In recent weeks, there has been a disturbing attitude that I have witnessed on a number of Internet forums. Some of the posters who submit their comments and views appear to have abdicated their responsibility for Americas decline. I must assume from some of the forums in which I lurk, this may have something to do with the juggernaught of Y2K that is now looming ever so near.

Assuming that their comments must represent a certain (but unknown) percentage of the American population, I feel that I must strongly object. Although I previously posted an abbreviated reply, I would like to offer this as a new thread.

Recently, a poster on this forum said:

"Between Y2K, wars, earthquakes and the like, along with our own nations moral demise, our grandchildren will inherit the wind. It is not something that you or I did to cause this. Every great nation had its glory days, afterwhich it became a 3rd world nation for a time. We as a nation have peaked, and our glory days are a memory fading fast."

This post stopped me dead in my tracks, because I detect something here that is irrational and irresponsible. The following is my reply:

Excuse me? Who exactly do you think IS responsible? If the American people are not responsible for the decline of America, then who is?

If you are of the age of reason, old enough to think, vote and lend your voice, talents, energy, time and money - then you indeed ARE responsible for the decline and fall of America. Americans think that they can always blame someone else for what is wrong in this country when we have only ourselves to blame. Not a pleasant thought, but true.

The simple fact is, each of us shares a small part of the responsibility of America - it's successes and it's shortcomings. I may not be PERSONALLY responsible for Willie Boy and his pandering, but I AM responsible for being a part of the solution - which is what most American's fail to recognize, therefore letting corrupt and evil politicians, judges and whatnot undermine the moral fabric of this country. Believing that we don't share the responsibility is basically saying that we won't hold these (and ourselves) accountable for their actions. SOMEBODY has to do it - somebody has to face the responsibility and the accountability.

We as Americans must come to realize that our country is in it's current state of moral decay because we failed to stand up and stop what was going on - and we continue to fail to do this today. Our elected representatives were SUPPOSED to do this (in part) for us - but they have failed miserably. Now it is up to us (it always was). If we as a people accept our responsibilities for America's decline from a state of grace, we just might have a chance to fix it before God destroys us all. Just maybe.

We may indeed be soon faced with a wistful view of days gone by - by that does not allow us to abdicate our responsibilities of the here and now. Actually, I already wish for yesteryear of greater moral standing in this country and Im only 39 years old! What might my children yearn for?

We must collectively face our responsibility for our decline as a nation by standing steadfast against the tidal wave of moral decay and corruption that swirls around us. Our continued failure to do so GUARANTEES our downfall. Our children just MIGHT inherit the wind , but only if we allow it to happen! We must strenuously object without ceasing lest we fail to provide an inheritance to our childrens children that we can be proud of. It is both our DUTY and our RESPONSIBILITY and lastly, our AUTHORITY to do so.

This does have a direct correlation to Y2K. Y2K is OUR fault - those that wrote the damn programs, me included. Had we recognized the serious impact that two digit date fields would cause in 40, 30 and 20 years ago, we COULD have done something about it THEN - saving what now proves to be BILLIONS of dollars. We should have IGNORED the bean counters that refused funding to provide the memory and disk space we needed. We should have refused the time and cost saving practices of programming two digits instead of four. We should have taken RESPONSIBILITY.

This real-life example proves my point. Failing to stand up to what we KNOW is wrong and simply ignoring it or hoping it will go away somehow has proven to be a recipe for disaster. How this cake gets baked remains to be seen, but clearly the ingredients are there. If Y2K is ANY hint at ALL, then the decline and fall of America is a FOREGONE CONCLUSION. Let's NOT make the SAME MISTAKE!

-- Ray (shusters@montanasky.net), September 25, 1999

Answers

Thanks, Ray. You wrote it better than I could have.

-- mil (millenium@yahoo.com), September 25, 1999.

Ray,

Well written. Sadly, there are plenty of mistakes yet to be made before 01-01-00.

Sincerely, Stan Faryna

-- Stan Faryna (faryna@groupmail.com), September 25, 1999.

"If the American people are not responsible for the decline of America, then who is?"

