Slap Shots

No plans for a draft? Then why are people being asked to volunteer for draft boards?

From Reading In The Dark:

Dear Diana,

I appreciate your interest in becoming Local Board Member with the United States Selective Service System (SSS). In order to proceed with this process please complete the SSS Potential Board Member Information Form. On the Oath of Office and Waiver of Pay page please complete just the top half.

Upon receipt of the completed forms, I will contact you by telephone to conduct an informal interview… I appreciate your patriotism and interest in serving your community and your nation by serving with the Selective Service System.

Gratefully,

Think it's a joke? Not according to the Selective Service System: http://www.sss.gov/fslocal.htm

Says Diana:

That breeze you feel? is the draft.

***************************************************

CNN's Quick Vote Question, Saturday May 14, 2005:

"Are suspected al Qaeda members outside war zones legitimate targets for U.S. military strikes?"

As of about 7:00 PM Saturday, 85% of respondents said 'yes.' I didn't answer. Is this a war? If so, then why aren't we treating captured prisoners like Prisoners of War?


***************************************************

Do you think Free Trade is a good idea? If so, you're probably in favor of the proposed US-Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA).

From the San Jose Mercury News [requires registration; link may expire soon]:

Concerned about democracy? CAFTA, like NAFTA, authorizes foreign corporations to challenge U.S. laws and regulations that might stand in the way of profits. Using a similar ``investors' rights'' rule under NAFTA, for example, the Canadian company Methanex is protesting California's order to remove the carcinogen MTBE from our gasoline. No one questions that MTBE is a health hazard. The problem is that it's also a moneymaker for Methanex. If the United States loses the case, taxpayers will be liable for millions in damages, payable directly to Methanex.

Betcha didn't know that, didya? We need to demand Fair Trade, trade which improves worker and environmental protections, not which weakens or destroys them.


***************************************************

Finally, whatever happened to http://www.changingtheclimate.com/? That's Robert Lind's Website; he's the guy behind those "I'm Changing the Climate! Ask Me How." bumper stickers for SUVs. He (or at least his site) seems to have vanished. Anyone have a clue?

After these messages...

So what's the single greatest obstacle to happiness in our society today?

And what can you do to rid yourself of it?

Well, the solution is quite simple -- and absolutely free!

Eliminate advertising from your life.

That's right -- advertising is the single greatest obstacle to happiness in our society.

Is that crazy?

You may think so at first, but check out my reasoning.

First, consider that most unhappiness comes from unfulfilled desire.

We want something we don't have. Then we work until we get it -- and what happens?

Are we then happy?

Only for a short time, until we are overcome by desire for something else. And the cycle continues....

We chase happiness the way a donkey chases a dangling carrot.

We are, of course, physical beings with real needs. We have basic needs, and we have more complex needs. Real needs. These come from within; the more we understand them, the better we are able to fulfill them -- and finally to transcend them.

But desire for things we don't need distracts us from fulfilling our true needs. We waste our limited physical, mental, emotional and spiritual energy pursuing things we don't need, leaving us exhausted -- and with our true needs unfulfilled.

Unnecessary desire is the root of most unhappiness.

Now, consider the purpose of advertising.

Someone has a product. You don't know anything about it. They want you to know about their product and for you to crave it. So they create advertising.

The advertising compels you to desire something you don't want, something you don't need.

By using well-known psychological tricks, they seek to confuse you, to make you believe their product will help you fulfill your real needs. Keep in mind, advertisers don't care about your needs; they care only about making you desire their product.

The purpose of advertising is to create unnecessary desire.

My advice to you is to avoid advertising whenever possible. Avoid commercial television and radio. Change the channel (or at least hit 'mute') when an ad comes on. Use a pop-up blocker or a browser with built-in pop-up blocking.

Turn off. Unsubscribe. Opt out.

See if you don't feel much better as a result.

You might argue that our entire society is based on advertising, that if everyone followed my advice, our economy would crumble. And you might be right. If so, we need a new basis for our society, a new model for our economy.

Artificial desire is a disease. Eradicating it would make us all a lot healthier.

I hope you take my advice, and that it helps you.

But hey -- you know what they say about free advice: it's worth what you pay for it.

Or maybe in this case it's priceless.

You decide.

:-)

And now a word from...no one in particular

Friends, what I am about to tell you is nothing short of revolutionary.

It will change the way you think about everything.

Let me ask you a question -- just one question: what would you pay, if you could instantly eliminate the single greatest obstacle to happiness in your life today?

Would you pay $100?

How about $500?

