Separation of State and Everything

How often have you heard people complain about religion in education, or business in politics? Do complaints about government being too involved in your personal life, or the media having too much influence over politics, sound familiar? It is because many of the problems faced today are caused by permitting or even demanding these institutions exert control over one another.

Here are what I consider to be the biggest institutions of society:

Religion – Education – Business – Government – Families – Media

The media is a mess with their entanglement with political parties. Schools have lost the focus of teaching and are a battleground for theology and politics. The lines between business and government are getting blurrier each day. Science has been rocked by the scandals of political influence. Even the definitions of marriage and family are being defined by the courts and voters.

Please take a moment to consider smaller connections between these groups as the path to follow. The old Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups commercial with the line, “You got peanut butter in my chocolate? Hey, you got chocolate in my peanut butter!” ended with a delicious treat. When this same event occurs in society, we often end up with something that tastes nasty.

A sure way for things to get messed up is when any of the major institutions exert too much influence over any of the others. Each institution works fine by itself, when focused on its own area of expertise. It’s when these groups blend and mesh together that society goes haywire. They each perform best when they aren’t interfering or interfered by other institutions.

The economy is a mess, and much of the mess can be attributed to the government/big bank entwinement. Both exert too much influence over one another. The banks shouldn’t be coming to the government for loans, and the government shouldn’t be telling the banks to whom or how to loan money. Each side claims to have been seduced by the other. Wouldn’t we be better off if the two had never slept together in the first place?

The news media is another mess. There isn’t a whole lot of news covered in the news, but there is a plethora of political discussion. I’ve watched Mike Huckabee on Fox News–a combination of religion, politics and media. Being a pastor is a good thing; governors provide good public service, and a journalist discussing political issues is an important service. But these are three distinct positions. The flip side of Huckabee is Al Gore: Vice President, filmmaker and author, and environmental preacher. Separately each can be beneficial, but the resulting mixture of religion, politics, business, and media muddies the water, providing less news and more polarized viewpoints.

Some of the problems facing education can attributed to the distractions caused by external influences. Should schools be involved in leading prayers or used to teach tolerance? Schools are there to educate children with the tools they’ll need to survive as adults, and not to change the shape of the next generation’s society. They shouldn’t be used to install patriotism or environmentalism because that’s not their role.

The list goes on and on how each group causes problems for the others. This isn’t a left vs. right or liberal vs. conservative problem; it’s a problem with our society as a whole not enforcing boundaries. Each institution resents it when the other institutions cross the boundaries, but unfortunately the resentment they feel towards external influences doesn’t stop them trying to manipulate other groups.

The principle of I can’t be free unless everyone is free needs to be applied here. For each group to be free to achieve their goals, they must be willing to give up the influence they exert on each other. They have to be willing to clean their corner of society instead of trying to clean up society as a whole.

Share Button

Separation of State and Everything

How often have you heard people complain about religion in education, or business in politics? Do complaints about government being too involved in your personal life, or the media having too much influence over politics, sound familiar? It is because many of the problems faced today are caused by permitting or even demanding these institutions exert control over one another.

Here are what I consider to be the biggest institutions of society:

Religion – Education – Business – Government – Families – Media

The media is a mess with their entanglement with political parties. Schools have lost the focus of teaching and are a battleground for theology and politics. The lines between business and government are getting blurrier each day. Science has been rocked by the scandals of political influence. Even the definitions of marriage and family are being defined by the courts and voters.

Please take a moment to consider smaller connections between these groups as the path to follow. The old Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups commercial with the line, “You got peanut butter in my chocolate? Hey, you got chocolate in my peanut butter!” ended with a delicious treat. When this same event occurs in society, we often end up with something that tastes nasty.

A sure way for things to get messed up is when any of the major institutions exert too much influence over any of the others. Each institution works fine by itself, when focused on its own area of expertise. It’s when these groups blend and mesh together that society goes haywire. They each perform best when they aren’t interfering or interfered by other institutions.

The economy is a mess, and much of the mess can be attributed to the government/big bank entwinement. Both exert too much influence over one another. The banks shouldn’t be coming to the government for loans, and the government shouldn’t be telling the banks to whom or how to loan money. Each side claims to have been seduced by the other. Wouldn’t we be better off if the two had never slept together in the first place?