"Go, my child, and tell the world the sort of things that are about to happen between 1950 and 2000. Man does not listen to the commandments that the Lord has set before us. The devil rules the world and is making people hate each other. Weapons are being made that can destroy the world in minutes. Half of mankind will be destroyed. Hard times will come to the church. Evil will live among men and the devil will plant the seed so that no one will get along with each other and the people will lose faith. War shall start again in Rome and there shall be fighting among religious orders. The weak and the bad will fall. God will allow cold smoke, water, hail, fire, rain, horrible weather, very cold winters and earthquakes that will slowly destroy life on earth. Those that will die do not believe in our Lord. Those are the people whose lives were based on material things, and millions will lose their lives in seconds." Our Lady of Fatima

-- -- (dogs@zianet.com), September 25, 1999.

Aloha Ray: It is indeed painful to realize how much our innocent non- actions turn into disasterous outcomes. Or else to realize, much later, how wrong we were to "go along with the song". HOWEVER, when, as you are obvioiusly doing now, we are willing to face ourselves, learn and go on, we are contributing to the furthering of our community, society as a whole. Good grief, how else are we to learn. We are no different than the youngest toddler amongst us -- we act, or don't act, we (hopefully) learn, we go on. Not many among us are truly bent upon heading down the wrong road; the majority of us simply need to have the experience. We are all learning. I am learning, you are are learning, they are learning. YOU ARE NOT ALONE. AND, you're ahead of the game. Aloha always -- grngrl

-- grngrl (jhandt@gte.net), September 25, 1999.

Though I don't dispute that it is the American People who have allowed the current philosophical and moral crisis to occur, I do quibble with "taking collective responsibility" for anything.

I have tried for years to "work within the system" to change our direction. I didn't vote Republican nor Democrat. I wrote many letters to my elected "representatives". I worked for a presidential campaign. I educated myself in philosophy, politics, economics, and history.

My point is that I, and possibly YOU, sir, are NOT part of the problem. Do not take on guilt that is not yours. Part of responsibility is to know when you are NOT responsible for something as well. There is no such thing as collective guilt, as their is no such thing as collective responsibility.

By ascribing responsibility [guilt] to a collection of people, you dilute the responsibility too. It is up to each individual to do "something". They can band together into groups, to achieve more power in numbers, but it's still a volitional choice by each of the individuals involved.

America was founded by individuals who shared a common philosophy. Their individuality did not prevent them from combining their resources to defeat the British Crown. But their individuality was indicated in the enumeration of INDIVIDUAL rights stated in the Bill of Rights. Most particularly the 10th amendment.

Don't waste energy reflecting on a chimerical "collective responsibility", use it rather to take actions that will restore America to what the founding fathers intended.

Jolly

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), September 25, 1999.

Because I am an immigrant who is not an American citizen, I always felt a little guilty and therefore devoted more than the usual amount of time to volunteer work. Although I did serve on some boards and headed up some local organizations, I always got my hands dirty--very few garden parties, except to raise funds. I think I DID make a difference, particularly in the work I did teaching English to Vietnamese refugees, animal rescue (which I've done since I was 7, and which helps humans as well as animals), battered women, and the Big Brothers program. Where I felt I made things worse was in some of the paid work I did for various War on Poverty programs. Oh and I should add I haven't been in a comfortable, middle-class position, looking for something to alleviate boredom and fill the hours at any time in my life. Most of the volunteer work I did was when I was a struggling, working, divorced mother. It's only in the last five years that I've had even the merest suggestion of financial security, thanks to Sweetie.

I still work with stray animals (a lot), crime prevention (some) and the library (a little), but I've given up on the food co-op (because they refused to prosecute people for shoplifting for what I considered faulty philosophical reasons), and the "enabling" type of social programs. Deliberately developing into an irascible old git, I no longer volunteer in politics because I can no longer be diplomatic (read "naively kiss ass"). Nowadays I find it very easy to "just say no."

Ray, I think you might find that a disproportionate number of people who contribute to this forum have worked within the system, like me, and found it too difficult to change, also like me. There have been some positive changes but not enough. We've seen how problems are wallpapered over, how bad solutions continue to be implemented (even when they don't work in any locale they've been tried), and how we've been penalized for trying to change the status quo. You get to my age and you think, it's not worth it, sod it, there's not enough time left, I'm too tired, worn out, I've done enough, health is going, energy level is gone, let the young 'uns take over. I'm not one of those lucky people you see on the geriatric ads who go scuba diving in their nineties. All I can do locally these days is try to (diplomatically!) get my wise old (!) point of view across by enabling people to see things in a different light. (Which very often consists of the response, "That IS a dreadful problem. What ARE you going to do about it?") And, of course, write the occasional letter to the local paper and elected representatives.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), September 25, 1999.

