Basketball vs Violence You know, I’m not surprised about this fight between fans and players. I’m surprised it hasn’t happened sooner! In every sport in the world, there’s a separation of the players from the fans. But in basketball, they’ve got the fans RIGHT THERE on the court. Given that fans are impassioned (fan being short for ‘fanatic’), the fact that there haven’t been more incidents is the real surprise.

So why did it happen this time and never before? Surely that wasn’t the first incident of a hometown fan assaulting a visiting player. Surely these aren’t the first players who are tightly wound impassioned athletes open to the smallest provocation.

Was it a security lapse? I don’t know enough about the situation to comment one way or the other. Certainly a lack of previous instances means that security has always been fantastic, was this simply a new level that they weren’t prepared for? Or do years of relative calm take the edge off of security?

Or is greed the root of this problem? As I understand it, a night out at a basketball game might buy you a small Korean car. If I’m spending that much at a game, I’m going to expect a certain level of return. Frustration for not getting value would certainly escalate over time. Further, if the costs of a game are going up, surely it’s linked with player salaries. Players may feel that by earning a premium amount of money should make them immune from things, like being assaulted. Fans are expecting more, players are expecting more; there isn’t enough ‘more’ to go around. In any society, that always leads to violence.


  ¶ 1:50 PM 0 comments

  Fat vs Thin Believe it or not, I had a tough time deciding what goes first in the ‘vs’. Does it matter? Is there an accepted protocol? Good guys on the left?

Anyway, that’s an essay for some other time.

Every week there’s another study about how fat America/The Western World is. Children are bigger than ever, airplanes are using more fuel than ever, XL caskets are in great demand.
I’m sure this has to do with the abundance of cheap calories now available. Getting refined sugar, or specially bred beef down our gullets is easier than any time in history. Of COURSE we’re going to be bigger than ever.

But is this a bad thing?

There are studies that point out disease is on the rise. But a lot of these diseases that are blamed on weight, another large risk is always stress. Could the stress of living in a fat phobic world be the cause, not the weight itself? I don’t know, but I can’t tell you that anyone’s actually checked!

So why are fat people loathed so much? I’m sure there are many reasons. So what ones can I pick at?

Well, first off, there’s the obvious: historically, a fat person was a prosperous person. Historically, wealthy people are held in contempt, mostly from jealousy I suppose, but also because some wealthy people will stoop to anything to gain/maintain their wealth. It’s natural to dislike wealthy people, so that might be part of it.

Then there’s the Catholic ‘7 Deadly Sins’. These are all things that can tear apart a community. Of course, they date to the close knit communities of medieval Europe. ‘Gluttony’ would mean eating more than your fair share, meaning someone else has to go hungry. I could eat non stop for 24 hours a day, and no one in my community is going to go without. Further, if I DON’T eat a second Big Mac, it’s not like they’re going to send it to starving children in Rwanda. If anything, increased appetites help create economies of scale: more food consumed means bigger processing facilities means bigger farms, means that it will be cheaper to export food.

There’s a stereotype that fat people are lazy. I won’t deny that. However, I wouldn’t assert that fat people are lazier than thin people. And, quite frankly, since when is someone being lazy a bad thing? Everyone complains about the non-stop lifestyle we’re faced with. Isn’t lazy just… not partaking the non-stop lifestyle?

Which brings me to what I feel is perhaps the REAL reason why people might dislike fat people: jealousy. Sure, every maligned group automatically assumes that their antagonists are jealous of them. Maybe they’re right. I mean… people think fat people are lazy… they’re jealous because they don’t think they can afford to be lazy. People think that fat people are wealthy, of course that leads to jealousy! People deny themselves eating pleasure, and believe that fat people stuff themselves silly. Well… I’d be jealous if I thought someone was having more fun than I was.

Now, the world is populated by fat people, and the world is populated by thin people. Certainly most people probably don’t REALLY care about the ‘obesity crisis’. And certainly there are fat people who hate fat people, just as surely as there are thin people who hate fat people.

There are fat people who started out thin, and grew to be fat for whatever reason. There are fat people who were born that way, and don’t seem to have a choice in the matter.

Many of these fat people don’t give it a chance. They’re fat, and they know they’re supposed to hate it, so they do. They need to try to experience it without prejudice. Go ahead be fat. Feel that jiggle when you walk, feel those clothes cling to your skin.

Being fat isn’t for anyone, just like The Beatles aren’t for everyone.

But I think if more people would just gain 20 pounds, and see what happens, just let it BE, they might find they like it.

If people didn’t worry about fat, there’d be less stress among the ‘afflicted’.

Less stress is always good.
  ¶ 1:07 PM 0 comments

  Winning vs Defeating What is the point of democracy?
It is to choose the better person, with ‘better’ determined by the people who get a vote.

This is why John Kerry lost the election. Many people on his ‘side’ were only there by default: they were NOT on George Bush’s side.

While it’s fair to oppose someone, that’s not the way democracy is supposed to work. Sure, you can prove the other guy’s doing a bad job, but then you have to prove you’ll do a better job. Just harping on someone’s faults isn’t going to work.

It’s human nature. Ever been told ‘don’t look down’? Admit it, you looked down. You can’t help it, it’s the way we are. You go around saying ‘don’t vote Bush’, guess what’s going to happen?

