On An Art Festival

During the weekend past, The Ravishing Mrs. TB wished to go to an art festival located at the heart of New Home 2.0 (Big City edition).  Access there is easy enough - a light rail trip of about 40 minutes - and as we did not have any other plans for the day, it seemed like a good idea.

The walk from the train station to the park where the festival was located was typical of the sorts of things one sees in large cities these days, compounded a bit by the fact that it was a three day weekend.  The streets were largely empty, except for the local population of those that do not have a home.  It is easy enough to avoid a situation and the panhandling that I have seen in other locations such as New Home was not nearly as prevalent.  The sidewalk bears the odor of old urine, something that perhaps only the rain will scrub away (we will see when Winter comes, although has its own health issues I imagine).  The buildings of what was probably a thriving local ethnic downtown are faded and for the most part empty, driven out (likely) by a combination of increase of rent and decrease of business caused both by a move to the suburbs and an unwillingness to make a specific trip and step through or around people to get to one's favorite restaurant. 

These days, one can usually find an excellent restaurant much closer to home.

---

The art festival itself is located in a central sort of park for one of the city's historic districts. Signs proclaiming "City District Art Festival" begin to dot the poles as we come near.  One cannot miss the festival itself:  a long rectangle of portable chain link fencing marks out the section of the park dedicated to the arts, useful sign holders in bright yellow jackets stopping the traffic to allow people to cross from one side of the park to the next.  The private security guards are discretely packed away in the corners.

Inside, a series of small tents hold the arts and artists from at least half a dozen countries that I can count.  The artworks themselves are for the most part marvelous creations, the sorts of things that people with real skill can create.  Every medium is represented:  jewelry, glass, metal work, printing, paper, photography, sculpture, wood work, fiber - even local handicraft organizations have demonstration booths.

The crowds themselves are the sorts of people that one usually associates with this sort of art show, the sort of people that - on the whole - likely are not the type of folks that agree with me on most things.  Yes, I know, it is perhaps false to judge things purely based on appearances and half heard conversations - but one gets a sense for things after time through dress and attitude and conversation. No-one is rude of course, or impolite - but there is a vague feeling as we walk up and down the aisles that I am, once again, out of place.

The artwork, while exquisite, is expensive:  small prints of delightfully painted birds on old tea bag material runs $75 while a blown glass trio of flowers is $3200 and a wire frame sculpture is $4500.  These are artists are not fools:  they are here because they believe they can make more money than it cost them to generate the work.

Obviously, I am far from my price range.

---

As we leave the festival, within 50 feet we re-enter the zone we originally started in:  the buildings are dour and closed off or in the process of reconstruction (likely for apartments).  The park continues and we walk up.  I marvel at the apparent itinerant inhabitants:  a man with black sweatpants and no shirt on who thumps the garbage can and walks away, the small groups of two or three sitting and discussing things, the man sleeping underneath the sculpture that looks pretty neat but is not something we can see now. In the center of one block we see a small playground where a father is carefully watching his children as they frolic over playground equipment.

As we re-enter the city portion, the same largely empty and grey streets greet us.  Traffic is light, but so are folks like us who are clearly not from around here.  The ground level floors sometimes hold businesses or sometimes have "for lease" signs or sometimes are just empty.

Reaching our stop, there is a series of handicraft stores that are open on this almost empty street.  The items themselves are lovely as I look in the windows.  Looking up, I see a security guard in what I assume is a tactical vest walking the beat around the building.  She nods at me, I nod at her.  We step into one of the stores and look until the ring of the train indicates our tourism is at an end for the day.

---

Riding back, I marvel at the the sights I have just seen.

The contrast could not be made more clear by the foil of the art festival in the midst of the general run-down nature of what was once a proud neighborhood.  Fenced off to clearly control access and protect valuables and keep the peace. inside were artworks valued (all together) at hundreds of thousands of dollars.  It is hard to put an estimate on the net worth of the individuals present there - of course some were probably tourists like ourselves - but it is also fair to say that there were people of significant financial worth at that event.  

At the same time, walking up the street, I saw three people sharing a sandwich, eating it as quickly as they could.

The festival ended that day; the tents came down and the artists and their works traveled back with them from whence they came.  As the tide returning, the world that was kept at bay for a little while has undoubtedly rushed back in.  Likely you will be unable to go today and tell there was anything there at all.

The irony?  In many cases the people who came to stroll around and see art (and be seen) will likely be the same group of people verbalize how ugly this part of the city has become, how undesirable - perhaps even unsafe.  They will on one hand support and enable those that create policies that make such things possible and then decry the conditions that these policies have created.  It is a vicious circle that in a way begins and ends with them - but they try to look through the mirror to what is beyond, never seeing the reflection.

---

The train comes to a halt at our station.  Above and to our left, the rabbits wait in their room for dinner.

Responding To The World At Large II

Anisthenes

Yesterday I touched, on a personal philosophical level, of how I am managing my response to The World at Large.  And a basis is important for having a reason for doing something.  But basis without practice is merely a set of ideas.  So practically, what does someone do who is seeking to thread the needle of living according to one's principles and mores in a world which is at best thinks poorly of them and at worst is vehemently opposed to them?

I have had to put some thought into these to bring them into the form of a written form, as it is not something that I had done before consciously.  I do not know that they rise to the level of a manifesto, but certainly the represent my current thinking and to the best of my ability my current practice.

1)  Do Not Engage

This principle can take many different forms.  It appears in simply to refuse to engage in certain conversations and activities - much like traffic law, as a citizen or organizational member or employee I will do what it asked of me - read the document, attend the training - as long as it does not undermine some belief that is a core principle (and trust me, few of these things rise to that level).  But that is all.  If conversations start on such subjects, I do not offer opinions or thoughts.  If no more is required of me than "read and acknowledge" that is all I do.  

I find as a consequence of this, I simply tend to disappear from many people's radar and calculations.  This is an unexpected feature, not a bug.

One especial thing I personally have to fight in this matter:  the need to respond to things.  This is especially prevalent in the electronic world, where responding is as quick as a simple typing exercise.  I do not have to respond to every thing I disagree with or every bad comment I see.  I really do not.

2)  Do Not Support

This principle takes two forms.  The first is simply to not support, by my presence or involvement, anything that is outside of what I support.  This is actually much easier than it sounds:  Just do not go. Do not show up.  Do not follow the group or post or person.  Just walk away.  This denies them attention, something that the modern world and the movements in it desperately crave

The second form is that of the pocketbook, one of the real remaining powers that we possess - especially in a consumer based society.  Many if not most of the businesses that exist are somehow based on providing a consumer service or a consumer product.   Those businesses depend, ultimately, on someone buying something to pay for something.

I know what some may say:  "TB, the companies are too big.  My not-spending there does not make an impact or difference.  Boycotts do not work."

I agree that boycotts - generally - do not work in the modern world, but that is as much a function of the fact that the word "boycott" will immediately invoke a visceral response as due to the size of the companies.  But if we think people walking away do not make a difference, it may be that we are not looking in the right places.

If you have an hour or three, I might suggest doing a study about events in the entertainment and video game industries of late.  In short, they have chosen not to serve their markets.  And their markets are responding with a lack of support, both verbal and financial.  That lack of support has critical impacts for those companies and those industries.  

I suspect that as time goes on and economy continues, this lack of support will become easier for many (due to economic reality) and more impactful to those companies that remain.  Extend that to every sort of human endeavor and association and one can begin to see the potential for impact.  All done, I note, with any sort of formal declaration.   The reason people have left will become clear to any that have the curiosity to understand.

 3)  Do Become The Quiet Revolution

Since my last two points have been detractive in nature ("Do Not"), it makes sense to have something that is a positive action that I can take.  After all, someone who is only ever negative tends to drive people away instead of pulling them on.