"Our country is in danger, but not to be dispaired of ... On you depend the fortunes of America. You are to decide the important question, on which rest the happiness and liberty of millions yet unborn. Act worthy of Yourselves." - Dr. Joseph Warren (1775)

Owe me some beans, Old Git?

-- x (x@x.mil), September 25, 1999.

sometimes i think American is in decline; then i remember that there was once a time when 75% were illiterate, sweatshops with 9-year-olds working 14h days were abound. once we enslaved and lynched other human beings without batting an eye and exterminated whole tribes of natives. once women were denied their birthright to live as free citizens and were thought of as glorified property.

nevertheless, in spite of all the imperfections of the past, one thing is truly different. in the past people believed in an objective reality, and moral relativism was still tucked away in the minds of a few marginal academic radicals.

today you'd be hard pressed to find someone who believes that morality is not a mere "social construct." probably most now think that reality exists ENTIRELY in the perception of the individual, that nothing is external or objective, that trees which fall in the woods do NOT make sounds if no one hears them. essentially now people believe that you can invent your own morality on your terms and be your own God. even if you are of atheist persuasion--and I know and respect q

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), September 25, 1999.

sorry about that last message; i hit the submit button accidentally. heregoes again..

BEGIN RANT:

sometimes i think American is in decline; then i remember that there was once a time when 75% were illiterate, sweatshops with 9-year-olds working 14h days were abound. once we enslaved and lynched other human beings without batting an eye and exterminated whole tribes of natives. once women were denied their birthright to live as free citizens and were thought of as glorified property.

nevertheless, in spite of all the imperfections of the past, one thing is truly different. in the past people believed in an objective reality, and moral relativism was still tucked away in the minds of a few marginal academic radicals. they at least realized how imperfect things were and that there was room for improvement and progress. they knew that they were evil at heart and needed to do their best to improve, somehow. this is why we have experienced progress: our humility to accept that our world was flawed and that, with a bit of sweat, toil, blood, and tears, we could leave it behind a little bit better.

today you'd be hard pressed to find someone who believes that morality is not a mere "social construct." probably most now think that reality exists ENTIRELY in the perception of the individual, that nothing is external or objective, that a tree which falls in the woods does NOT make sound if no one hear it. essentially now people believe that you can invent your own morality on your whim and be your own God.

even if you are of atheist persuasion--and I know and respect (though kindly disagree with) quite a few--this flakey, new-agey post-modern BS should be the height of arrogance and will only sow the seeds of our own destruction. pride comes before a fall, so they say. and you could say that we are about ready to be SERIOUSLY humbled. i guarantee it. if y2k doesn't do it, something else will. why? because along with extreme pride comes a false sense of security, a complete inablilty to notice the incoming semi that is about to collide with you when you turn the corner.

i wouldn't say that america is in complete decline. i think that it would be more accurate to say that a rough "winter" is upon us. this winter will be a very rough one because the "harvest" we are reaping will be meager and not sustaining. but eventually, in the natural course of things, all winters come to an end and spring returns.

END RANT

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), September 25, 1999.

(reposting from another thread)

It is trite and completely true to assert that human nature remains unchanged. Certainly, as a Christian, that is axiomatic for me. It is equally trite and completely true to assert that cultures have "rises" and "falls" and, sometimes, "second rises". While we can (and do) debate whether that is true of our culture, based on various indicators, the FACT that cultures go through periods that are qualitatively different than other periods is unquestionable. IOW, the notion that chronology (ie., it is now 1999 instead of 1899) automatically means things are "better" or, of course, "worse", is vacuous, taken by itself. I vividly remember the first seminar question asked in my freshman year at St. John's College. We (arrogant, intellectually self-assured products of the 1960s American high-school system) had just read the first six books of the Iliad. The seminar leader asked this question, "Based on your reading, has Western culture advanced or regressed since Agamemnon and Achilles began their fatal quarrel."

How STUPID and LAME (we thought) as we smirked. Duh. Of COURSE we have advanced. Weelllll. We weren't quite so certain after two hours and we became less certain as our freshman year progressed and we weighed such (antique?) Greek concepts as arete (very poorly translated as "virtue" unless you bring with it a sense of "excellence" and "moral fitness" and more) and others. No, "concept" is the wrong word and not one an Athenian Greek would have even recognized -- too modern a ..... concept .... for them. Indeed, we began to ask whether we could even gain adequate ENTRANCE intellectually and spiritually to the world THEY inhabited in light of the yawning gap between us and them.