$1000?!?

What if I told you that the cost of eliminating the single greatest obstacle to happiness in your life was just [absolutely nothing].

That's right! For the amazing, low, low price of only [absolutely nothing] I can tell you how to rid yourself of the greatest single obstacle to happiness in your life today!

How?

It's actually quite simple.

Tune in tomorrow....

All your base are belong to US

From Jane's Defence Industry:

Defence expenditure in the US will equal that of the rest of the world combined within 12 months, making it "increasingly pressing" for European contractors to develop a "closer association" with the US, corporate finance group PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) says.

Its report - 'The Defence Industry in the 21st Century' by PwC's global aerospace and defence leader Richard Hooke - adds that "the US is in the driving seat", raising the prospect of a future scenario in which it could "dominate the supply of the world's arms completely".

The US defence budget reached US$417.4 billion in 2003 - 46 per cent of the global total.

....

What can I say about that?

Yeah, it's breathtaking. Maybe I should be glad that there's no global Manifest Destiny movement in this country.

Oh wait, there totally is.

The original Manifest Destiny was the concept, popular with US Americans in the 1840s, that we were on a mission from God to extend the US border from sea to shining sea.

Today, it's less a desire to do that on a global scale than a desire to spread 'democracy' and 'freedom' to the whole world. Our current president and his administration are strong advocates of this 'crusade.'

A truly free, democratic world is an idea I find attractive, but when it becomes such a valued end that all means are justified, that's where I get off.

By all means, I'm referring mainly to

• Pre-emptive bombing and invading;
  
  and
  
  
• Discarding international law and agreements. Specifically on my mind right now is the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Yes, it's true that we're not the only nuclear power clinging to our nuclear weapons, but we are the only power actively developing new ones.

Even if our methods were lily pure, would this be the right goal for us to pursue? Surely our country isn't perfect yet, or even close.

Unless the goal is a nation of 'sheeple,' who do little but work and consume, without questioning (much less challenging) the policies of their corporately-financed political leadership -- in which case I guess we are pretty much perfect after all.

Forgive my cynicism, if you can. I need to stop playa hatin' the Bush administration and instead propose some solutions.

Okay, try this: instead of attempting to rule the world with tanks and warheads, let's create a truly just, equitable and sustainable society, one in which everyone's rights are honored, one in which the natural environment is cherished, one in which everyone has what they need and are satisfied with it. Let's build that, and then see if the rest of the world doesn't beat a path to our door.

What do you say?

Generation Gap Flash

I feel no generation gap whatsoever with Generation Y.

Zero.

They do make me feel slack and old, but that's not their fault. And their celebrities -- well, I was going to say that their celebrities were somehow even more shallow and moronic than Generation X's -- but then I realized that the examples I was going to cite, Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, are both members of my generation. Shout out to my Gen X homies, yo!

Generation Y makes perfect sense to me. They seem to have effortlessly assimilated the best ideas of the Baby Boom generation after filtering them through our generation's BS detector. And they know how to do stuff, in teams even. They're functional, as opposed to dysfunctional.

Which is totally in line with what Generational Theory predicts.

Overall, I find Generational Theory to be a good theory. Patterns bestow meaning on history, and enable understanding. The four-cycle generational and event patterns fit the facts of history.

But I do have a few questions:

1. What about people who are out of step with their generation? For instance, in many ways, I've always felt kind of alienated from my alienated Gen X peers. I love to read, I hate consumerism (especially advertising) and I love thinking about the Big Questions. What role do we exceptionalists play?

2. Some parts of the country are 'ahead' of other parts, in terms of cultural/social/techonological trends; e.g. NYC and L.A. are years ahead of, say, Statesville, NC. I've noticed that fashions and political trends here tend to lag behind the national in a predictable manner. Do such 'time lags' have an impact on events?

3. Do great events shape generations, or vice-versa? Or both?

Recent posts have been kind of dry. We are aware of this issue and are taking steps to address it. Thank you again for reading Warrior of the Woods. Have a nice day.

:-)

Talking 'bout Regeneration

"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future."
- Yogi Berra

I'll risk looking stupid and make some predictions about the upcoming years. Not only that -- I'll give you a new way to view US history.

No extra charge.