Becoming The Quiet Revolution is going to look different for every person depending on any number of factors including location, economic position, relationships, etc.  And people will likely participate in all kinds of different ways that I cannot imagine.  Here, at least, is what I am trying to do:

1)  Become Independent:  Independence can mean a lot of things.  To some it means complete self sufficiency.  To others it means being able to do something which is not dependent on "The System" to do (even a single planter box in an apartment balcony or making yogurt is a step in the direction).    To others it means foreswearing social media to focus on actual human relationships.  But in all of these, it is taking action to free one's self in some way from a system that wants us to just "Go along" and "Be Dependent".

2) Make Money Count:  To some extent this is the opposite of Item 2 above (Do Not Support), but it is meant as more than that.  It may mean swearing off national chains or even local chains that do not comport with one's views and practices.  It may mean being willing to settle for not new items and going without certain things (A note:  In a society as rich as ours, "going without new things" is not hard at all if one knows where to look).  And it certainly means spending with those individuals or companies that we do find are compatible with our beliefs and practices, even if it costs a bit more.

3)  Become Intellectually Independent:  A subtype of the first item on this list, it could go there but I feel it important enough to break out separately.

We, as a society, have the knowledge of ages at our fingertips but for the most part limit ourselves to a paltry number of sources for our information.  This is something that I have had to actively work on for years myself, to give myself a second education  which 100 years prior would have been par for the course but even in my high school years was quickly fading.

What could it be?  Literally this is a choose your own adventure experience.  History, economics, science, public policy, philosophy, theology - literally any subject is out there for gaining more information on.  A small note here:  the closer information gets to our modern era, the less without bias it becomes.  So it has ever been, so it will ever be - even the great historians of old tended to write in a way that would not offend their current rulers.   And as a second note, expect this to take time.  Knowledge is not gained in a single short span.

4)  Be A Engaging Example:  The World At Large has a public image that they like to portray of people that will not fit in.  It is generally a cross of a Neanderthal savage with the learning power of the mob trying to burn the library at Alexandria clothed as the Spanish Inquisition and the economic sense of a miser on the day that rent is due.  It certainly not flattering and while by no means completely earned - but by actions in the past, we who do not fit in have made ourselves a target for this.

Be different.

Be engaging.  Be knowledgeable.  Be the man or woman with the pleasant demeanor and a quick hand to help.  Know things.  Do not make every event an opportunity to "preach" about the problems of The World At Large or what is wrong with them.  Be helpful and share what you know. 

And, of course, always be kind.

Because here is the thing:  listening to people talk and discuss in my own circle of contact, there is a sense that there is "something wrong with the world today", to quote those great purveyors of modern wisdom Aerosmith.  People cannot bring themselves to identify it but they know it is there.  It is staring them every day in their personal economics; it shouts from the current narrative where things should be better but are not;  it cries to them to them as the hint of things not quite right from history begin to resemble the current circumstances in which they live.

They do not need someone lecturing or shouting.  They do not need the equivalent of Pharisaical demands that demands complete adherence before forgiveness.  They do need someone - us - to show them a different way.  And that we can do not by the volume or decibels or vehemence of our words, but by the simple act of living a different and better life.

Gandhi is quoted as saying that we should be the change we want to see in the world.  If the world does not see it in us, in whom will they see it?

Responding To The World At Large I

 

I have often struggled with my response to "The World At Large".

I really do my best to keep anything of general political or social nature out of my writing, partially because of the fact that (as denoted in my thoughts about Relevance) I am not very good at it in general, partially because of the fact that writing about such things only divides and never unifies, and partially - indeed perhaps mostly - because of the fact that what I desire more than anything else as a result of this space is the promotion of thought and occasionally discussion about such things in a manner where things can be heard, instead of words hurled as weapons.

But even I acknowledge both that I myself have opinions about things and that we live in a world where things of general political, social, and even religious nature impact my daily existence.  In fact, they thrust themselves into my face on a regular basis.

However, I have also had the experience of both living long enough to see how the inception of things is often not the indicator of how things end and being some that loves to read history and so having an understanding of how things often end.  Perhaps to the surprise of no-one here, humans are not nearly as clever as they think themselves and most of their plans for multi-generational/multi-year building of anything tends to sputter out more quickly than they would have imagined (insert reference to Ozymandias here).

So, in a world that continually impinges on me to have opinions and take actions, what is someone like myself to do?

I am not inherently a person of violence - my one and only experience with "fighting" was in the 4th grade where, confronted with the potential for a fight, I hurled my skateboard at the parties in question and sprinted home.  This is combined now with many years of training in a martial art - Iaijutsu - which brings one to the swift realization that even training with wooden weapons can result in serious injury or worse; one comes to understand that potential risks any time force is used.

Nor am I a person of strong ability to debate. Long ago in college, the professor assigned to guide me through my program noted that I tended less to debate than hurl my opinions out there as if they were gospel and do the equivalent of what we now call a "mike drop", supreme in the "knowledge" I had proved my point.  That does not make for good debating of course, and it has taken me years (35 plus) to reach the point where I learned that I lack the qualities required of a good debater and more importantly that not every comment represents a disagreement.

What I can do, as it turns out, is live in a way that to the best of my ability and does not further enable those individuals and movements that are opposed to me intellectually, morally, economically, or religiously.

Which is why I found the above quote from Charlton Heston both such a surprise (I had never seen it before) and so pleasing.  Because I realize that is exactly the way I am trying to live my life.

Is it somehow surrender-driven and hopeless?  I can see that argument being made - after all, I am essentially committing to a non-violent long haul path of quiet disobedience.  And certainly the results are the sorts of thing that may not manifest in my life time.  But men like Vaclav Havel and Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Aleksander Solzhenitsyn suggest otherwise.  

Is it without cost?  No, not at all.  The costs can come in ways that only a modern bureaucracy can think of devising. Just beyond the simple issue of losing opportunities or losing positions or losing money, it can turn into the blacklisting of one in all of society (The Soviet Union knew much of this; Communist China knows even more).  

But ultimately, as a Christian, I have a Master beyond any on this earth. And His questions on His commands and my motives and practices are not something that I can hope to avoid or side step.  Perhaps said differently, God expects His work to be accomplished in His way by His people.

Note the repeated "His" there.  There is no second option given.

On Innovation

If you are not doing yourself the favor of reading FOTB (Friend Of This Blog) Eaton Rapids Joe's series The Cumberland Saga, I would encourage you to do so.  It is a rollicking tale about a small community living through a collapse (Rollicking?  Can I use that word in that context?) and is well worth the investment of your time.

Yesterday's serial episode involved some innovative thinking on the nature of weapons.  The weapons are beyond the point of this discussion (as they usually are here), but the idea of innovation is not.  The short version is that in the midst of thinking of parts, the innovative idea of 3D printing came up.

Innovation.

Among my many complaints about Our Political And Social Betters (OPASB) is the fact that for almost anything anymore, there is one solution:  theirs.  There is no negotiation, for example, on ways to address powering civilization (on which, as another FOTB John Wilder has often pointed out, the entire edifice stands):  it can only be solar or wind.  There are no other solutions and therefore, no need to discuss.  The same has been extended to virtually every area of human endeavor:  arts, religion, technology, human interactions, food, practices of all kinds.  There is only one solution, that of the OPASB.

Even I buy into this more than I should.

The difficulty for the OPASB - which I propose will become more and more evident every day - is that their solutions are not the end-all/be-all to the problem.  Solar and wind, for example, can be useful - until they are not.  Highly scientific and robotic farming works - as long as the chemicals flow and the finely tuned equipment works.  Defining what is art and entertainment works - until people simply no longer go to it.  Raising wages increases employee benefit - until labor becomes a cost which has to be reduced and the employee has no job at all.

The serial that ERJ wrote (above) is concerning solving for a particular problem.  What comes out of the discussion is a solution which had not been thought of before. An innovative solution.

It is here that the non-OPASB has the advantage.  Because they - we, really - can be innovative, flexible, and nimble.

