Fear

Fear -- it's part of human nature, it can be a disease, and it can be manipulated for nefarious purposes, but I think we can take simple steps to avoid unfounded fears and thereby lead happier lives.

I'm no expert in psychology, but it seems to me that many people have a psychosis that compels them to NEED something to fear.  Government, secret world-ruling cabals, foods, industries, cults, aliens, political parties, the U.N., celebrities, the local cops, the very wealthy, something they don't understand, or just "them" -- if those things didn't exist, their psychosis would invent them.

Fear of the unknown is also just human nature.  We all have fears.

Some people are savvy enough to play off fear, or to at least instill a form of it in their audience.  They invent things to fear so that they can gather power or money.  How many times have you heard politicians paint the opposition as something or someone to fear?  How many advertisements use this tactic, and organizations seeking donations or votes?  "You may have this disease and not even know it" is a common ploy in medical advertising.  Talk show hosts (of all persuasions) use it all the time.

Hitler used fear to peddle his doctrine of murder and war.  Al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood and the KKK use it, as do virtually all radical militant and political groups, and groups that hate based solely on race or stereotype.

Some common unfounded fears include the following: The Japanese mafia or the U.S. government manipulating weather, the U.S. government being behind the 9/11 attacks, aliens (everything about them), the Trilateral Commission, Bigfoot, the Loch Ness monster, witches, ghosts, hauntings, the "zombie apocalypse," California sinking into the ocean, refined sugar and white bread,  fluoridated water conspiracies, and teaching evolution in schools.

Of course, there really are some things to fear -- natural disasters, violent people, insidious political movements, and so forth.  But all of the things mentioned above?  Certainly not.

So how do we evaluate the things we fear?  How do we instill a little more peace in our lives, and shut out unfounded fear?  I have a couple of suggestions, and would appreciate your input for more.  You'll notice that my basic philosophy is that knowledge is power, and that shallow knowledge is dangerous.

1.  Is there objective, tangible, verifiable evidence for this thing/person/movement you fear?  Have you really studied this thing?
2.  What is the source of your information?  Does this source gain anything by promoting this idea?  If so, be skeptical and take a hard look at it.  Are your sources credible authorities, or are they politically or economically motivated?  As an example, I'll offer that all talk-show and website/blog hosts are motivated by increasing their audience, and their guests are motivated by selling their books, so everything they say should be viewed with healthy skepticism.  You can extrapolate to other sources from there.  A subject-matter expert is one who is educated in the subject, has been employed working on the subject for many years, is recognized by other subject-matter experts, and does not reach conclusions motivated by power or money.  Simply being a book author or website/blog author or talk-show guest does not an expert make.
3.  Is this thing you fear realistic?  That is, do subject-matter experts agree that it is?  Does it contradict good common sense?  Does it fit with known laws of physics and accepted scientific or psychological principles?

Life without unfounded fear is much, much happier.

Moral Superiority

Frequently in the news or broadcast media, or even in movies, TV shows, and conversations, a position is taken with an underlying assumption of unquestionable moral superiority over other positions.  For example, a recent editorial overtly took the position that closing the Book Cliffs in eastern Utah to oil and gas exploration was morally superior to allowing drilling.  They never bothered to justify their position, they were so sure it's obvious to everyone that this is the moral thing to do.  Those who are called "environmentalists" often work from an assumption of unquestionable moral superiority, but it happens on a lot of topics -- health care, welfare, tax rates, energy (of all types), and myriad political issues.

I challenge the notion that closing an area to mineral exploration is morally superior to allowing mineral exploration.  It was this topic that led me to write "Imagine There's No Oil," another post on this blog.

Look at the materials you use and depend on every day, and consider this: if it wasn't grown, it was mined.  Think about that for a moment as you look around you.  Here in my office, for example, the only things that were not mined are paper and wood products, and they were logged (often farmed).  The plastics, glass, synthetic building materials and fabrics, ink, lightbulbs, metals, paint, and if you really want to get detailed, even some of the food ingredients you eat were all mined.  Your entire computer was mined.  You know about metals, but did you realize that plastics are made from oil and other mined materials?  Electricity is generated by machines that were made from mined materials, and most in the U.S. is fueled by coal, gas, or nuclear fuel.  Solar panel materials were mined.  Same with wind turbines.  Batteries are made of materials from open-pit mines (what do you think of the Prius now?).