William Strauss and Neil Howe wrote a book called Generations about fifteen years ago which made the following general statements:

• American generations can be broken down into a four-part cycle
• American history itself follows a four-part cycle

I'll explain, starting with history. Here's the four-part cycle, with examples from our recent history:

1. Crisis Era - e.g. the Great Depression and World War II -- Society's problems reach such a state that they can't be ignored or put aside any longer. Now all generations work together to face them head-on. This equates roughly to Winter.
2. Outer-Driven Era, e.g. the postwar (1950s) era -- Society has successfully faced its crisis and now it's time to enjoy life. And conform. Springtime.
3. Spiritual Awakening Era, e.g. the Flower Power (1960s/70s) era -- Youth find the culture of their parents unbearably bland, so they reinvent it. Summer.
4. Inner-Driven Era, e.g. the current era -- Society largely ignores and puts aside its tangible problems as it struggles to define itself in the wake of the Spiritual Awakening. Autumn.

That's a very simple version of the cycle.

Now for the players. Here are the four generational types, in above order:

1. Civic -- They do great deeds, but struggle with 'the vision thing.' This generation comes of age (i.e. reaches adulthood) during a Crisis Era.
2. Adaptive -- With the great deeds all done, they work to make society fairer. They come of age an Outer-Driven Era.
3. Idealist -- They dream the great visions, but have trouble with 'the reality thing.' They come of age during a Spiritual Awakening Era.
4. Reactives -- We play hard, but we also work hard; we get most of the blame and little of the credit -- and we call bullshit when we see it. We came of age during the current Inner-Driven Era.

By "we/us," I mean Generation X, those of us US Americans born between about 1961 and about 1982. Working backwards from us, the Baby Boom generation (birthyears 1943-1960) is Idealist; the Silent generation (1927-1942) is Adaptive; and the GI generation (aka the 'Greatest Generation,' 1900-1926) is Civic.

The next Civic generation is waiting in the wings of history. Their moment is almost here, but they don't have a good name yet. Some say 'Generation Y'; Strauss and Howe call them 'Millenials,' but whatever (they tried to call us 13ers -- because we're USA's 13th generation -- feh). The next generation's approximate birthyears are 1983-2001. Only time will tell for sure.

Predictions

What's likely to happen in the next few years?

Right now, we're figuratively in late Autumn, heading for Winter (not, I hope, a nuclear one). We're where we were circa 1915 in the last cycle. 9/11 is roughly analagous to the sinking of the Lusitania. I hope. More on that later.

Over the next few years, the Global War on Terror will likely be fought to a half-assed conclusion, with a lot of loose ends.

After that, we're due for an era similar to the 'Roaring 20s,' a period of economic prosperity and hedonism. The Baby Boomers will continue to argue amongst themselves about which Utopia to pursue: Pepperland, or Jesusland? There's likely to be some harsh cultural repression, a la Prohibition, and society will be even more fragmented than it is now.

Then, after several 'crazy' years, something big and terrible will happen. The funny thing is, it doesn't much matter exactly what terrible thing. Last time around it was a stock market crash, followed by a global economic Depression, followed by World War II.

This time, who knows? China invades Taiwan? North Korea strikes Japan? Nuclear Terrorism? Global Climate Change? Peak Oil? All of the above?

What's important is our reaction to the event(s). In the last Crisis Era, we united behind a strong, capable leader, fought our way through the Depression and then through World War II -- and emerged the world's leading power at the end of it.

We surmounted those great challenges well, partly because we were able to reach a national consensus, but mainly because all the living generations were 'aligned' correctly. In 1932, the Missionary Generation (that cycle's Idealists) were entering elderhood, and were perfectly positioned to provide moral guidance and big-picture vision; the Lost Generation (Reactives) were in midlife, just the right age to provide pragmatic tactical leadership; the GI Generation (Civics) were young, strong and eager for great collective challenges (the very young Silent Generation (Adaptives) obediently stayed out of the way).

That alignment comes along only once every 90 years or so, and it's due again around 2015. If we face a great crisis then(or a series of crises), we should do very well.

However, if history forces us deal with an earth-rending crisis much sooner than that, we could be in some trouble. It might be more accurate to say 'if we choose to treat events as earth-rending crises' -- because again, it's not so much what happens, as how we deal with it.

The classic US history example of a crisis that came too soon is the Civil War. The Transcendental Awakening (that cycle's equivalent to our Flower Power era) began in 1837. The Civil War started in 1860, only 23 years later. And ended Very Badly, with our country devastated both physically and spiritually. Obviously, the country hadn't reached any sort of consensus on the major 'values' issues of the day, especially slavery. Given a few more years, they probably would have reached some consensus and solved the problem much less destructively.