Innovation is not easy of course.  And innovation should never be completely identified with progress, because in many cases current innovation looks a lot like traditional methods, methodology, and craftsmanship.  

The best part about innovation is it keeps mentally sharp.  Just trying to think of a solution is itself a useful exercise, even if the initial solution does not solve the problem.  Suddenly the world becomes a massive series of inputs to problems, just waiting to be used to resolve themselves.

The OPASB cannot and will not do such things.  They have too much invested - not just money, but pride - in doing things in their solution way.  To question the solution of the OPASB is to question the OPASB and, like almost all other authoritarian and totalitarian regimes, the OPASB will happily consume any doubters or heretics in its ranks.

Fight the power - quietly, silently.  Be innovative.

A Lack Of Layoff Safety

 This weekend my friend The Dog Whisperer finally begins a semi-cross country trek to her new job, something that ended up taking here almost 4 months to find.  Her stuff has gone on; she and H The Wonder Dog depart from New Home this weekend to make the journey.

As I was scouring the InterWeb for layoffs (as I always do), I noticed that a work location similar to what I remembered hers being announced they were having layoffs.  I checked in with her:  yes, that was her location and no, no-one had contacted her about any impact.  And although they were saying it was a minor layoff in the face of their total employee count, it was not the sort of not one wants to start one's job one.

It is true of me as well:  during one of the few times I checked the news while I was in Turkey, I found that my own company announced a series of layoffs - not at my site, but certainly at my division.  Again, limited numbers - but there was no internal mention of the event at all.

The Dog Whisperer's response to my inquiry was "At this point, no industry is safe from layoffs".

Her comment sank deep within me.

It is probably not fair to say without hesitation that "this is the new normal".  And yet, there is something within me that makes me feel that this sort of instability is the new normal, or at least the new normal within my own lifetime.

It is probably true that I am more sensitive to this than most, given the fact that with my own recent history I am almost at the point of jumping at my own shadow.  And yet, the shedding just seems to keep on coming.

There has to be a point where all of this reaches critical mass, when there are so many people not working and paying their bills (and directly dependent on government to do so) that it finally upends the economic apple cart.  Those that do not earn do not spend on the sorts of things that a service and consumer economy relies on for revenue.

It is a burden enough for those of us in our latter earning years; I cannot imagine the level of instability this will contribute to younger workers.  Sometimes it feels that at the rate we are going, more layoffs and longer periods between employment will become more and more of a thing.  

Managing through this, effectively at the end of my career, is difficult enough. I cannot imagine how a generation that has had not had the experience we had will do so.

On Raising Wages And Departing Employees

 In what is going to be a real life test of an Ayn Randian principle, California has recently decided to up the minimum wage of fast food workers.

For the purposes of this exercise, I am setting aside the arguments about what a minimum wage is and why it is and who gets it.  That is not the crux of the issue - but there is an underlying issue I think bears careful watching.

The issue is simply the breaking point of the average consumer.

One of the things that remains relevant even in my own industry is the idea of COGS, or Cost of Goods Sold - that is, the sum total that one sells a good for.  In theory, COGS is supposed to include all the things which go into the manufacture of that good, including materials and labor (but excluding things like overhead, which falls into administrative expenses).  Nor does this include some level of profit for the company manufacturing the product (Useful description here.)

When labor goes up - just like materials go up - the COGS goes up.  But COGS is not necessarily the same as "price sold at".  This becomes a balancing act of all of the things - COGS, Administrative expense, profit.

When California raised the minimum wage to $20 an hour, it increased the COGS.  Unfortunately for fast food (and all of us), the cost of goods in general (in this case, food) has also gone up.  Which leaves the business owner three choices:  lower profits, raise prices, or cut costs.

From the view of the government, I am reasonably sure that the most desirable outcome is "lower profits".  Profits are, after all, generally evil except above some small socially acceptable norm which is never quite defined but everyone knows what it is (ignoring, of course, the fact that lowered profits equal lower tax receipts.  But more on that shortly.).

From the business owner's point of view, the most desired outcome is "cut costs".  Cutting costs reduced (or at least mediates) COGS.  And, sadly for everyone else, labor is usually the greatest cost any business has.

The option that is overall least desirable is "Raise prices".  From the government's point of view, although likely it generates more sales tax it also hikes overall prices.  From the business owner's point of view, the more prices rise the more likely it is that you will begin to price out certain portions of your market and thus lower overall revenue.

And so - even before this started - business owners started cutting staff.

In at least one example, it started with pizza delivery drivers.  There is a certain cold logic to it - in an age of apps that handle delivery of food, why would one keep a staff to deliver food?  Yes, it means that you do not have direct control over that part of the supply chain, but you are also not paying people who may or may not have deliveries.  And now that overhead and administrative expense falls on someone else, not you, reducing your cost. 

From the government's point of view, this is a bit of a catastrophe.  Less payroll taxes, less income taxes, likely more drain on the social welfare systems as these people look for work.  By "increasing" income, they have decreased their own revenues and increased their own spending.

The other element, of course, is simply the price hike.

As prices increase due to inflation and material costs, people start making choices.  People start realizing what is important and what is not.  And in times of tightened budgets, fast food and restaurants in general are likely some of the first things to go.  

The problem for Our Political And Social Betters (OPASB) is that although they can control owners indirectly, they cannot control consumers.  And consumers will respond to the market in a realistic fashion based on their experience, not on what good intentions would mandate.

By (in theory) trying to do the "right" thing in increasing people's salaries, they have likely ensured that more people will not have jobs.  Which seems like a bit of a reverse outcome. 

Contrast this mandate with at least one restaurant here in New Home 2.0, where they notify you up front (literally up front as you enter the restaurant) that they charge a 3% "living wage" fee as part of the check.  If you do not care to pay it, you can have it removed.  This, to me, makes more sense:  I am informed, I have the ability to opt out, and the company is able to do something to mitigate costs (likely most people do not refuse the additional amount).

My prediction?  Layoffs will skyrocket. Businesses will fold.  Where businesses do not fold, automation will not just become an interesting idea or unique selling point, but critical to the businesses ability to survive.   It will not impact OPASB of course; they eat at locations where none of these things will be an issue.  But almost everyone else will see some kind of effect.

Atlas may not be shrugging, but he may be limbering up his shoulders.

History, Philosophy, Theology, Literature

One of the greatest gifts my mother ever gave me was the interest and passion for reading.  The second greatest gift she gave me in this regard is that I could read anything that I wanted to.  Originally I read fiction and fantasy - not surprising in a young boy - and after a short trip into space exploration, started reading more in history, which led to philosophy and theology.  Literature happened as well, though initially through the "encouragement" of education; it was not until after college that I realized I could read the great fiction that I found I enjoyed, not the ones I was assigned.

One of the things that comes across from reading about different periods of history and people within those different periods of history is that on the whole, humanity and the problems we face have not really changed over all these years.  2500 years ago the Greeks were discussing what the nature of the individual was.  Sun Tzu and Thucydides and Tacitus and Anna Commena and the unknown writer of the Heike Monogatari remind us that war and internal politics have not changed in a very long time

History, Philosophy, Theology Literature - these give us a view into the humanity and all of its glories and failures.  Laid out fully before us are all of the follies and foolishness and successes of every thing that humanity has ever done or tried.  It also serves as a guide to future endeavors, if we will allow it to be so.

Collectivization of property which will benefit society?  Been tried, failed miserably.  Restricting personal freedoms and imprisoning those that are against the current regime?  The regime falls, eventually, and those that believed and enable it will be excoriated.  Start a war without understanding what a war actually is?  The nature of war will be understood at the cost of lives and treasure and territory and the rending of social compacts.

To Lewis' point above, most of this will be lost if we only focus on our current day.  