I'm not bandying mere words here but awesome realities. Substitute the ancient Far East or early Islam if you'd like. Toting up modern sociological statistics on EITHER side doesn't cut it (you know, the old "number of murders" type of stuff). What we can say is that people all over the world share a deep sense of uneasiness about our time, even as they (we) race to embrace "modern" technology together. And, yeah, I'm on record as saying that EVEN TEOTWAWKI won't halt this in the long run. Heidegger viewed modern technology as both inevitable AND the end of human thought as it had been understood for millenia. His question was, "AFTER we have gone through it, is it possible we might be able to think again?" Good question. He considered it was possible but not certain by any means.

Yes, I ramble, I know.

My point? I'm not sure "better" or "worse" are adequate categories to describe the way in which world foundations (not only American) are being swept away by dynamics we only barely understand. As a Christian and an American, I have no hesitation in asserting that the "Bible" and the "Constitution" STILL represent critical tools for attempting to "think" about these dynamics, ie, they are more RELEVANT than ever. There are others, I only name two. Include Homer if you'd like and Shakespeare or even Adam Smith. I recognize this is a minority view!

One thing I learned at St. John's and it stood me in good stead to succeed in IT and become a GI about Y2K is that the original seminar question remains completely germane and is the antithesis of a merely "academic" question:

"Based on your reading, has Western culture advanced or regressed since Agamemnon and Achilles began their fatal quarrel."

I will only say this now about the subject posed on this thread. Whether or not gang rapes by young boys and brothers of their little sisters have "always" taken place (of course they have), Homer, Moses, Mohammed, Shakespeare and, I intuit, even Adam Smith, would know what to say about them and about any culture that has lowered social discourse and moral standards in the name of a trivial and cynical relativism dominated by commerce and entertainment as this one has.

They would say that it is undoubtedly in the midst of a grossly corrupting "fall", not a "rise".

They would also say that its future has not yet been determined but will be determined, not least, by you and me.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 25, 1999.

coprolith:

As Decker has pointed out using actual facts, statistics, and hard data, we are indeed better off than in the past by almost every objective measurement -- health, education, employment hours, accident rates, life expectancy, ease and convenience, you name it.

But we will never elminate the disaffected, no matter how well we do. And the disaffected will always blame others for their malaise and their personal problems. This subgroup has always existed, and has bemoaned the decline of civilization since the dawn of written history.

And the problem isn't moral relativism or whatever else happens to be in fashion. This entire forum is proof positive that those who go looking for trouble will find it, and those who focus on the negative will emphasize what they focus on. So the wailing and gnashing of teeth we read here is descriptive only of those doing the wailing. The rest of us seem to be doing fine, and better all the time.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 25, 1999.

Drudge Headlines:

UN DISCUSSES GUN CONTROL MEASURE

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/19990925/us/un_gun_control_5.html

-- maybe the kooks are right (kettle@heating.up), September 25, 1999.

"And the disaffected will always blame others for their malaise and their personal problems."

That's true, Flint. Someday, perhaps, you will be able to stop doing that.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 25, 1999.

I have enjoyed this thread greater than many previous to it. Big Dog, I wish you were my neighbor! And Coprolith and many others too. What a very interesting neighborhood that would be. I imagine it would be the kind of neighborhood where people could walk about late into the night and still find a good conversation and an even better cup of coffee. And in imagining such pleasantries and being greatly impressed by the good and thoughtful people that come to this forum, I find that I have arrived at hope's doorstep: there is still hope for America and elsewhere too. If there's enough people like us out there, there is hope still.

What about Flint? Flint can only insult us. Once, he seemed powerfully rational, but he doesn't try very hard to be appear rational anymore. He admits, that without the smokes, he hasn't the patience to put up with our so called whining. But if Flint is trying to play the Devil's advocate, the Devil needs a new advocate. There's hardly time to thresh out every wrong thing in all the wrong things he has to write. It would be volumes. Still, while Flint is content to say that there is much ado about nothing, he is better prepped for Y2K than I.

