WulfCry Weblog

. . . Solstice

Okay, so it looks like Summer Solstice, but a friend of mine brought up a very good point.

As a little background information, my family doesn’t celebrate Christmas. The reason is fairly simple: we are not Christian. But since Christmas was simply invented by Christians in an effort to retain more pagan converts through syncretism,we can celebrate Yule instead. Since Christmas was pretty much modeled after Yule, we get to do all the same fun traditions without all the “Jesus Died for You” stuff, which tends to bring everybody down anyways. It pretty much equates to all the fun with less than half the guilt

Anywho, on to the subject of this post: the commercialization of Christmas/Yule. No matter how you look at it, Yule and Christmas were both essentially family-centered holidays. You took comfort during the cold months by spending time with family, and showed your appreciation by making gifts and decorations for those you loved. Now, however, Christmas has been hijacked by the crass commercialism, and bears little resemblance to what it used to mean. That’s where the the movement of the “buy nothng christmas” came from. The reason I write about this now, is because to make your gifts takes time and thought. We should probably start early.

I’m sure I’ll get guff from my family about how I’m anti-capitalism, or some such. Or how our economy depends on a commercialized Christmas, but I don’t care. I guess it’s about priorities . . .

I know it’s been a long time. Sorry about that. Part of it’s laziness and lack of time. Part of it is because I have been tagged by my brother to write my “last post ever” if I were to have to leave the blogosphere forever. I’ve been struggling with the concept and would have felt to guilty writing something while ignoring this directive. Now I could easily cop out as he did and say it depends on why I was leaving, but I suppose I can safely say that if I were to write my last post ever, it would come down to priorities. Other things in my life would take priority over the time it takes me to post on my blog. So here’s a little bit on priorities.

Family
Family is always number one to me. If I were to stop writing, it would probably be because it was having some kind of detrimental effect on my family. Nothing I do in this life is going to have more lasting impact on the world than my children–it’s cliche, but a truism. Thus I owe it to them, myself, and the world to make sure my family is as healthy and functional as possible. I want my children to be strong, responsible, and to have a strong moral compass. There’s much I don’t like about the world we live in, but the best way I can change it is to send my kids out into the world with the principles and strength to make a difference for the better. Which brings me to the next point.

Spheres of Influence
I don’t remember if it was Steven Covey who said this, or if I got it from somewhere else. Each of us only has a small area of the world we can influence. It’s a waste of effort to try to make changes beyond this sphere–any changes we can effect must start in our sphere and radiate outwards like pond ripples. THis sphere always starts with ourselves. If we can’t control ourselves–our emotions or reactions–we can’t control anything. It’s why personal responsibility is so important. If the circumstances in our lives are not as we’d like them, we have to realize that it is choices that we make that put us there, and we can only change our circumstances by making changes in ourselves and the choices we make within our spheres of influence.

I struggle with this, I really do. It’s why becoming fit and quitting smoking is so important to me, and why I feel so impotent when I can’t manage it. When we get lost in these destructive habits, we might as well be in quicksand–our situation won’t improve unless we an control our choices enough to escape. It’s also the concept in my favorite quote by Garath McCathron that’s attached to all my emails–”Stregth of Will is the only Freedom.” If we don’t have the will to control ourselves, we are not free to to make lif what we want it to be. That’s why our spheres of influence in general–and will power in particular–should be a priority.

Common Courtesy
I don’ know why I throw this in here, except that it’s been on my mind a lot lately. As technology brings us closer in a lot of ways, it isolates us in many others, and many interpersonal skills are falling by the wayside. I like to smile and exchange friendly words with people I come across, even strangers in the elevator. When they smile back it brightens my day–and I hope it brightens theirs–and puts me in a better mood. I like to hold the door for whoever is walking up behind me–man woman or child. I also find that being friendly gets me further with people I have to work with than being surly or detached.

It distresses me how often a smile and a greeting goes ignored. How often a “thank you” goes unsaid. I think if more people practiced “common” courtesy, the world would be a nicer place in which to live.

—
That’s all. Not much, I know. I hope it didn’t come off as too pompous or didactic. But after all, why do we all post if not to share our thoughts with other people. I wish I had more of value to share, but there you have it. gods bless.

Now I get to tag. I tag Jamie, Erin, Ash, Syrmopoulos, and McLucky Monkey–have fun

Spence

Okay, here’s my prediction. If I’m right, I’ll probably surprise a lot of people. If I’m wrong, I leave myself wide open for the I-told-you-sos. Anyhow, here it is.

The Democrats will win the mid-term elections, and lose it in 2008

Americans are so sick of the curent administration, including a congress riddled with corruption and scandal, and an unwillingness to reevaluate our approach to Iraq, that the Democrats will most likely take at least the House, and probably the Senate. Hell, the current state of affairs and the way the neo-cons have hijacked our government makes me almost want to vote a straight D ticket, even though it goes against my principles. However, the D’s are too idiotic to keep it. Here’s why.