Current day commentators who only look at the current day and/or only look at the things that support their views are men and women constantly advancing before encroaching sunset.  I say advancing; they are actually running as fast as they can lest the weight of the past catch up with them and overtake them.  Modernism can scarcely bear the weight of historical experience; its only hope is to try and outrun it.

Interestingly, the InterWeb has both accelerated and compounded this problem.  It has accelerated it in that history, philosophy, theology, and literature can be simply removed and hidden away and facts around it rewritten and obscured.  It has compounded the problem in that those same areas can be much more easily distributed and read by many more people.

Were I to have a recommendation or plan for society to right itself, I would recommend that people spend twice as much time studying the past than they do paying attention to the present or the future.  Those of the present and future orientation only have theoretical results and hopes to point to; the past can tell us how such things generally work out in reality.

Live Not By Lies, The Benedict Option, And The Future

At the start of a thought process introduced by OldAFSarge at Chant du Depart, I had reason to revisit two books that I had read some years ago by Rod Dreher, Live Not By Lies and The Benedict Option (links are to reviews).  

I have said in the past (and maintain) that I enjoy reading Dreher, someone who I could only describe as sort of a cultural/real world commentator that has the added bonus (in my opinion) of acknowledging where his life has gone awry and is not afraid to write about it (he writes a Substack here; there are occasional free articles as well as the paid subscription). He is (at least in my view) something of a futurist in that he looks at current trends and taking historical examples, points to reasonable possibilities of where they might go.

In re-reading Dreher - himself in a self-imposed exile in Hungary - it is useful to look at the point of time in which his books were written and ask the question "Have we moved further along the path he wrote about?"  If we have, then while perhaps not a prophet he is a certainly a predictor to at least be considered.

 In The Benedict Option (2018) he suggested building essentially modern islands of community (Christian communities or even non-Christian communities; Dreher himself is Orthodox) based on the model of Benedict of Nursia to fight the rising tide of modernism and its corrosive effects.  In Live Not By Lies (2020) he related the history of the rise of Communist control of media, thought, and religion in Eastern Europe. 

Is society more or less corrosive, throwing away social norms and history in the name of modern world that only recognizes true freedom in certain approved areas and seeks to make its own history?  As it turns out, these are pretty simple questions to answer:  Are we more or less free in our expression, our communication, and the exercise of our religion?  

It is perhaps not surprising that I find myself in the solid "Things are worse, not better" camp.

Which is fine, of course.  Others will see it differently.  The question is, as it is for all of us, what will I do.

Dreher's examples from Live Not By Lies is instructive in that (with two notable exceptions) Eastern Europe did not have the wherewithal for any sort of armed action (if I had to theorize, partially because of the destruction of World War II, partially because of the overwhelming numeric superiority of the Soviet Union in their various nations).  What they ended up doing as discussed in Dreher's book were three major actions:  strengthening their minds in learning and knowledge, strengthening their connections with others, and strengthening their faith.

It explains why - in the last few years or so - I have become rather insistent on books and especially historical books of classical Greece and Rome which have the original text and a translation.  it explains why I have been gathering knowledge in general.  I suppose it even explains why I am endeavoring to find a different church (although obviously the relocation has set that back some).

In that sense - the "preparing for bad times sense" - a relocation to a modern urban environment is not the best decision, especially starting out living in an apartment; we do the best with the situation that we are given.  But even in those sorts of situations, things can be done - and in some cases, things become available that were not before (a smaller living space, for example, combined with a complete change in activities and schedule, frees one's time for other activities that previously were not possible). 

I am reluctant to go so far as to say "Something Wicked This Way Comes" - I am also no prophet and I have limited success in seeing into the future.  But sometimes, one does not have to.  Preparing for the worst and being pleasantly supplied is almost always in fashion.

The Age Of Indifference

 In what has become a running tradition, I attended Ash Wednesday (equally known this year as "Valentine's Day With A Twist" with Uisdean Ruadh -  I had asked him if I, not being Catholic, could get "marked".  His response was simply "Unlike Communion, Ash Wednesday is a come-one come-all event".  Relieved of not re-fighting The 30 Years War, I duly walked up and received my cross of ashes.

During the course of the homily, which was (I suspect) a typical sort of presentation - what is Lent, why do we give things up, looking towards Easter, etc. - the priest made a comment that   "The last stage of hate is indifference."

As I thought through it over the course of the next couple days, the truth of the statement struck me deeply.

We tend to think of indifference at that point as not hatred but simply a sort of normal outgrowth of the process.  First we are bothered, then perhaps angered, then hateful.  After hate?  I never really thought of that before.

Using the word "hate" itself is a bit jarring, and perhaps something that (as I a Christian) I should not be approaching as familiarly as I do.  But replace hate with "anger" or "offended" or "turned off" and it is simply a different word to address the underlying feeling.

As I continued to think on it, I realized how dangerous such an outcome was - not to those that have reached that point, but those who have created the situation.

"Not caring" could be used as a synonym in this case.  When I become indifferent to something - an intellectual property, a business, a philosophy, a company, a state - I do not just no longer have strong feelings against the thing.  I no longer have any feelings about the thing at all.  Its success - or its failure - is no longer something which I pay attention to or care about the outcome.

The thought was remarkable because it explained how in the last three or four years I had changed in my opinions of so many things.  It was not that I had somehow forgotten about them, I had simply reached my limit of bother/anger/frustration and simply stopped caring about it.

The danger, of course, is to those who continue support the thing in question.

In the back of their mind, there always remains the thought "Well, when push comes to shove, we can count on folks to rally around the intellectual property/business/philosophy/company/state because at their core, they will remember the value of the thing. They always come back." And then they will stand in shock when those people do not come to support the thing in question, and it simply fails.

The supporters of the thing will, of course, rail against those that let it fail. "Uncaring, selfish" will be the call.  But their words will have no impact; the indifferent will simply have moved on to things that they actually care about and are engaged with.

The great danger in indifference, of course, is that it is usually only realized long after any remediation could take effect, leaving the true believers in shock as the things slowly slips beneath the water towards the bottom of history.

On A Bank E-mail

Two Wednesdays ago I got an e-mail from my bank.

I have been using an airlines credit card  for the last 3 years or so, once going out to The Ranch and to see my parents became a thing. One earns points for money spent and gets a bolus of points on the anniversary. It was one we paid a fee for but, at that time, yielded significant benefits.

The notice that came in the e-mail had the innocuous title of "Changes to your XXXX account".  

The purpose of the e-mail was to notify card holders at starting on 26 March, a new penalty for failing to make a payment - the "Penalty APR" was being put in place. In short, in the event that a payment is missed, an interest rate of up to 29.99% (Prime plus 26.99%) will be levied against the account.  As an alternative, they are setting up a "pay over time" option for select customers and select purchases (conveniently called the "MY (Bank Name) Pay Over Time" plan.

You read that right.  29.99%

Technically, you do have the right to protest the fee - however if you do, the bank will close the account and no new purchases will be allowed to be made.  How long will the Penalty APR be in place, even if you do make the payments?  It could be up to forever, or as long as you hold the card.

They note that "As a valued customer, we encourage you to continue to make your payments by the due date to avoid penalties".

We have paid off our monthly balances for years (the points earned from credit cards have paid for any number of flights), so I had no idea what the current going rate is.  Turns out it is between 21.24% and 23.24% for purchases (that do not, apparently, miss payments).

I can only imagine the bank - I presume all the others are doing the same thing - is trying to get in front of what they see as a major failure of repayment coming in the not too distant future.  '

Which is actually pretty telling about what industry - not the people that do not have to bear the brunt of bad decisions - thinks the near future will be like.

In The City

 On New Year's Eve, for the first time in over 25 years, The Ravishing Mrs. TB and I went to a New Year's social event out in the public.

As it turned out, it was a bit of a fluke:  my sister and her family had come to New Home to celebrate an anniversary and gave us tickets to the event as our Christmas gift (they were attending as well).  Not necessarily the sort of thing I attend (regularly or otherwise), but even I am open to a new experience once in a while.