If I remember correctly, Flint said he can go one year without power, water services, grocery stores, etcetera. If a depression comes, he has said that he can weather it well enough; Flint has his house and debt paid off. So he is covered except for a 10. But who is prepped for a 10? No one that I personally know and have met face to face. And quite a few GIs seem to want to take Y2K less seriously once they have prepped to their comfort and ability. So it isn't a big surprise that Flint has gone Polly. But if you are a Polly and you are actually prepped better than most GIs, is it dishonest to argue that everything is gonna be fine?

Either Flint or we could make clear (everytime he posts) that he is prepped to the teeth for a year of Y2K disruptions as well as a recession-depression... but that's a mind numbing and tiresome effort. So I propose that Flint consider downgrading his preps from one year to three months as proof positive of his new confidence. Since it's not impossible to imagine that he gives to charities like most others do, an itemized inventory receipt of his donation to Red Cross could be scanned and put up for all to see. I'd have a lot more respect for the man who calls himself Flint, and I would would consider his arguments with great seriousness. And if Y2K is clearly nothing by 2Q 2000, you'll see my donation receipts too. What do you say, Flint?

Sincerely, Stan Faryna

-- Stan Faryna (faryna@groupmail.com), September 25, 1999.

Stan -- In fairness to Flint, it is certainly possible to change one's mind about Y2K impacts after having prepped! And he has never hidden the rough scale of his preps, which he could have.

I do wish he were more RATIONAL than he fancies himself (as you know, he doesn't really understand the right use of reason) and could discern the difference between a hard-hitting and positive spirit in approaching REAL issues in our culture (not only issues faced by America but around the world) without taking such a shallow, technocratic approach. It is hardly rocket science to note that the world is passing through a wrenching transition and the historical jury is out as to whether it will be a "rise", a "fall" or "sideways motion."

Not having children, Flint doesn't realize that three TVs in houses, three cars and vacations to Europe et al, while cause for thankfulness, do not necessarily equate to a "better life" for those that will very soon take our place on the stage. Fortunately, my children and their peers, having watched the "Flints", are VERY well aware of that fact -- though they are floundering with the rest of the world in considering how their generation will answer the kind of questions raised in this thread.

Raising five children, these issues (Y2K included, of course) are not some sort of tea-party exercise, but the stuff of life at its most practical for me.

Regrettably, as so often happens, this is now likely to draw attention to Flint, which he enjoys so greatly, rather than to the subject matter -- it's the subject matter which interests me.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 25, 1999.

Are our modern concepts based in reality?

Are we so different from those who went before us?

What of that ancient artisan?

That craftsman who placed the final stone in the Appian Way.

Was he thinking, that day, of the decadence in Rome to the west?

Or was he thinking about the beautiful shores of the Adriatic to the east?

Have we lost sight of the importance each stone provides?

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), September 25, 1999.

Ray, I have a problem with every one of the items at the bottom. American citizens that believe anything like I do have what prospects of these ceasing to exist in our country without a cataclysm? (Y2K is likely to provide one.) For this reason, keep in mind that we no longer as a nation love freedom as much as we once did, or we would have resisted (by whatever means it took) the implementation of these types of things from the beginning. I envy the countries of Afghanistan, Hungary, Chechnya, Rumania, etc. in this respect: at a point in the past they loved freedom enough as a citizenry to be willing to die for it, and more recently than any numbers of Americans have been, at least with respect to their own government. THAT dates back to 1865 at the most recent (leaving aside the immorality of black slavery). Thomas Jefferson said that a citizenry that wished to keep its freedom would have to revolt every generation. That has not been true of Americans, including me. Consider these incidents I know of rather directly:

1) I know someone who is a goldsmith, and when halted for speeding (not ticketed), he had 6 digits worth of gold taken from him. He is unconnected with drugs or money-laundering; both cops involved wore rings he made at a (fruitless) hearing.

2) A friend of our family, while standing in his own driveway earlier this year, was grabbed (no warning/prior reason given) by local police. He was beaten to the point of hospitalization, nearly losing a kidney. It was over an hour after his assault began that he found out that he resembled a suspect in a (never-specified) crime. He has been told that since he had no witnesses willing to testify, he had no recourse against the police. The particular hospital he was treated at sees innocent police beating victimes frequently.

3) My own sister was a passenger in a car wreck caused solely by a police car breaking multiple traffic laws. She suffered a concussion that resulted both in memory loss that deprived her of a semester of college. Both she and her (friend) driver were dazed by the accident. They were jailed on suspicion of drug use instead of being allowed medical attention. Her companion came within 30 minutes of dying from a ruptured spleen.