Less obviously, the generational alignment was completely dysfunctional. Yes, an Idealist generation (Transcendentals) provided the big picture, but instead of working together, the best minds of that generation worked against each other. Instead of pragmatic Reactive generals (who fight simply to win), we had Idealists there, too -- and winning wasn't enough for them -- they demanded the savage annihilation of the enemy. Insead of team-playing, Civic foot soldiers, individualist Reactives fought the battles.

Contrast that with the WWII cycle: the Missionary Awakening started in 1883; the Great Depression began 46 years later, in 1929.

1967 was the Summer of Love; it's already been 38 years since then, so our society should be ready for something major in just a few years. But we're not ready yet. We're still a deeply divided nation, with only the faintest hints of consensus starting to emerge. That's why I said earlier that I hope we treat 9/11 like the Lusitania, as opposed to Pearl Harbor.

I hope the GWOT doesn't turn into a WWI-style bloodbath, and I can't wait for flapper dresses to come back in style.

Just kidding.

When In Doubt, Dive In

So I've been told.

I've also been told I need to write more. So I'll dive in.

[clears throat]

Uh, Music In My Head? Just a couple of songs lately. Song One is "Sugar (On My Tongue)" by Trick Daddy (with Lil Kim and several others). Awesome song. It sounded familiar right away, and I finally realized it's a remake of an obscure Talking Heads track. Sort of. Actually it's much better than the original.

As much as I don't want it to, the Runaway Bride story keeps draining my brainpower. I read somewhere (FARK.com, I think) that her family knows someone in power at CNN, and that's why they were able to get so much media attention.

And truly, Ann Telnaes hit it right on the head: http://www.ucomics.com/anntelnaes/2005/05/02/ (this link will expire around May 16, 2005).

'Events' like this, and like Michael Jackson's trial, are sort of the ultimate reality shows. I mean, they're really real. Sort of. If you've ever been interviewed for a newspaper or television story, you probably know what I mean. I've been interviewed for both, and in both cases, I was misquoted and edited to prove the reporter's point. And I was a very small fry. Makes me wonder about the level of distortion in bigger stories. But I don't think the 'public' wants to know that; I think they want to believe.

As for Jennifer Wilbanks (finally getting to the 'substance' of the story) -- didn't she, as an adult in a free society, have the right to 'run away from home' without telling anyone? Seems to me she did/does. Rude? Yeah. Inconsiderate, too, but not illegal. And if her family freaked and pulled strings to have the police make finding her a priority, if people in Duluth dropped what they were doing to comb the sewers for her? Well, those were their decisions, not Jennifer Wilbanks's. She's not a six-year-old child. Amber alerts are not issued for adults.

Of course, she did lie -- explicity -- to authorities several days after running away, and she could be liable for that, both criminally and in civil court. But I would think she'd only be liable for what was done on her behalf after her false reports.

The case is a bit of an onion, i.e. there are a lot of layers to it.

Another layer, below the legality of her running away, is of course why? I think anyone who's ever faced a big wedding can offer one obvious reason: it's scary. This huge event, thundering towards you, now completely beyond your control.... 600 guests. 14 bridesmaids. Of course, there could be other reasons. Did she realize she didn't love John Mason? Could she have been abused by him, or seen hints of such danger?

Could she have some sort of mental illness? I think she almost definitely does. "Jennifer has some issues the family was not aware of." That's her uncle, quoted in this article. John Mason, the fiance, told CNN, the "only concern now is to get Jennifer well." Of course, just realizing that you're the story-of-the-century-of-the-week could be enough to traumatize a person severely.

Finally, why do we care? Some of you probably don't care, and for that I applaud you. We need another one of these distractions like we need a Face Eating Tumor.

And yet...I can't help but think a lot of the fascination centers around the whole woman-as-possesssion aspect of marriage. Sure, laws that grant husbands ownership status have been off the books for many years, but the attitude remains, and I think it's one of the leading causes of friction in modern marriages.

More obviously, we all face decisions with serious consequences. Once we commit to one course of action, we usually experience some post-decision dissonance, but we hardly ever reverse course on such decisions. Jennifer Wilbanks took the other road. And look where it got her.

There's a lot more to this. $100,000 for a wedding? Doesn't she owe at least an apology to those people who crawled through sewers? Doesn't she owe a major apology to Hispanics, for tarnishing their image? And one I keep coming back to, over and over again: out of all those people -- friends, family, bridesmaids, clergy -- wasn't there even one person Jennifer Wilbanks could talk to about this before she ran off?

What we have here, is failure to communicate. Wouldn't you agree?

Oh, and the other song in my head?

"Albuquerque" by Weird Al Yankovic. Of course.