The event, for the record, was pretty much what I expected it to be. On the bright side, it was a 1920's themed event and people definitely dressed up for it, which was pleasant.  Also rather cool to behold were couples in their 60's and 70's out dancing and obviously enjoying themselves (and in love).  The music was loud to start with and got louder.  Our tickets included all the alcohol one could drink (for the record, I had one glass of cabernet and a glass of champagne at midnight) and a rather sad trickle of snacks that was...well, at least they warned us it was "while supplies last".

I may or may not have even danced a bit.

But to go to this event, of course, we had to go downtown.

My images of "downtown" and "The City" were rather blurry growing up. My memories very early on were mostly the song from Petula Clark, "Downtown" (perhaps obviously in its post release days as part of a Reader's Digest music compilation), which included lines like "Listen to the music of the traffic in the city" and "Linger on the sidewalks where the neon lights are pretty".  Old Home was a small town (which had an actual downtown back in the day, sans neon lights and traffic), but sometimes we would go to Capital City.  

Capital City consisted (in my childhood world) mostly of the Capital grounds, where we would go and feed squirrels, and the zoo, and historical sites and very occasionally, a shopping mall.  Every year as well for a number of years growing up we would to to The Big City for a medical appointment (I had a condition where I just walked on the balls of my feet; it is better, but you can now always tell by my wear patterns on my shoes), which would include a visit to A Major Tourist Site or a very cool museum and park.  In those days I was hazy about the environment of the cities themselves; my memories are mostly of the experiences, not the surroundings.  

Except people. I remember a lot of people.

New Home is one of those "up and coming places" which is in a race to destroy itself and its uniqueness in order to be fashionable and relevant to the world around it.  Even in our time here, skyscrapers have soared into downtown, bringing apartment buildings and condos and upscale stores.  Land is actually so valuable that older buildings sell and are torn down, replaced by large squares of apartments with chic upscale restaurants and stores underneath, wedged in between older buildings that somehow manage to cling to their location out of nostalgia or sheer spite.

This started in downtown, but the "improvement" is working its way west to the upscale housing and meeting upscaling working down from the North. Only the eastern half of the city "remains" in its pre-center of the universe status and even there, pockets of "the future" are now emerging.

The Eastern half, of course, is where we stayed.

Human urine is a smell that, much like marijuana, once you know it you never forget it.  And that was the smell that greeted us as we walked from the parking lot to our hotel and then to the restaurant to dinner.

This part of the city is right on the razor's edge between new and old:  on one side - a clear, demarcating invisible line, is "the future".  On the other side are buildings - bars, tattoo parlors, low end restaurants, the occasional unique store - in buildings that for the most part are clearly from early in the previous century.  In some cases the word "crumbling" is as kind characterization.

The homeless are here, wedged in between bars and restaurants:  sleeping in doorways, sitting on corners, rolled up in blankets with carts nearby. Some speak up, asking for change, others just watch you go by.  

Patches of marijuana smell rise up like isolated rain clouds, vendors demonstrating the value of hemp in ways legal and not-so legal.  Music spills over from walls of enclosed patios or from open windows of bars.  We are still early: the roving bands of the younger set, coming for drink or amusement or to be seen will be out long after we have gone to our party.  But the street is even now blocked off and people are moving up and down lanes that saw traffic earlier in the day; luckily if they are weaving, there is far less danger.

It is not that I ever felt unsafe:  the sun was up, the lights were on, and I am aware enough and wary enough that I am at best a troublesome mark if perhaps an underweight easy one.  And certainly given the season, it is unlikely our local politicians or local law enforcement are interested in having high profile issues on New Years; The police were out and in force.

It is always a problem, of course.  Cities and counties bemoan the fact of development that wipes away their unique qualities even as they greedily stick out their hands to gain the income from increase property taxes and higher end taxes that come with increased tourism and sales.  They placate their inner guilt with development projects that in theory are civic minded but never seem to actually preserve the uniqueness of what they had; parks and community centers and monuments to their own glory are pale reflections of what used to be.

Culture, once unmade, can only rarely be recaptured.

It is not often that I go to any city or downtown, and there is a high likelihood that I will not see this downtown - at least at night - for the rest of our time here.  Not just because of the public safety, although that is a legitimate concern.  It is the reality that, hidden behind the rising towners and shining spires and self-congratulatory plaudits of the modern city lies the decay of modern life, pushed off to the sides and quietly tolerated as the cost of relevancy.

I do not remember this in the cities of my childhood; perhaps it was there and I simply missed it.  But I surely cannot see any city - at least any American city - with anything but this lens now.  The rot - but really the smell of old urine, all of the failures of urban life contained - is not something one hurries back to see.

Disquieted

 I find myself disquieted.

I sit here looking out the front window as the cold front that apparently heralds our arrival of Winter makes itself known:  rain, wind, and dropping temperatures for which are temporary, but will definitely settle downward overall even further.  The washing machine runs in the background, washing two weeks worth of guinea pig blankets that need a good hot wash and two rinses.  The coffee - from the second pot this morning - is still warm.

All of this feels real - and yet, all of it feels like an illusion.  It is moments like this that make me remember what a thin veneer of stability makes our whole society and what I often take for granted as my lifestyle run.

Certainly reading the news will not help anyone's frame of mind - which is why by and large I have stopped doing it.  I drop in occasionally only to find that pretty much nothing has changed - in fact, things genuinely seem to be going from bad to worse.  

I go through a list - is it job security and employment I am worried about?  Of course always - at best what the industry I am in is unstable at best and start-ups are even more so.  We are going through the budgeting activities for next year and although I am planning as if I had a full year and lots of growth to plan for, at the back of my head I am painfully aware of the fact that if something significant does not change in the next four to six months, this will be a very different discussion indeed.  

We have scrubbed the budget - again - and will probably do so one more time .  No matter how much I think we have redirected funds, likely there is always something more.  And yet at the same time, there not all the saving in the world can make job instability not happen.  

(It looks like my hours are up slightly at Produce (A)Isle to 17 hours a week or so.  Given those hours on top of a regular job, not sure there is a lot else I can do there - even I need some down time.)

Add to this the message that seems to be coming through loudly from the sermons I have heard over the last two weeks from Thessalonians with the effective message being about persecution.  It is as if someone is trying to get a message through or something.

Sure, I have been here before. This is not the first time that the world has been unsteady or my job has been in long term doubt or persecution has come up in a sermon series.  But the question that keeps popping up in my head is that even if all of this is nothing more than another swell in the ocean of history, what do things look like after it?  Things never "go back" to the way they were before.  They are either changed or seem the same but find themselves more fragile.

I should not be disquieted about things I have seen before - and yet, I am.

On Inflection Points Of Empire Downfalls

The indefatigable Old AF Sarge over at Chant du Depart posted an older piece of fiction yesterday (the man, by the way, can write. If you are not following him and the cast of misfits over there, you should be) about the battles of Lexington and Concord - as seen from the side of the British of that day.  In the middles of the story, one of the characters notes "It seemed to Tom that a war might be starting this very day. were these men insane?"

It was a thought provoking piece for a Sunday, which is come to be my deep breath day of the week wedged as it is between what has become effectively the end of the work week (Saturday) and the beginning of the next day.  It raised the salient thought:  How do you recognize the actual end of a civilization or a society?

These sorts of questions have always fascinated me, and of the many different types of history that I have devoured it is the end of empires that often garners the most attention.  Rome, Byzantium, The Ottoman Empire, The Austro-Hungarian Empire - I have read and re-read the fall of these empires until the progression of their unwinding becomes clear.

Why empires, or at least multinational states?  Because it is the fact that these are more often than not societies that have existed for hundreds of years and almost up to their end, they continue to show signs of life.  Even moribund, an empire can still continue to shamble forward based on the powers of a bureaucracy that defies inertia. 