The news media is another mess. There isn’t a whole lot of news covered in the news, but there is a plethora of political discussion. I’ve watched Mike Huckabee on Fox News–a combination of religion, politics and media. Being a pastor is a good thing; governors provide good public service, and a journalist discussing political issues is an important service. But these are three distinct positions. The flip side of Huckabee is Al Gore: Vice President, filmmaker and author, and environmental preacher. Separately each can be beneficial, but the resulting mixture of religion, politics, business, and media muddies the water, providing less news and more polarized viewpoints.

Some of the problems facing education can attributed to the distractions caused by external influences. Should schools be involved in leading prayers or used to teach tolerance? Schools are there to educate children with the tools they’ll need to survive as adults, and not to change the shape of the next generation’s society. They shouldn’t be used to install patriotism or environmentalism because that’s not their role.

The list goes on and on how each group causes problems for the others. This isn’t a left vs. right or liberal vs. conservative problem; it’s a problem with our society as a whole not enforcing boundaries. Each institution resents it when the other institutions cross the boundaries, but unfortunately the resentment they feel towards external influences doesn’t stop them trying to manipulate other groups.

The principle of I can’t be free unless everyone is free needs to be applied here. For each group to be free to achieve their goals, they must be willing to give up the influence they exert on each other. They have to be willing to clean their corner of society instead of trying to clean up society as a whole.

Share Button

Groundhog Day

So I went looking for news stories today hoping for something at least remotely related to an issue, but didn’t have much success.

I see Glenn Beck said something about Nancy Pelosi and Arianna Huffington said something about Beck. President Obama and Sarah Palin both spoke today. There were several political stories about one side being far superior to the other and new statistics to backing up the claims. The government will be spending more money, or taxing more, or both.

A few stories about global warming being real or fake. Micheal Jackson’s doctor is being charged for I don’t know what. A few more economic stories about how bad things are. Big banks something, something, something. Health care blah, blah, blah, blah.

Bad things happened in the Middle East. There is bad weather here and there. Something new about the iPhone, iPod, or iPad.

Punxsutawney Phil saw his shadow, so there will be six more weeks of the same news.

Happy Groundhog Day!

Share Button

Local News should have Safety Tips for Voters


BBC One show Rip Off Britain had a show about convenience stores charging more than grocery stores. It seemed odd to me to have a show on the subject, because who doesn’t know a convenience store charges more? Why waste time warning people about something they learned as kids? How do you follow up a report like that? A story about fire is hot, fire burns?

I don’t mean any offense to the UK. The show Rip Off Britain is not a reflection on the intelligence of its citizens. In the US, almost any nightly newscast will have parental reminders along the lines of reminding you to put coat on because its cold outside, or too much sunlight will burn your skin.

Still, there were probably a few people out there that benefited from the show pointing out convenience stores charge more. Its just as likely someone benefits when they are reminded to use suntan lotion or put a coat on.

The political events of the last few years have had me wondering basically the same thing about politics. Do people need to be continually reminded about how politics work? Is a story about government incompetence news? Maybe people should be reminded from time to time about the dangers of politics.

Local news programs should have safety tips for forgetful voters prior to elections?

Politicians promises are more likely to be broken than kept.

If they are the lesser of two evils, it means they still screw some things up.

They can’t be on your side and working for everyone at the same time.

Corruption follows power and money around.

Whatever they say it will cost should be doubled or tripled.

Contrary to what most politicians believe, not every problem has a solution.

Politicians have been known to lie.

Share Button

Political Agreement Matrix

To break the hold of the US vs. Them mentality in politics, we’ve got to be able to spot the tactics used in political speech. Adjectives used in political speech are rarely used to offer insight into an issue, the intent usually being to promote an opinion.

It’s just simple marketing. Attach positive words with what you are promoting and repeat as often as possible. With enough positive or negative marketing , you’ll have others using similar adjectives to describe the products. The better the put-down, the more likely it will become a headline. Headlines are repeated without being read, and over time the opinion can turn into reality.

Political opinions are a mixture of marketing issues and parties at the same time.

Politicians X plan is intelligent, and its going to work. (agree with positive adjective – same team)

Politicians X plan is shockingly accurate, and its going to work. (agree with negative adjective – opposing team)

Politicians X plan is well-intentioned, and its not going to work. (disagree with positive adjective- same team)

Politicians X plan is extremist, and its not going to work. (disagree with negative adjective – opposing team)

None of the above statements are intended to sway the listener with supporting arguments or facts. The person isn’t trying to persuade with reason, but instead with simple positive and negative associations.