4) Years ago, my then-girlfriend began suffering seizures (for the first time in her life) when I was out of town working. Her friends were out of town as well, it being between terms in a college town. I arranged long-distance for a friend of mine to get her to the county hospital. They took her temperature/blood pressure, found out she was uninsured, and (without doing anything else) told her to go to the University's student health center (!) when it reopened in 11 days (as if it could perform CAT-scans). She died less than 24 hours later of the aneurysm they had refused to diagnose and treat. If this had been a private hospital, that would have been within their rights, but this was a public hospital, one which I had paid serious taxes toward supporting over the previous several years. Oh, and they were subsequently effectively unsueable due to their governmental status.

5) A retired disabled military combat veteran I am very close to enlisted under the contractual agreement that he and his family would have their medical needs taken care of; his children until maturity, and he and his wife until they died (this makes up in part for the notoriously low pay military servicemen get). Well, there have been innumerable small whittling-aways of this, to the point that this man and his wife have to go to civilian medical facilities (at their own expense) if they want competent care in a timely fashion. This is a reason why I did not enter military service myself; I learned at an early age that the government has no honor, and that the less one has to do with it (and the less there is of it, perhaps?) the better. Who here is in favor of keeping our goverment in its current form? Not me.

fractional reserve banking fiat currency welfare of all types (personal/corporate/foreign) Congressional delegation of lawmaking authority income and property taxes governmental bond-issuing/obligation-accepting authority education-degree holders/NEA members teaching in schools most (non-suffrage)laws passed since 1865 judicial activism faculty tenure in universities/K-12 schools endangered species legislation holding of political office for more than 12 years total in a lifetime race/disability/gender-based legislation the national emergency Executive Orders the current asset seizure/forfeiture laws property zoning current immigration laws lawyers allowed to serve in elected lawmaking positions workers striking instead of just quitting nonexecution within 30 days of convicted murderers/3-time felons "closed-shop" workplaces HMOs the milk-marketing orders the BATF, OSHA, ICC, FCC, Educat. Dept., etc. more than 5% of a state being government property (look at a map of Nevada sometime) minimum wage/Davis-Bacon paternity suits for bastards firearm laws not in effect before 1920 involuntary participation in Social Security

www.y2ksafeminnesota.com

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), September 25, 1999.

fractional reserve banking

fiat currency

welfare of all types (personal/corporate/foreign)

Congressional delegation of lawmaking authority

income and property taxes

governmental bond-issuing/obligation-accepting authority

education-degree holders/NEA members teaching in schools

most (non-suffrage)laws passed since 1865

judicial activism

faculty tenure in universities/K-12 schools

endangered species legislation

holding of political office for more than 12 years total in a lifetime

race/disability/gender-based legislation

the national emergency Executive Orders

the current asset seizure/forfeiture laws

property zoning

current immigration laws

lawyers allowed to serve in elected lawmaking positions

workers striking instead of just quitting

nonexecution within 30 days of convicted murderers/3-time felons "closed-shop" workplaces

HMOs

the milk-marketing orders

the BATF, OSHA, ICC, FCC, Educat. Dept., etc.

more than 5% of a state being government property (look at a map of Nevada sometime)

minimum wage/Davis-Bacon

paternity suits for bastards

firearm laws not in effect before 1920

involuntary participation in Social Security

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), September 25, 1999.

Flint said

(MY COMMENTS IN BIG BAD ANNOYING CAPS)

"coprolith: As Decker has pointed out using actual facts, statistics, and hard data, we are indeed better off than in the past by almost every objective measurement -- health, education, employment hours, accident rates, life expectancy, ease and convenience, you name it."