And then, all of a sudden, there is the sudden end.  Curtain, finis. 

Were these inevitable collapses?  In hindsight of course, it is always difficult to say "no".  We know the history in a way that those living through it could not and we see all of the factors that contributed to the cracking, not just the ones that are easy to see.  But was there a moment just before the moment of inevitability, a moment where the course could have been corrected?  And if there is such a moment, could they have actually seen it for what it was?

Asked differently, can we think critically enough about pivotal points of history to consciously choose them?

I suspect the answer is no, as that would require more thought and consideration than most individuals are willing to put into any decision, let alone critical ones that impact them in ways that they cannot fully comprehend.  I do not think that this surprises me:  abstract decision making is very difficult for us when it directly impacts us, let alone when does not.  Add to that a hearty dose of kicking the can down the road, and the fact that a decision of this nature passes by in an instant is not surprising.

It does make me wonder though:  were the inhabitants of Rome or Byzantium or the Ottoman Empire or the Austro-Hungarian Empire of the previous 200 years to somehow magically move forward in time and see the outcome of their decisions, would they have changed them?  Or is the lure of the here and now, of themselves and their plans and desires, too much to overcome the survival of that which they might have held dear?

History suggests "no", but I am always willing to be pleasantly surprised.

Of Ostrogoths And Failed Political Systems

 One of the lesser "might have beens" of history was the Ostrogothic Kingdom in Italy.

The Ostrogoths, like their cousins the Visigoths, eventually showed up at the Roman Empires door but in a different way instead of directly moving to invasion in 378 A.D.:   co-opted by Attila The Hun, they served in his confederation of troops until around 454 A.D., when the Hun confederation fell apart and they moved to Pannonia (now Hungary). Conflict ensued again, and in 473-474 A.D. they rolled into the Balkan peninsula, where, after 14 years of moving from place to place and trying to go East, they turned and went West - and successfully invaded the Italian Peninsula in 488 A.D., creating the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy (493-554 A.D.).

Thomas Burns, in his book A History of the Ostrogoths, makes the following statement:

"In Italy, Theodoric (454 A.D. - 526 A.D., King of the Ostrogoths 471-526 A.D.) sought to stabilize his new established kingdom and to device a program where the indigenous Romans and the Ostrogoths could coexist peacefully and productively under the aegis of the Amalfian dynasty.  His efforts produced the most successful symbiosis of barbarians and Romans in contemporary Europe" (p. xiv) 

Theodoric and the Ostrogoths attempted to forge a new government system on the basis of the old Roman System.

Under the Ostrogoths, the King functioned as the head of state (keep in mind that the Western Empire had fallen in 476 A.D.) under the authority of the Roman Emperor in Constantinople. The Roman Imperial Senate continued to function.  Romans provided the administrators for the Kingdom (although the Ostrogoths, of course, held all the military posts).  The King of the Ostrogoths never "created" laws; he "clarified" them - largely to ensure the Ostrogoths remained in power, of course.  The Romans lived under the Roman laws of the Empire and the Ostrogoths under Ostrogothic Law.

The center could not hold, of course.  The Ostrogoths still in some events acted like Ostrogoths (Theoderic is rather well known for painfully executing Boethius, author of The Consolation of Philosophy, on a suspected treason charge) and the invasions of the Byzantine Empire starting in 535 A.D. until the end of the kingdom in 554 A.D. ensured that the last years of the Kingdom were spent fighting instead of building.  Add to that the fact that no leader after Theodoric had his vision for a merging of Ostrogothic and Roman interests, and the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy becomes nothing more than an interesting footnote of history for professional and amateur historians.

That is great, I hear you say.  Thanks for the rather obscure historical lesson.  And your point is...?

Three thoughts, really.

1)  Trying to cling to the norms of an old governmental system while making it something "different' does not mean you will have a viable governmental system.

2) There is no really thing such as "fusion" of two system.  They with the most power control the system, no matter how much they pretend they do/will not.

3) Taking over a political (and cultural) system which has existed for centuries is no guarantee it will continue to exist.

A historical note:  The Byzantines did not get to enjoy their newly conquered province for long.  The 20 year war of reconquest had destroyed and demoralized Italy; in 568 A.D. the Lombards, another Germanic tribe, poured over the Alps to conquer Italy for themselves and driving the Byzantines first to the coastal cities and then eventually out of Italy altogether.  The Lombardic Kingdom lasted until 768 A.D, and parts of it continued to exist until the final conquest by the Normans in 1078 A.D.  

Conquest is no guarantee of actual success.

Ostrogoths

Ostrogothic Kingdom

Gothic Language (Bonus Round!)

Living On The Edge Of A Failing Society

 Over the weekend while darning socks, I watched Blood and Gold on Netflix.  The plot, set in May 1945, involves an escape plot, a revenge plot, and a "Get the Treasure" plot.  It was far more entertaining than I had anticipated, although I do not know that I would heartily recommend it.

The fact that is the end of the War and the Americans are just beyond the horizon is a subtle pressure underlying the movie, that things need to be "done" by the time the Americans arrive. 

Which then, of course, brought me to another thought entirely:  What, I wonder, is if like to live in societies that are facing the end of existence?

Netflix's All Quiet On The Western Front asks this question as well (as does the book); The Last Days of Hitler is the same question at a higher level.  But the question is relevant beyond ending of wars through German points of view.  The same could be said of Edo Japan in 1866 or Royalist France in 1788 or Britain in 408 A.D. or Byzantium in some point during the 1440's or 1450's or even the Eastern Block circa 1988:  the time between the clarity that the construct one is living in is not going to continue but before it actually fails.

On a personal level of course, I would have to imagine there is a lot of confusion and unrest.  Does one flee?  Does one stay in place?  When the dust settles, will things be better or worse? - and this is not an irrelevant question: one of the sayings just prior to the conquest of Constantinople was "Better the Sultan's turban than the Pope's Miter" (e.g., better to live under Turkish rule than merge with Catholicism and given the history of the previous 250 years, not hard to understand), and surely those that have lived under any authoritarian society where they were victimized (National Socialism, Communism) cannot see anything much worse than what has happened before. 

And surely there is a consideration of the past actions of one's life.  In some cases, plans that were years or decades in the making are about to be turned into dust ascending in the wind.  All that planning, all that scheming, all those years and years of work - gone in an short period of time.

Add to that the reality that for many, staying where they are is likely a bad idea and so one sees people fleeing hither and yon.  Refugees moving away from advancing armies, refugees being turned back or away by people who themselves are effectively in the same situation.

What is like to see all of this coming, to realize it is happening, and yet to feel powerless to either change the outcome or to have a clear path toward safety?

I would imagine that one is also thinking about the "after" of the event:  What will happen to me?  What will the new society be like?  Will I be a criminal?  Will I have things taken away - or looted?  What will it all look like - especially if I was an individual that had a stake in the society now passing away?

All of this compressed into months or even weeks, even as things continue to slide apart.

When, I wonder, does it become clear that all of this is happening and all of this needs to be thought of?  For some of course, it will not be until the deluge is upon them, until the barricades have fallen and the crowds are in the street and things are being torn down. For others, it will be months or even years before the event; even for some it will be before the last feather comes to rest on the pile, tumbling the whole thing down.

In a way, perhaps, it is like the death sentence that we all invariably carry within us the moment we are born:  we know we will die, we just do not know when or the circumstances.  Within that knowledge, we try to make the best life we can for ourselves, knowing that there is only so much we can control and doing our best.  

Plan for the best and prepare for the worst, as the saying goes.

On A College Graduation

 This weekend Nighean Bhan graduated from college - not the actual completion of the degree mind you, that happened in December of last year.  This was the "walking" portion of the process, where the graduate goes through and gets the public recognition for their accomplishment.