While I’m sure there are a billion examples of people voting against someone, rather than for someone, I think it’s inherently a bad strategy, and a complete anathema to democracy.

Call out the bad record of an opponent, sure, but let your ideas carry the day.
  ¶ 1:17 PM 0 comments

  Name calling politics. There may be traces of irony here. If so, too bad.

There are people of all political stripes. If you can imagine it, then odds are there are people who would steadfastly support it, and steadfastly denounce it. Twould be a dull world indeed if everyone agreed on everything all the time.

In fact, it’s good to have ‘bad’ ideas linger. Sometimes an idea is ‘bad’ because it needs other ideas to make it good (for example, what good’s a can without a can opener?).

So, I like the idea, nay, love the idea that there are people in the world I disagree with. I even acknowledge that while I’m right 100% of the time, it doesn’t mean that they’re wrong 100% of the time.

There are many people who can’t accept that others don’t share their thoughts. And they’re never more evident than during election time. Now that the US election is fading into history, there are scads of name callers. Look, I don’t agree with Bush on every issue (or even on enough issues to comfortably call myself a Bush Supporter), but I’d never call him a monkey.

You start calling people names, and suddenly your own credibility is gone. If the best you can do is childish name calling, then the first thing that comes to my mind is that you’re WRONG. You may not be, but you’re not conveying a message that I’m listening to. You might as well be trying to send me a telegraph in Swahili. I won’t get it.

Do you think the War in Iraq was a bad idea because $87 billion could be better spent fighting AIDS in Africa? That’s a valid point. Tell me that, I’ll listen. Call Bush a hyena, and I won’t, and I’ll never think that fighting AIDS in Africa will do more to fight terrorism than any invasion. (I don’t postulate this is true, but don’t have enough knowledge to proclaim it to be false. To be honest, I don’t know that anyone has made this assertion!)

Of course, the ‘Conservative Side’ (which I suppose I’d be on) is far from innocent. I hate for anyone on my side to do something that I hate.

If you’re going to run for office, run on ideas. I’d like to say ignore the other side, but that’s not practical. Attack bad ideas as bad ideas. If someone changes their mind because they backed bad ideas and have moved on to good ones, praise them for seeing the light, don’t harp on the fact that they changed their mind.

Hopefully with the Most Important Election in History behind us, I’ll be able to take on things in the world besides US politics!
  ¶ 2:06 PM 0 comments

  Conservative vs Liberal When people discuss politics, invariably the labels ‘Conservative’ and ‘Liberal’ pop up. Sometimes I wish these terms would go away. Having to choose between two categories of beliefs is ridiculous. I’m not going to paint a picture with only red and green (well, maybe I would… but I’m not going to do ALL of them that way), I’m not going to do a sketch with only vertical and horizontal strokes, and I’m not going to make a meal with only steak and salt!

Forcing people to choose between two views, no matter how distant, nor how similar, just isn’t fair. Surely that’s the reason why Bush and Kerry seem to be so close in the American Presidential election set for tomorrow; what if you like the idea of hunting terrorists, AND think abortion should be allowed? How can you reconcile a choice like that?

Why do Conservatives have to oppose abortion? Why to Liberals have to oppose war?

Of course, one of the big problems with any labels, is that different people believe the same labels mean different things. While I think that Conservatives oppose abortion, I’m sure there are many people who don’t agree with that. Works for me. (For the record, I don’t oppose abortion. I don’t think it’s a good idea, but it seems like banning it is a worse idea. How does it go? “Rare, but safe”?)

Since this is my ‘blog, I’ll say what ‘Conservative’ and ‘Liberal’ mean to me. I think by the time we’re done this, we’ll see that if I’m forced to choose, I call myself ‘Conservative’.

When it comes down to fundamental beliefs, the core is whether you trust other people or not. To me, Conservatives believe that people will do the right thing more often than not. Liberals, conversely, believe that people will act in self-interest more often than not. Now, in a great many day-to-day decisions, ‘the right thing’ and ‘self-interest’ coincide enough that Liberal/Conservative doesn’t matter all that much. That’s the key principle that makes democracy work.

But, when the details unfold, I see it like this: a Conservative will let you do what you want. If you make mistakes, you’re in trouble. A Liberal will tell you what to do, and if you make mistakes, they’ll pick you up and dust you off. In this view, conservatives are optimists, liberals are pessimists.

Ironically, most people view Conservatives as ‘cold and calculating’, with Liberals being ‘warm and compassionate’. This certainly fits in with my belief. On the other hand, think about life, and who you like to be cold and who you like to be warm. You want your doctor to be warm, but you don’t want to see him very often! You want your accountant to be cold, because then he’ll get you the most money.

As I see the world (the democratic world), there will be an eternal tug of war between ‘Conservative’ and ‘Liberal’. It’s GOOD to have a safety net. People make mistakes. People just can’t quite get it right. But if we focus on the net more than on success, the net will become meaningless: who goes to see the trapeze artist lying in the net?

If we go too conservative, the net breaks when it’s needed. If we go too liberal, then we spend too much time on the net, and can’t afford to maintain it.

If I had to choose, between going without a net, or manning the net, I’d choose to go without the net. And I think that’s what makes me ‘Conservative’.
  ¶ 10:52 AM 1 comments