How to succeed in business without really trying. by meeks
April 12, 2012, 12:53 am
Filed under: Politics, Uncategorized | Tags:

The length of the title stood out amonst the list of past productions on the backpage of my middle school’s playbill. Through the years watching children, whom I thought of as adults, assume the roles of adults, who intermittently break into song, I would build fantasies around that show. I was attracted in equal measure to the awkward fit of the title on the playbill (much like the phenomenon of owning a TJ houshmandzadeh jersey), and to the promise of the title. I sincerely hoped the play had good advice to offer and I wanted in on the secrets.

I am now 25 and have just commenced working in an office for the first time in my life. I am doing it up white bread all the way: 8-5 number punching accounting work, downtown cubicle, fluorescent lights, soft rock radio, 1 hour lunch, 2 fifteen minute breaks; you know, the american reality. Politically I regard corporations as insidious; probably, as a result their culture is as exotic and strange to me as any. So, I plan on using this space in a similar manner as I did in the past with my teaching experience in the Guyanese jungle. You can expect such future gems as: I bring WHOLE wheat bread to work, the grains are too big to fit down the drain, this sets in motion of cascade of mishaps and hilarity ensues.

Despite what consitutional law says, since I do not regard corporations as people. No, I am NOT working for the man. Thank you very much.

One’s Rhetorical Reaction: Apocalypse Past by meeks
January 20, 2009, 12:46 pm
Filed under: Politics | Tags: , , , ,

He just seems to get it.

Every frustration I have felt listening to Bush over the last 8 or what seems like 12 years has been lifted by Obamas emergence. My national conscientiousness- what it means to be an American, what it means to believe in your nation – has been awakening after a long, long hibernation. Unmitigated raw emotions emanated from me as I listened to Obama run through a litany of things that I actually cared about: science, prudent military uses, responsibility, all in a way that felt sincere yet short of rhetorical. My body had become so accustomed to its self preserving apathetic response to all things presidential fed by toxic trivilalities like gay marriage, Teri Schivo, Steriods and less trivial but none less toxic- Iraq – that it was completely unprepared to hear a welcome call for optimism.Nuclear fireball.jpg

For as long as I can remember, I had never really considered the possibility that the world was not on a fast track to disaster, the impending dilapidation felt understood. My standing world view was perhaps be best relayed as transmogrification nuclear cold war doom captured in the bewilderment of Fenyman’s apocalyptic lament and finally concession-

“I returned to civilization shortly after that and went to Cornell to teach, and my first impression was a very strange one. I can’t understand it any more, but I felt very strongly then. I sat in a restaurant in New York, for example, and I looked out at the buildings and I began to think, you know, about how much the radius of the Hiroshima bomb damage was and so forth… How far from here was 34th street?… All those buildings, all smashed — and so on. And I would see people building a bridge, or they’d be making a new road, and I thought, they’re crazy, they just don’t understand, they don’t understand. Why are they making new things? It’s so useless.”

“But, fortunately, it’s been useless for almost forty years now, hasn’t it? So I’ve been wrong about it being useless making bridges and I’m glad those other people had the sense to go ahead.”

The sentiments in the later part of the quote of concession, of monotonously putting one foot in front of the other, not out of conviction but of subsistence, expose the quote’s historical context, and that is what is different about today day. I feel reasoned moving forward fueled by more than subsistence, but the confidence that things will get better. What more can one ask for from a leader blazing our way through treachery?

The Fall of Conservatism by meeks

This morning I got to spontaneously reading – one of the many delights of summer leaisure. Soon enough, I came across an article in the New Yorker called The Fall of Conservatism. The source of much of my political information and opinions trace back to the New Yorker. I am not sure if it is the best way to coalesce an informed, unique, broad reaching political perspective reaching primarily from one resource, but I have not found any other material that engages me in the same way on an consistent basis. Plus, I am not Washington Insider or elected official with the onus of doing what is acting responsibility for the constituent population which I represent – I just read what I like. Articles like The Fall of Conservatism remind me of the why I got to reading the New Yorker in the first place. It is the first and only periodical to which I subscribe.

The article went into depth on what is known as the conservative movement – its origins, rise, and current premature tailspin (thanks to the Doofus-n-Dick administration). The article delved into some abstract political theory – , made some grand sweeping statements – Reagan is to Goldwater is to what Obama is to McGovery* and topped off with a discussion of future directions for the brand.

*Really? Anyone really expects the liberal movement to culminate in Barrack Obama? Does anyone really think twenty years from now liberal hacks will be clamoring to immortalize Obama on the face on our currency? really? That sounds awfully presumptious when applied to someone yet to be elected and who  squeaked through his own party’s primary in what was probably the closest race of the modern American politics.

The article did two things that are to me hallmarks of superior writing-

1) Imbued in me the desire to further pursue subjects mentioned within

2) Lifted me out my prejudices to understand a new perspective

I have never understood the conservative movement. Why would anyone want to be a ConSerVaTive. Since in my lifetime, The Republican Party has been inextricable from to the conservative movement, by association, I could never understand how any intelligent citizen could be a Republican. Well, after reading the article, I modified my original statment to – I can’t understand how any intelligent person under thirty could be a Republican. I did not understand that conservatism was a response to the nuclear chain reaction explosions of the 1960s- a spoon of acid makes the social revolutions go down. But thats not for everyone and as Nixon and Buchannon schrewdly realized- There existed a “moral majority” of meat and potato Americans for which all of this was too much too fast. Thus, the modern conservative movement was born. But one by one as the sources which the movement formed rallying against became history, the movement faded. Conservatism became a vestigial status quo. William F. Buckley* surmised,the conservative movement lost its R’aison d’etat with the fall of communism.

**The late William F. Buckley fascinates me. A conservative intellectual who life synchrously spanned that of the conservative movement. A man who did not believe in minority voting, or that a Jew should take over his publication yet vehemently opposed segregation and launch an intellectual political magazine. This is an individual thinker, a man I want to better understand.

This is the point at which I arrived into political consciousness, puzzled staring down the beast of status quo. I reject the notion that I had no intellectual understanding of the origins of the conservative movement. I had seen enough Haight Ashburry films mentioning Reagon trying to break up the fun like a two bit local police officer trying to bust high school keg party to crudely known some conservative history. I just never really tried to empathsize with the “moral majority” and why they might be opposed to the left wing tumult. I can now see why in the face of communism, hedonism, acid tests, all spun in the vortex of an emerging globalism why some people would rush into the fuzzy arms of Nixon an his promises of an erstwhile, simple America where only news that occurred within a hundred mile radius matter, and ya had a glass of milk every night before bed. I myself am not drawn to that illusion, but at least I do now understand.