I was a little hesitant about going - this is by far the largest event I have attended in over three years and the first college graduation since 2019.  Overall it was fine - long (over three hours) and what I would consider any sort of non-related social constructs and thoughts kept to a bare minimum.  The keynote speaker's address was short, amusing, and the sort of thing one can just as easily get online in a 15 minute inspirational living value.  Other than the press of people making their way out (which set off every panic button that I possess), it was an endurable experience.

The thing that made me really think was not the ceremony, but rather the graduates.

This was an undergraduate only event, and yet there were likely 1100 individuals at this event to graduate, scattered among four or five different departments within the larger college.  I am sure there was the usual mix of students here:  the overachievers, the very devoted, the "doing it for my family", the lower achievers that met the minimum requirements, and those that staff breathed a sigh of relief as they crossed the platform (there are always a few).  All now armed with immaculate diplomas to be mounted in frames on walls or stuffed in closets to be forgotten.

Whither will the graduates go?

I do not ask this question to detract from the accomplishment - completing a college program is a big deal and a life investment of time and resources (having been through two degrees, I know as well as any).  I do ask it based on the world we live in today.

Colleges over the next month or so will be releasing college students into the economic ecosystem.  In 2020 (The most recent year I found) a little over 2,000,000 undergraduates took a degree.  Assuming that includes B.S., B.A, and A.A. that is still a lot of (mostly) young people flooding out into the world.  Some will continue on of course to graduate school (Nighean Bhan is one), but others will be moving directly into the world of work.

What world will they wander into?

One of the great complaints about the U.S. college system is that it is disconnected from the actual needs of the economy.  We pump out all kinds of degreed individuals:  English, Psychology, Science, Math, Communication, Journalism, Political Science (Those losers - I was one of them).  They arrive, some of them knowing precisely what they are going to do, others (like me) having no idea what they are going to do.

But the world is different - different than when I graduated, even different within the last ten years.  

When I graduated the global economy was just taking root; now one completes (literally) with the entire world.  Robotics had begun to automate many tasks considered "drudgery"; we are now in the very early stages of Artificial Intelligence automating many tasks considered "skilled" and "educated".   I have already considered the fact that within 10 years, likely Artificial Intelligence can do 90% of what I performed as a project manager:  create and track timelines, follow up with emails, track spending, assign invoices. Practically speaking, $1.00 when I graduated with my BA is now $0.42 - not a great trend when prices are only continuing up, not down.

I am sure they are educational as prepared as a large prestigious university can make them. But are they prepared for the world as it is today, not even the world as it was when they started college?

If anything, life teaches us that we need to play it as it lies.  Seldom (if ever) are we offered the opportunity to pick our ball up and move it on the playing field.  Sometimes, the "lay" works in our favor; other times it does not.  Either way, we have to take the next swing.

I wonder - in that sea of individuals literally bursting forth upon the world - how many truly grasp that fact.

 

On De Consolatione Ad Marciam And Outcomes

De Consolatione Ad Marciam (To Marcia on Consolation) in Lucius Annaeus Seneca's Moral Essays (Loeb Classical Library Volume 254) was written by Seneca to Marcia (Cremutius) Cordas, a friend of the Emperor Augustus's wife Livia.  The occasion of the consolation is the death of her son Metilius, who passed away three years prior to the writing of it.  In it, he reminds Marcia of the fact that death is endemic to all men and can actually represent a release both from potential sins as well as from actual suffering.

Today's thought exercise, though, is taken from a section dealing not so much with the consolation as with the historical examples of living long enough to see: 

"Think how great a boon a timely death offers, how many have been harmed by living too long?  If Gnaeus Pompeius (Ed:  Pompey the Great), that glory and stay of the realm, had been carried off by his illness at Naples, he would have departed the unchallenged head of the Roman people.  But as it was, a very brief extension of time cast him down from his pinnacle.  He saw his legions slaughtered before his eyes, and from that battle where the first line was the senate, he saw - what a melancholy remnant! - the commander himself left alive!  He saw an Egyptian his executioner, and yielded to a slave a body that was sacrosanct to the victors, though even if he had been unharmed, he would have repented of his escape; for what were baser than that a Pompey should live by the bounty of a king!

If Marcus Cicero had fallen at the moment when he escaped the daggers of Catiline, which were aimed not less at him that at his country, if he had fallen as the saviour of the commonwealth which he had freed, if his death had followed close upon that of his daughter, even then he might have died happy.  He would not have seen swords drawn to take the lives of Roman citizens, nor assassins parceling out the goods of their victims in order that these might even be murdered at their own cost, nor the spoils of a consul put up at public auction, nor murders contracted for officially, nor brigandage and war and pillage - so many new Catilines!

If the sea had swallowed up Marcus Cato as he was returning from Cyprus and his stewardship of the royal legacy, and along with him even the money which he was bringing to defray the expense of the Civil War, would it not have been a blessing to him?  This much at least he might have taken with him then - the conviction that no one would have had the effrontery to do wrong in the presence of a Cato!  As it was, having gained the respite of a very few years, that hero, who was born no less for personal than for political freedom, was forced to flee from Caesar and submit to Pompey.

...All things human are short-lived and perishable, and fill no part at all of infinite time."

Seneca point to Marcia was that his early death spared him from suffering unimagined ills that were yet to come.  My meditation today is on a tangent to this point:  living long enough to see the consequences of our actions extend to their logical conclusion.

For many of us - most of us? - we take a multitude of actions every day.  Some of these are of no import at all, but some of them can have drastic impacts on ourselves, our loved ones, and even the society around us.  Some decision are consciously made for this very reason - that somehow we are going to make our family/home/geographical entity a better place.

We make these decisions and blithely assume that everything will work out for the best.

Sometimes, of course, we luck out and the decision goes moderately well.  Other times - well, other times we get removed from the situation or (worst case) die before we see the outcome.

Other times though, we get to live through it.

That is the tangential point of Seneca:  Pompey lived long enough to the Civil War go against him (does anyone think at the start of a war they will not win?), Cicero saw the end of the Republic that he had tried to save by executing one man only to let loose the larger scourge of Civil War, Cato lived to see how his inflexible Stoic and political beliefs contributed to the destruction of the Republic that he spent his life serving.

One can argue it is part of the human condition:  we are shorted sighted and can barely look five years out, let alone 50 or 100.  For example, 100 years ago most of the US was still rurally based, electricity was just becoming a thing, and Soviet Communism was still "a pretty good idea based on the previous inequalities and backwardness of the Tsarist regime".  

That last point, of course, looks quite different from our vantage point now.

I write this for two reasons.  One, of course, is simply to remind myself that nothing is permanent.  The fact that history (personal and "big picture"), while not predicting outcomes of things, can often guide us in how they are likely to work out in the long run is something to take wisdom from and refuge in.  Many of the things I find in my own personal life as well as the larger world, seemingly giant, can suddenly change.

The other is for those involved in making the sorts of decisions that they believe will change themselves, their situations, or the world without accounting for the long term impacts.   It is not only that the course you chart is the course you end up with - unlike travel, the actual world is far more messy and influenced by many factors beyond your control.  The other point is that often you live just long enough to see the final outcome of your changes - and sometimes, to be consumed by them.

One wonders if, looking back, Pompey, Cicero, Cato, and even Seneca himself would have chosen differently.

Events That Do Not Matter And Events That Do

 One of the things that is coming to fore as I an working through the small introduction to Anglo-Saxon history which has turned into its own research project is the inability of individuals to properly assess the actual impact of current events in their time.

Time and time again in my reading, events (mostly battles in this case) occur and are considered to be of major importance. In some cases they are:  the battle of Mons Badonicus (circa 500 A.D.) bought the Romano-British the breathing space of a generation, but also concentrated the invading Angles, Saxons, and Jutes into a small area that became totally Germanized unlike most of the other barbarian invasions of Western Europe at the time, which flowed over and through the population, becoming a thin elite class which was subsumed into the existing population.