1.) They are too splintered–The D’s tend to be more diverse than their elephantine counterparts. This COULD work to their advantage. . . if they manage it right. They won’t. To succeed, they need to get together and come up with a solid agenda that reverberates with their constituents. They won’t. Instead, they will try too hard to go too far, and promote a secular humanist, academian agenda. They have lost touch with their logical base.

2.) They will raise taxes and spending–With our deficit, there is no question that taxes cannot remain where they are. But spending also needs to be cut and the tax code needs to be simplified. Americans know this, the Democrats don’t. I’m not saying we should cut all our social programs, but they need some work–which brings us to the next subject.

3.) They will blindly follow the same programs that made people tired of their leadership in the late 90’s–Social security needs to be reformed, and so does welfare. So do any number of programs. They don’t need to be abandoned, just reformed to make them more workable and less prone to abuse.

4.) They will not enforce immigration laws–something needs to be done. They have made it abundantly clear that they do not stand with the majority of the country on this issue. That will frustrate voters.

5.) They will gridlock with the President–granted, this one is not entirely their fault. The president has shown himself incredibly reluctant to reach accross the aisle. But they won’t either. They’ll be seen as an obstructionist congress, and very little will get done. THis will especially frustrate people on security issues. The D’s may even have some better ideas on security, but they won;t get them through because they will be more interested in attacking the President’s position than compromising.

6.) They won’t reform health care–Americans will never go for a purely socialist system (nor should they), but Democrat politicians are too beholden to the dollars of drug companies and insurers, just like the Republicans. They will be unwilling to go against their funders, and Americans will remain uninsured and underinsured. They will come off no better than Republicans on this one.

7.) They won’t address middle class concerns–I’ve already touched on health care and illegal immigrants driving down wages. They also won’t do anything about outsourcing or loss of all manufacturing jobs in America. They will be too busy pursuing their social agenda. Unions will remain powerless to promote the working man’s interests, and corporations will grow ever more powerful. Anti-trust laws still won’t be enforced and mergers will continue to push small business owners out into the snow. They may increase minimum wage, but not to a livable wage. People will still live beyond their means (just like the country), savings will shrink to an all time low, and those coming up on retirement will panic when they see that STILL no one is looking out for them. Republicans already have an advantage in that Republicans will receive a lot of middle class votes because of the Ds’ far left image on social positions and the prevalence of “voting your religion” among the middle class.

That covers most of it. Feel free to add your own examples of Democrat stupidity in the comments sections. I won’t moderate unless it becomes excessively vulgar or profane. As for me, I’ll be voting third party in the congressional elections, mostly because of the shameless mudslinging in Arizona’s elections and the fact that neither side is really stating a position. They seem content to hurl half-true allegations at the other guy. Screw all the Republicrats and Democans. The Washington party needs some real competition before things will change. . .

“The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
-Winston Churchill

The United Nations, while not as utterly ineffectual as some pundits would have you believe, has some issues. The often insurmountable deadlocks in the Security Council due to the veto power of a huge communist, non-democratic nation like China undermines any pro-democratic process or resolution that could be adopted. Serious human rights violators like Libya are taking control of the Human Rights commission (held the chair in 2003), and others like the Sudan are allowed to join, avoiding censure for their own violations. We saw the effects of thhis impotence in the years leading up to the U.S. war in Iraq. The UN could not manage to pass one meaningful resolution on Iraq with any teeth in it. If this were not the case, I sincerely doubt that President Bush could have convinced the US Congress to take matters into our own hands.

But what is the solution? A new organization. Not to replace the UN, because I feel that it is important to give democratically challenged states a peaceful international forum and voice, but to supplement it and provide a meaningful way to promote democracy accross the world. To do so, we need to take a page out of the European Union’s book. We should start an organization, spearheaded by the US, made up solely of democratic societies. Such an organization could offer each other, and especially newly developing democracies, special economic relationships for mutual benefit. It could also collaborate on focus groups, studying the best ways to promote democracy and human rights.

Again taking a page out of the EU’s book, we could extend membership only to those who have demonstrated a commitment to human rights. Then we could have a worldwide Human Rights comission that could actually make efforts to extend Human Rights, rather than one that attempts to slap Isreal every time it can.

Having such an organization would also provide incentive for new governments, such as the military that took over by coup in Thailand recently, to quickly adopt democray and take steps to curb human rights violations. If we procide enough economic incentive to join, borderline democratic states would have a reason to work out their questionable practices in favor of genuine democracy.

Of course, it is very common for a nation to claim it is democratic when it really isn’t. Take Saddam Hussein’s claims of elections where he won a victory by a 99% landslide, for example. However, a democratic union could provide a forum for citizens of its member states to voice concerns about election practices, and provide an international, multipartisan Election Supervision Board to investigate such allegations.

As I mentioned earlier, the US would have to lead such an effort, because such an organization would fail without the US as a member. However, it is also important for the US to recognize that it would only be one af several member states. I think it important for no nation to have veto power such as that held by the big five in the UN Security Council.

So what do you think, is it possible? Is it even advisable?

If liberty and equality, as is thought by some are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost.
Aristotle
Greek critic, philosopher, physicist, & zoologist (384 BC - 322 BC)