TRUE TRUE TRUE... TAKING INTO ACCOUNT MOST OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENTS WHICH MEASURE MATERIAL THINGS, MOST OF US _ARE_ BETTER OFF. I CANNOT AGREE WITH YOU MORE. AND WE HAVE (SORRY FOR THE CHEEZ-E CLICHE) THE "WONDERS OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY" TO THANK. ACTUALLY, EMPLOYMENT HOURS HAVE BEEN INCREASING FOR THE PAST SEVERAL DECADES, BUT I'LL LET YOU OFF THE HOOK ON THAT POINT. AND NOW IT TAKES ALMOST TWO BREADWINNERS TO BRING HOME THE INCOME THAT ONE USED TO BRING HOME, ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION AND COST OF LIVING. AS FOR EASE AND CONVENIENCE, WELL, I LIVE IN A TOWN THAT WOULD BE FAR MORE EASIER AND CONVENIENT IF THERE WEREN'T SO MANY DARN CARS AND HIGHWAYS AND STRIP MALLS...IF TOWNS CATERED TO PEDESTRIANS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION WE'D HAVE FAR LESS TRAFFIC AND GET TO WHERE WE WANTED TO GO MUCH MORE QUICKLY. BUT I DIGRESS AGAIN...

WHILE WE CAN JUSTLY CONGRADULATE OURSELVES ON HOW COOL OUR CIVILIZATION IS WITH ALL ITS GREAT MILESTONES AND CONSUMER TOYS, A FAR MORE DIFFICULT MEASURE WOULD BE TO MEASURE OUR CULTURE'S "HUMANE-NESS." I THINK IN MANY WAYS IT IS NOW HARDER-EDGED, LESS HUMANE, LESS CIVIL, LESS LOVING, AND INSTEAD MORE "GO-GO-GO!!!".

BUT GO WHERE? AND WHY SO QUICKLY? IF WE COULD COMPARE PET/MRI BRAIN SCANS OF PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT ERAS I _DO_ THINK YOU'D FIND A FAR GREATER NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN TODAY'S WORLD EXPERIENCING TANGIBLE, QUANTIFIABLY-HIGHER AMOUNTS OF ANGST, DISSATISFACTION, ISOLATION, DEPRESSION, AND CHRONIC STRESS. WHY??? SOMETHING IS DEFINITELY MISSING IN OUR PERCEPTION OF REALITY THAT OUR ENVIRONMENT IS NO LONGER SUPPLYING US WITH...

But we will never elminate the disaffected, no matter how well we do. And the disaffected will always blame others for their malaise and their personal problems. This subgroup has always existed, and has bemoaned the decline of civilization since the dawn of written history.

TRUE. OFTEN TIMES, WE CAN COUNT AMONG THESE DISAFFECTED PEOPLE LIKE DOSTOYEVSKY, HUGO, KAFKA, SOLZENEITSEN (sp), SHAKESPEARE, J.D. SALINGER, JAMES JOYCE, VAN GOGH, ETC. THESE FOLK WERE ABLE TO CAPTURE IN WORDS AND IN COLORS THE DISSONANCE OF THEIR TIME AND WHAT IT DID TO THE SOULS OF OTHER HUMAN BEINGS. IF IT WASN'T FOR PEOPLE BEMOANING THE IMMINENT DECLINE OF CIVLIZATION FROM IT'S "MARGINS," CIVILIZATION WOULD NEVER HAD ADAVANCED. STRANGE BUT TRUE. FOR CIVILIZATION TO MAINTAIN ITS ADVANCE, THE HUMAN BEING--ALONG WITH HIS/HER TECHNOLOGY--MUST ADVANCE. I BELIEVE THAT FOR ALL THE GOOD OF OUR LATEST LEAPS IN TECHNOLOGY, THE HUMAN BEING HAS NOT CAUGHT UP IN EVOLUTION. WE ARE STILL CAVEMEN DEEP DOWN INSIDE IN MANY WAYS, WITH CAVEMEN INSTINCTS REACTING TO THINGS OUR GENES HAVE NOT ADEQUATELY PREPARED US FOR. THERE ARE DEEP, BASIC LONGINGS NOT MET BY THE WORLD WE ARE RUSHING TO MAKE FOR OUR ROBOTS, UH, I MEAN CHILDREN. And the problem isn't moral relativism or whatever else happens to be in fashion. This entire forum is proof positive that those who go looking for trouble will find it, and those who focus on the negative will emphasize what they focus on. So the wailing and gnashing of teeth we read here is descriptive only of those doing the wailing. The rest of us seem to be doing fine, and better all the time.