Or the battle of Brunanburh (we are not quite there yet) in 937 A.D., in which the King of The English engaged the Kings of Strathclyde, Scotland, and the Norse Kingdom of Ireland.  In the literature at the time, it was felt to be "The Deciding Battle of England" - yet a little over a hundred years later, the entire Anglo-Saxon kingdom and its ruling class were overthrown by Norman invaders.

One could argue that the Concert of Europe (1815) may not have fully played out until World War 1 (1914-1918), or World War I did not fully play out until World War II (1939-1945) or that any of the events that were current even five years ago have played out to their logical conclusions.  In my lifetime I have seen the end of the Cold War, but still live within the framework set up by it; the final implications of it may not be fully visible until well after my death.

There are events that really do change things, of course:  the defeat of the Vikings by Alfred the Great at the Battle of Ethandun (Edington) in 878 A.D. really did change the course of history (had Alfred lost, the likelihood any Anglo-Saxon kingdom would have survived would have been much smaller). The defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 really did change Western (and Eastern) Europe.  The Russian Revolution of 1917 really did change everything about the Russian state as did the Chinese Revolution in 1949.  Sometimes one can look an event and say very clearly, "This changes things".

We are awash in media and news these days: 24/7/365 updates, if one wants them.  And one can spend their time running through nothing but news cycle after news cycle, only to discover after the fact that the news cycle had absolutely no impact on things whereas some event that was not even on one's radar turns out to be a significant development.

It is a hard balance to hold, this looking forward and back and to the sides all at the same time while trying to keep one's own life on track and moving forward towards the plans one has set in place.  The only advice I can constantly remind myself of is that while events local, national, and international have the ability to impact my life, the only thing I can truly control is my own reactions, both emotional and practical actions.

If history teaches one anything, it is that the world has always been a troubled place.  And as to the impact of current events on the future, one can look to that paragon of wisdom, Yoda:  "Always in motion is the future.  Difficult to see."

We can see the immediate impact of events, but can only see their long term impacts as we live through our days, twenty-four hours at a time.  That, too, has not changed since before the time that history was recorded and "the future" became a thing.

The Speed Of Economic Failure

In case you missed it last Friday, there was a bank failure.

Not just any bank failure of course, but the 16th largest bank in the United States failure.  Pretty much in the course of 24 hours.

I had vaguely heard of Silicon Valley Bank the way I had heard of other banks - I suppose at some point in time or space I saw an advertisement or even a branch - and then put it out of my mind.   There are always banks, and I try to need them as seldom as possible.

By Friday evening, everyone had heard of Silicon Valley Bank.

Note that the bank did not just have a bank run and fail - it had a bank run and went into receivership on the cusp of failure on the same day (emphasis mine). One can only often seem to get the minimum amount of alacrity out of the State and Federal Government for many issues.  The fact that they acted so quickly in this case is indicative of something.

From what I read, there are two real issues.  The first is that most depositors (93 to 95%) had way over the FDIC $250K insurance limit in the bank, so there is a question of what if any money those depositors will get back - and this leads into the fact that this is tied up in companies that need that money to do business - you know, things like pay employees and pay bills.  The second is that as of Friday, the money could not be accessed (although that may be completed now).  Had a direct bill on Friday?   Someone did not get paid (and likely, you now have a late fee to boot).

I am not a financial individual - but the speed of this is stunning to me (and we are fortunate there was a weekend to buffer all of this.  Imagine if it happened on a Monday.).  And it should be an instructive lesson - to me first, of course - that when the failure comes, it will not be the fanfare and panoply, but it will simple happen.

Or as the quote goes on how one goes bankrupt:  Slowly at first, then all at once.

On A Work Ethic

 Friend of this blog Nylon12 made a fascinating comment in yesterday's post which (as these things often do) sent my mind down different paths as soon as I read it.  The comment is thus:  

"Agree about colleges/universities., how many prepare their students for the real world?   How many teach the process of  how to think/analyze/learn? How many employees give a full days effort for a full day's pay?

The place that mind went was "Where does one learn a work ethic?"  Perhaps more intuitively, "Where did I learn a work ethic?"

If look at myself at least, it would have to start at home, especially with my father TB The Elder.  All of my growing up years and even beyond when I left home, he worked at the same job.  He left the house by 7:30 and arrived home by 6:00 PM.  Perhaps as is usual with children growing up, I had a very vague idea of what my father did.  I knew he worked for a utility company in the gas division, but was pretty vague on what that meant.  I know better now;  it meant days in the hot sun and rainy cold days, digging trenches and checking pipes and meters and dealing with emergencies as they came up.

Even at home, he had a work ethic likely drilled into him by a combination of poverty and his own father.  The amount of time I remember my father just "sitting around" is fairly brief.  He was always about something, be it around the house or at The Ranch on the weekends.  The three breaks from that were:  1)  Church on Sundays (which I suspect he grudgingly attended more often than not for many years); 2) and 3)  When his beloved Dallas Cowboys or Los Angeles Dodgers were playing.

My work ethic "extended" itself when I got my first job at a fast food restaurant.  Fast food was hot and greasy work and is on a pretty tight timeline (oddly enough, customers seem to prefer their food hot).  Work was a series of tasks to be completed in a specific order - and as one got good at those tasks, one "graduated" to other tasks ( and for everything I have forgotten from that experience, I still cook a pretty mean burger).  One did not leave until one's tasks were complete - and if I wanted to get off on time, I worked hard to make sure they all were done.

In my current line of work (let us be kind and call it "intellectual"), school helped a great deal. I have always been good at school for some reason because school made a lot of sense:  study, learn the material, pass the test, move on.  Classes, especially as one goes into high school and college, become much more defined.  How to succeed was clearly known (generally speaking, at least in the day, it showed up as the "syllabus" on the first day of class).  Understand what to learn, understand how to apply the knowledge and pass the tests, and one moved on - oddly enough as I think about it, much like what I do for a living now.

So what changed?

I am not a social scientist nor a trainer nor a labor consultant so I feel fairly unqualified to comment beyond a personal observational level - but I, at least see elements of the following:

1)  Examples:   This is a hard one for me to quantify as I have a limited pool of people (we all do), but it does occur to me that experientially, the biggest impact happens in the home, whether by direct family or other family members or close friends.  Are those examples as strong as they were?  If not at home, where are those examples coming from?

2)  Experience:  I would argue that my 1.5 years in fast food were some of the most formative in both my work ethic and my desire to get a better job (smelling like grease every day when you come home gets old pretty quickly).  I knew that working hard was important; now I had to apply it in a real fashion.  Effort without direction is just wasted effort (otherwise known as "flailing about").  

Our children all held jobs through part of their high school and most of their college experience. We never really told them what job to have, especially in high school - two babysat very regularly (and made good tax-free money doing it) and one worked at a grocery chain - as what the job is was (to me at least) less important than learning the basics of showing up on time, commitment to the task - and learning how to save and pay for things.  But how many children or even adults are gaining that experience now?

This extends, of course, to getting out of school and into the work force as well:  a key component to reinforcing a work ethic is to gain the benefit of one's labors.  Work and get nothing for it except the bare minimum and a tax bill and your desire to work can quickly dwindle.

In every generation, even the ones after mine, there are those that have a work ethic, that are working hard and well and succeeding.  Every time I keep feeling depressed about such things, I read another story that stirs my resolve.  Not everything is lost, and not all of a generation is doing the minimum amount required.

But there is one more thing about a society that loses its work ethic.

Those that lack the ethic can do so only as long as those with a work ethic continue to do what they are doing, and the society has the finances to support it.  Drop out that bottom, either by those with a work ethic removing themselves from the labor force  or the ebullient "we can pay for everything" financing collapsing and all of a sudden this surfeit of drafting ceases. 

At that point, everyone will suddenly discover they either have a work ethic - or need to get one.