montana. The HQ remains in San Fran.

Yeah.

People who do my job in Asia are getting better at it. American jobs that moved to Japan and Taiwan have long since moved to China, where people worry about India and Vietnam. It takes time, but eventually the quality of the work is comparable, and the costs remain better than competitive.

They have great programmers in Russia. Hell, so do we (my employer, I mean). How long before they lose jobs to Poland? Poland is already taking jobs from Ireland, as Dell seeks to cut costs.

As Tom Lehrer said, who's next? The cycle will continue for a very long time, until every continent and country has pulled itself more or less on a par with the others. And the bitch of that is, since the U.S.A. is the richest, the furthest "ahead" in that sense, over the long term we will be on the shallowest growth slope for the longest time. Well, barring wars and socialist insurrections that set others back, of course.

Not off the rails just yet

F Market & Wharves, taken last weekend
They call it a midlife crisis and turn it into a joke about blondes and sports cars and gold necklaces but doesn't it really make perfect sense that after a half century of building a life, one would reach a point where revisiting the path is simply inescapable? No one has made it to fifty and not done as much. Many just do it quietly, and they use unemployment or empty nest or time to write as the new lens through which to refocus on the remaining life yet to build. I'll do that too, real soon. 2009 is the year for hope and change. The question, for all of us really, is after that leap into the dark, was it off the high dive, and is there any water in the pool?

Confusion of Faith

Slow week: No one in the office, no one asking questions, no one expecting results. So I'm multislacking.

Wrote the following to Taranto wrt his quibbling over points made in debate by fellow non-believers but presumably politically non-aligned Christopher Hitchens and Heather Mac Donald (why else would he distance himself from them?). He writes about it at the bottom of today's BotW.

Summary quote from Mac Donald:

Do modern Christians still believe with the same fervor as in the past all those unyielding doctrines of eternal damnation for the unbaptised and unconverted? They sure don't act as if they do. If they really were convinced that their friends, co-workers, neighbors, and in-laws were going to hell because they possessed the wrong or no religious belief, I would think that the knowledge would be unbearable. Christians surely see that most of their wrong-believing personal acquaintances are just as moral and deserving as themselves. How, then, do they live with the knowledge that their friends and loved ones face an eternity of torment?

She goes on to suggest this conundrum as evidence of a widespread cognitive dissonance. Taranto thinks she's a little bonkers for regarding eternal damnation following the Last Judgment as an empirical matter. I don't.

Mr Taranto,

You are gently pulling Heather MacDonald's leg (and those of your readers) when criticizing her points. Your subtle sense of humor is at work here. I have to conclude this because even what little of her positions you have provided make good sense.

Obviously there will never be experimental evidence of a Last Judgment, so referring to its results as empirical could be described as inaccurate. But it is potentially so to those who truly believe in it. She is therefore asking of believers to own up to their beliefs: Either all your cherished friends and family who do not believe will be forever punished at the end-time, or you don't really believe what you say you do. If the former, you either don't care about their inevitable torment, or are pretending you don't. If the latter, you are being dishonest. Since very few people who are not sociopaths really don't care about the pain and suffering of loved ones, it's sensible for her to conclude that many, perhaps most, people of professed faith are to a degree lying to themselves.

Since you don't highlight this as the fundamental point of disagreement, it seems you are quibbling over whether or not after-life results could ever be verified experimentally. Obviously they could not if there is no afterlife, but it is a valid point for discussing the perspective of those who believe there is. That's why I think you're quibbling, with a bit of tongue in cheek.

By the way, she's right. My grandmother died without ever professing faith, yet those of her family who believed in faith as the escape route from everlasting torment mourned only her passing, and not at all her presumed fate. It would be ridiculously cruel for me to conclude they were indifferent to her suffering. Like most people who profess belief outwardly, in their hearts they just didn't believe in it.

I stretched a little here. My grandmother didn't really have family members who were believers, unless you include a temporary step-grandchild or two, but the point was more important than strict accuracy. Oh, I could have picked another example, but that would take more time. Hey, I'm busy here!

