There’s such a thing as information overload: a point at which a person realizes everything they are learning and all the discussions they are having are doing them no good whatsoever.

I even wonder, at times, if the level of impersonal interpersonal communication we have in modern society is a healthy thing for our brains; we certainly did not evolve to deal with such an unprecedented amount of information, especially information we are essentially powerless observers of. There’s just too much to know and correlate, and nothing to do with it.

So, good luck, Rory, and I hope you find some balance and sanity in your choice. Since my self-imposed hiatus in October, I’ve found more free time and enjoyment of little things in life I had been neglecting. I hope you do, too.

But I do thank you for them, and hope you continue to post on whatever pleases you here.

Two things I find odd are; the logic that polarizes us into ambiguous, disempowered groups, and how both sides come down so close in proximity to one another on the political chart. For example, from a strictly political perspective (not a value perspective) a Political Lesbian and a Christian Fundamentalist aren’t very different.

I define my political similar to most:

—Anarchy \ | / Capitalism
———————————
Communism / | \ Authoritarianism

I would think the natural lines of division would be drawn horizontally between those who want more freedom in more areas of their lives (above), and those who want to impose cultural laws and standards on others (below).

Oddly, what happens is the lines get bent in such a way as to pair up the capitalists with the (radically religious) authoritarians, and the socialists/communists with the would-be libertarians and anarchists, even though both of these alliances are as far as I can tell fundamentally at odds with one another. The result is two equally dichotomous and impotent polar forces.

If the Illuminati really is out there somewhere pulling our strings, you have to admire the brilliance of this device. As it is, though, I think this is something we pretty much do ourselves, even if there are those who are shrewd enough to help it along from time to time and use it to their advantage. Either way, it amounts to the same pile of beans.

The two polar ends of the spectrum have agendas that call for the use of the government and legal system to force their opponents into complying with their own values. This in effect bends the left-right line downward like /\ and lands them both in the bottom half of the chart, in the direction of fascism and totalitarianism, and away from freedom. It also leaves anyone with any hint at all of libertarianism appearing like the lunatic fringe.

In reality most of us end up closer to the center than we do to any of our respective extremes; nobody really wants to get too far out into fanaticism, but there’s still a problem: a lot of people have the illusion of doing something that matters when if fact little gets done, the people are saddled with bloated, neutered government, and the powers that be have free rein.

Consider the “Right”. Here we have grouped together the capitalists and the religious radicals. We’ve come to accept this as the natural way of things. You can imagine how that happened. If you consider that the people who wanted to conserve their wealth were largely white and largely Christian and either consciously or unconsciously wanted to conserve their cultural identity and perhaps their cultural dominance and cultural purity, then yes, the word conservative makes a tiny bit of sense.

However, there’s important distinction between a dyed in the wool capitalist, and the ruling elite. The ruling elite exist in any culture, with or without capitalism. A capitalist believes in letting a free market work out what needs to be worked out, and letting a person rise or fall based upon their character. the ruling elite are simply interested in using their capitol to ensure they stay the ruling elite.

An example of the dichotomy of the right is the stem cell issue. The religious radicals would outlaw harvesting the cells. Conversely, a capitalist would reject government regulation and interference in medical research. A capitalist will err on the side of too much freedom, and allowing the market to work things out. From a capitalist’s perspective, if people were significantly opposed to the research a boycott would ensue on the resultant technologies.

Now the “Left”. Here we have lumped the anarchist/libertarians with the socialist/communists. Again, we’ve come to accept this as natural, and you can piece together how this probably happened. The traditional idea of liberty from the wealthy and government rule over time got twisted into the use of the government rule to liberate the wealth. It’s easy to see how that could get confusing.

Look at something very simple like affirmative action. The socialist/communist element sees the inequity and injustice in our culture and aims to fix the problem through government rule and legal action. On the other hand, an anarchist or even the milder libertarian would be dead set against the government imposing such rules. From that end of the spectrum the perspective is people should be allowed to figure out how to behave and get along amongst themselves.

Both ends of the spectrum are ambiguous, hence ineffective. While small battles are lost and won over where to draw the lines on abortion and immigration and flag burning and stem cells and gay marriage and prayer in school, the power mongers are free to do as they please because we’re preoccupied with the tiny details rather than the big picture.

The religious right gets screwed because they elect leaders who pay lip service to family values and raise a fuss over things like leaving the word “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, but who lack the necessary power given our diverse culture to bring about the kind of homogenized utopia they dream of, while simultaneously inflaming the opposition with the threat of forced religious rule, giving rise and power to radical elements of the “left.” crystallizing stereotypes, promoting disharmony, and ultimately leading to more crime and hate and all the things opposite of what the religious right really wants; a more “Christian” environment.

The idealists of the left get screwed because in the pursuit of liberty and social justice they give more power to the government making it ripe for ineffectiveness and corruption and due to simple demographics often puts power right back into the hands of the people most likely to infringe on personal freedoms, while reinforcing adisempowered oppressed victim mentality in the very people they are trying to empower.

It’s not enough that we intellectually understand that we’re all closer to being moderates than we are to being radical fanatics, and it’s not enough that we pay lip service to being open minded. We have to be ready and willing to compromise and negotiate. We have to be able to stop seeing the other guy as wrong, and ask ourselves, “Could I be wrong?” And if we can’t admit that, then at least we need to ask ourselves, “What part of my agenda would I be willing to give up in exchange for some real progress in the world?”

I hate the label “moderate” because it makes about as much sense as “liberal” or “conservative”. And, it’s too passive. Until someone comes up with a better designation, I’m calling myself a radical moderate. Fuck the Left! Fuck the Right! Get in the middle where the action is.

I think, like Casey said, that it’s a good thing to stay in touch with ever-evolving reality.

But I’ve pretty much exhausted the experience right now. I’m not really learning anything new any more. It’s just the same old awful crap over and over, in different-colored packages.

I just end up pointlessly bummed out and focusing on things that I don’t really have the ability to alter on a mega-level.

But I can try to be saner and healthier and therefore maybe have a positive effect on the people whose lives I do touch.

It’s always a conundrum. We can’t abdicate our responsibilities as members of a larger polity. But we can’t be responsible for fixing every rotten thing that happens in the world, either.

Maybe if I figure out some thing more useful to do on a larger scale, my attitude will shift. But right now I don’t know what that thing might be.

details of that debacle can be found at LJ, dragonet2, I won’t bore y’all with it.

And the whole war thing has me in despair too because I have a brother who was totally broken by Viet Nam, and has only just in the past 10 years or so recovered enough to have a reasonably good life.

So I’m going one day at a time, one application to the next place to work, etc. If I try to think about it all I’d just collapse into a crying pile of moosh.

Other times I an info-seeking machine, and make the world a better place by knowing more about what’s going on. But this phase lasts a shorter time and recurs less often. It’s too taxing.

I’m right there with you, Rory.

Technical nit to pick: if ” the Bush administration has finally declare[s] martial law and suspend[s] elections, and the tanks are rolling down Main Street,” you aren’t REALLY going to be surprised, now are you?