Medicines depend heavily on mined materials, including oil and gas as the stock for carbon.  Farming depends heavily on fertilizers and pesticides, which come from mined source materials -- not to mention water, which in much of the U.S. is pumped (mined) out of the ground.

Natural resources are where they ARE.  We cannot choose where to go to get them.  There are certainly beautiful places we should never disturb, but they are unusual and few in number (Yosemite comes to mind).  The Book Cliffs, the Escalante staircase, and ANWR are simply not in the same category.

So imagine there's no oil, no metals, no raw materials for all these things.  Or at least imagine they all become very expensive because of opposition to their development.  Imagine the resulting poverty, hunger, disease, economic strife, and lower standard of living.  Is that really a morally superior position?

I think not.

Imagine there's no oil
It's easy if you try
No coal below us
No planes up in the sky
Imagine all the people
Living cold and dark...

Imagine there's no metals
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to manufacture
And no synthetics, too
Imagine all the people
Living life in caves...

You may say I'm a reaper
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will prosper as one.

Imagine no electricity
I wonder if you can
No fertilizer to stop hunger
Mass starvation of man
Imagine all the people
Dying all over the world...

You may say I'm a reaper
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will prosper as one.

Jesus and Welfare

It is sometimes argued that Jesus taught socialist principles and, therefore, the Christian thing to do is for the government to provide welfare.  I reject this argument.

In fact, Jesus never taught about the role of government in welfare.  Instead, he taught that we, individuals and the Church, must take care of the poor and our neighbors in need.  St. Francis of Assisi reinforced these teachings when they had been lost from the Medieval church.

Passing the responsibility of welfare on to the government is to reject Jesus' admonition that taking care of the poor is an individual responsibility.  The Good Samaritan did not go to town to report that an injured man was on the road, and law enforcement should go help him.  Mother Theresa did not send off a check to a charity, she WAS the charity.  That is what Jesus taught us to do by example and precept.

Whenever you read or hear this argument, please don't let it slide.  It is fundamental to the present and future of our American government and to us as a people.

Oblivion: An Example

In a recent letter to the editor, a young man complained about being given a ticket for going 2 mph under the speed limit.  That was the focus of his letter, decrying his obviously safe driving and the injustice of the officer in citing him.

In the process of trying to justify himself, however, he filled in the rest of the picture, painting himself clearly as an Oblivion:

He was on a 2-lane interstate next to a semi-truck, with a line of cars stuck behind him.

Oblivious!

First-Hand Experience: There's No Substitute

I had heard, seen, and read a lot about Italian drivers, and thought I had a pretty good conceptual understanding of how they're different from the American drivers I'm familiar with.  After all, I'd seen dozens of movies and TV shows, including some with both a car-related focus and some made for prospective visitors, so I felt comfortably well-informed.  And driving is something I do all the time and am a extremely comfortable with, so hey, no surprises could possibly await me.

I was wrong.

Spending two weeks all across Italy from Sicily to the Alps has finally educated me on Italian drivers.  Like in America, their habits and circumstances vary from place to place.  But from the mad almost-a-demolition-derby scramble in Sicily and Naples, where every car seems to have dents and broken mirrors, to the please-stay-away-from-my-Mercedes-while-I-hurtle-down-the-mountain thrill ride in the Alps, it dawned on me that it all makes sense in a very Italian sort of way.  While there are rules, markers, signs, and cops, the Italians seem to approach traffic like they approach food and family relations, with GUSTO.  They don't piddle around with polite waiting at traffic round-abouts, they barge in and get through!  If you want to go slow, you go slow.  If you want to go fast, you go fast.  And it all sort of works out.

To truly understand something, there's no substitute for hands-on, first-hand, in-person experience.  Ask anyone who has ever climbed a high mountain peak, or snorkeled in a reef, or watched lava explode on contact with the sea.  By reading or watching a screen you can get the general idea and learn a lot, but I've learned it's a mistake to mischaracterize that as actual knowledge or understanding.

It's the same with people, families, and culture.  If you'd like to understand a people or a country, for goodness' sakes GO THERE.  And don't make the mistake of preaching about them until you have.

How many of the world's current ills could we solve by sending people to places for first-hand experience?

Financial Crises

The logical conclusion reached from the financial crises in several European countries is that their governments spent too much.  Yet Washington has been spending recklessly for the past dozen years with no sign of slowing down.  It's like the lemming at the back of the pack, who sees his fellows plunging off the cliff--he could choose either to stop before he reaches the edge, or he could plunge to his demise with the others.  Guess which Washington has chosen.