Inevitable

Going from least to most doom and gloom ...

1. Obama will be elected President. I don't mind so much -- we simply don't know if he has what it takes. My chief worry is that he will follow left-Democratic advice on foreign policy. This will lead to less short-term saber-rattling, and to larger wars long-term. Besides, though Bush tried with his defusing of the Iraqi powder keg, it may be that the big war that's coming is simply unavoidable. History turns in its cycles as the psychology of populations ebbs and flows, and human nature remains what it is. It may also lead to a resurgence of friendly feeling towards the United States, and a serious chance at repairing the global attitude towards us. I hope so, but I fear such feelings can be short-lived. He must take the right actions.

2. Iran will attain nuclear weapons. No one seriously doubts this is their aim. Nor can they be blamed for it. The people of Iran have felt themselves under the thumbs of foreign powers for many long years, most recently and egregiously those of the British and the Americans. They need to come into their own and master their own affairs, and to join the club with India and Pakistan is an obvious step. Syria, Egypt, Venezuela and Brazil will in time follow suit. Once a technology exists, it cannot be held down forever. The answer, then, to save humanity from extinction, is to hope not that we can stop proliferation (though we should never stop working on that), but to work towards the day when every nation, especially every nation wealthy enough to build a nuclear weapons industry, is responsive enough to its own people such that fear-mongering and warlike nationalism are never deemed necessary.

3. There will be a major, population-redistributing war within our lifetimes. The above aim, that peaceful social systems can take root and grow in every industrialized nation, will not happen in time to prevent it. The post-Cold War rise of intense nationalism mixed with the power focused by the global energy economy will lead to tensions that only war can release. Nor can we simply blame the Russians, the Iranians, the Israelis, the Chinese, or the Republicans for this. One reason (one of many): It is no coincidence that the population of the U.S.A. experiences a war that threatens its government's existence every eighty years or so. There are complex social, mob-psychological and economic systems at work which make this so. This doesn't make what happens our doing: It only assures that the American population, which has some influence in the running of its own government and reacts to events in certain ways as a function of generational timelines, will react (I predict in the early 2020s) such that global war results. By then, you and I will agree there is no alternative, as horrible as the idea may seem today.

* * *

Draw your own conclusions*. Mine are that:

A) Humanity is best served by commitments within the hearts of all people to individual liberty. Not individualism, necessarily -- many well-meaning socialist types regard extreme individualism as the problem. But we can agree that every individual should never be denied a certain level of self-determination;

B) Only the United States among major powers has encoded in its soul a commitment to this ideal -- that Mankind is endowed by his Creator (which I personally interpret as the ineffable evolutionary processes that led us to sentience) with certain inalienable rights including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;

C) Institutions that survive the coming global war must include the United States, not in the interests of nationalism (which is a relatively meaningless term to any American) but in the interests of humanity; and to this end the U.S. must be strongly positioned when it begins. This requires we continue to take action in the global arena not so much that we are everybody's friend, but so that while we are admired by those who appreciate freedom we are also respected as willing to take strong measures to protect our own strategic interests.

Or to put it really simply: Sometimes we can justify the bad things the U.S. does because we must survive and be strong "for the good of mankind".

I am well aware how jingoistic if not outright fascist that looks, because the same wording could justify anything -- conquest of any nation, as has happened in the past, more than once, more than twice. The real challenge is in making the choices carefully and for the right reasons, which in turn requires maintaining focus on what is "right". Bush tried to change the rules with Iraq: Replace a dictator with a chance at democracy rather than keep the dictator on a golden leash. But too many things went wrong, too many self-interested parties were needed for the enterprise to have a chance, and our handling of Iran and Iraq in the preceding decades (not to mention Israel) guaranteed there'd be little to no trust in our intentions.

So, here we go: Roll the bones.

* - The conclusion that I am either batshit crazy or bonehead stupid will be excused on the grounds that no one knows exactly what anyone else knows and I've been called those things online far too often to worry about it anyway.