Another advantage to paying attention to the marketing adjectives is most people don’t come right out and announce their political affiliation, but the adjectives used offer insight into the political positions held by the speaker in relation to the subject.

Share Button

How ‘Ellie Light’ Came to Light

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2v7wcxVRnQ&feature=channel

Kudos to Sabrina Eaton

Share Button

Call the Police, I’ve been attacked on Facebook

(wivb.com) 7th grader busted for Facebook attack

A seventh grader in suburban Syracuse is in deep trouble after police say she attacked a teacher through Facebook.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YnisVNClqc

Are weapons available on Facebook?

Share Button

Name-calling is Fun and Entertaining – and Drowning Debate: The Jon Stewart / Keith Olbermann Saga

Here is Keith Olbermann’s response to Jon Stewart over Olbermann’s namecalling towards Scott Brown. At the end, Keith Olbermann says “You’re right. I have been a little over the top lately. Point taken. Sorry.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZylQXm-vis

The ad hominem spam in political discussion is so abundant it’s become an issue unto itself. Unemployment and a shrinking economy have to take a backseat to political pundits personal views of others. To quote Stewart on this subject, “Stop, stop, stop, stop hurting America.” (Jon Stewart on CNN’s Crossfire)

The irony is that at the end of the Crossfire video, Jon Stewart gets sucked into the namecalling by calling Tucker Carlson a “dick.” I’m not defending Olbermann; calling someone a “dick” is a far cry from calling someone “an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, tea-bagging supporter of violence against women and against politicians with whom he disagrees.”

The namecalling is so loud now its drowning out debate about the issues. Most political talk these days is focused on getting the best dig in and not the best point across. The king of the hill battle to arouse prejudices needs to die down. It would be an improvement for Olbermann to refer to Scott Brown as a “dick” next time.

Even when you are well aware of the damage caused by personal attacks, it’s easy to get drawn into the battle. It takes a great deal of self-discipline not to reach for the flamethrower when attacked or when there is a strong disagreement on an issue.

To teach themselves some self-discipline and so someone can benefit, the pundits should put up their own swear jar. Each time they drift away from the issue at hand and go with the personal attacks, they have to throw some money in the jar to be donated to charity.

Share Button

Dreaming of a Libertarian Network News Channel

Fox News coverage is aimed towards Republicans and MSNBC is aimed at Democrats. I’d like cable news network aimed at Libertarians. If being liberty-minded catches on, there will be a market for news Libertarians find important.

There is some Libertarian coverage on the networks now–and the coverage seems to be growing. Libertarians are let into the media pool for an hour each week with John Stossel’s show on Fox Business News. CNN has been throwing in Libertarian-leaning guests on their shows. I appreciate CNN for bringing Penn Jillette and Ron Paul into their discussions.

Lip service from the major outlets doesn’t cut it, though. There is still a need for a network with a Libertarian bias. As Penn Jillette put it while discussing his show Bullshit!, “We are trying to be fair and extremely biased.”

That’s what I want: factual reporting, unashamedly biased towards liberty–a network where reporters are required to ask politicians, “Will this lead to more or less freedom?” Reporters that will challenge the “majority of people want this legislation” with questions about the tyranny of the majority.

While a politician is speaking, I want the bottom of the screen to scroll the biggest donors to their campaigns. I want a cha ching sound when tax increases or incentives are mentioned and chain rattle when victimless crimes are mentioned.

When an election is mentioned, all the candidates for office will be listed, but in freedom-minded order. If there had been a network with a Libertarian bias, Joe Kennedy would have been mentioned on-air before the Massachusetts special election was held, instead of as a footnote afterward when the results had been tallied.

Polling for the Libertarian Network would be freedom-biased:

  • What is the least popular government program?
  • Do you feel more free now than you did four years ago?
  • Rate how much federal servitude interferes with your life: [ none/somewhat/too much/ready for a revolution]
  • Why do you feel Washington hates you?

A nightly lineup of opinion shows would include people like Penn Jillette, Drew Carey, John Stossel and Larry Elder. Have the people over at Free Talk Live do specials on police abuses.

And…last but not least, the hosts and guests could drink and smoke on the air if they choose.

Share Button

Poll: Who or what is really to blame for the disaster in Haiti?

There has been a lot of political discussion about the tragedy in Haiti. Below is a list of several possible explanations, gathered from the internet and TV. Please vote for what you believe is the most likely cause of the disaster.

[poll id=”3″]

Share Button