I KNOW YOU'RE AIMING THESE BARBED COMMENTS AT LEAST SLIGHTLY IN MY DIRECTION, AND WELL, THAT'S OKAY. (I'VE BEEN TO POSTER SESSIONS WHERE ME AND OTHERS NEARBY HAVE BEEN GRILLED TEN TIMES AS HARD.) BUT AU CONTRAIRE, MON AMI, THE BIG PROBLEM TODAY IS INDEED MORAL RELATIVISM. I'M NOT CLAIMING IN ANY WAY TO BE THE SOLE ARBITER OF MORAL ABSOLUTES, AND I'D BE DAMED SUSPICIOUS OF ANYONE WHO WAS. BUT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE, THE TRUTH OF QUANTUM MECHANICS (that nature does not behave perfectly predictably) BECAME DISTORTED INTO THE GOBBLEDYGOOK OF TODAY'S SNICKERING, IRONIC POSTMODERNISTS (that reality itself does not happen objectively). I'M SORRY TO RAIN ON YOUR PARADE BUT THE ATTITUDES THAT PERVADE A CULTURE REALLY DO AFFECT IT'S FUTURE, AND I THINK MANY OF THESE ATTITUDES SUCK! SO FLAME ME, I'M ALL YOURS.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), September 25, 1999.

Coprolith,

Are you sure you were never a card carrying neo-conservative? (Grin) We seem to have many common opinions about culture and objectivity. And what I mean exactly by the neo-conservative movement is that certain enchantment with classical liberalism and charming sense of intellectual promise that does not characterize the grass roots libertarian-lites that swept up victories in the House and Senate 1994 under the Republicans. Unfortunately, Dinesh D'souza, Buckley's protege, seemed to have stumbled and the neo-conservative movement with him-- as far as the next generation carrying it along and adding to the scholarship and charm. I'll admit that I almost thought myself a neo-conservative many years ago until the fight broke out between Reverend John Miller (editor of Social Justice Review) and Reverend John Neuhaus (editor of First Things) on social justice (and particularly on the question of employee ownership), and I took the side of Reverend Miller and social justice. You can see a glimmer of a fang when the capitalists kiss each other in the boardrooms.

Sincerely, Stan Faryna

-- Stan Faryna (faryna@groupmail.com), September 25, 1999.

First, I apologize for my delayed response, yesterday was time off for me. Thank you - to all of you for your replies. I am awed at some of the thoughtful responses that this thread has received. I am not sure that I have the literary skills in which to give a decent reply.

Jolly - we may quibble on semantics more then anything else. My collective responsibility comment was my attempt to point out that each of us offers a small part of the solution. I AM guilty of complacency at times, even at times conspiring with the evil that I hate because it serves me to do so. That makes me guilty, personally. Since I am no different then any other man, we are all then guilty to some degree or another.

Although this thread did not start out this way with my original post, what I am really, truly searching for is what we call hope. In the face of mounting disasters, political, economic, societal, etc., it seems that there remains for some of us (me), some of the time in my moments of quiet reflection, very little hope. I know just a little too much (but not enough) to realize we are all in for some extremely difficult times. Although a Christian myself, I dont expect Christ to save us in the near future as many believe. We have much more soul wrenching agony to endure before we can hope for the redemption of mankind. In the face of that, I seek to understand how we might hold onto hope for our nation, our families, our neighbors and our friends.

It truly pains me to see what is now happening, and what I am now certain WILL happen in the next several years. I want and need hope, I need to know that there is something worth striving for, something even worth saving. Like many of you, I tried working within the system, but gave up in abject despair after many years over my utter futility to change ANYTHING. The system appears to be hopelessly corrupt and deficit of any moral responsibility or accountability. This eventually caused me to utterly reject the very system that I was hoping to change. It wasnt WORTH saving and I left.

I then struck out on my own in an entirely new direction, but guess what? I discovered the same thing, although this time it was with the people. The apathy, unbelief and moral destitution that I have seen proves to me that America DOES have the government it wants and deserves, as much as some of us dont like it. The attitudes I found were and are appalling and pervades literally everything in our society today. In utter despair, I stopped everything and just concentrated on myself and family.

Do I save only myself and my family, hoping against hope for the rest of you, absolving myself that I have no responsibility for anyone else? Do I throw up my hands in despair and declare that there is nothing worthwhile other then myself and family that I should be concerned about? What hypocrisy is this? Personally, I have a BIG problem with that, intellectually.

Coprolith said: I'M SORRY TO RAIN ON YOUR PARADE BUT THE ATTITUDES THAT PERVADE A CULTURE REALLY DO AFFECT IT'S FUTURE, AND I THINK MANY OF THESE ATTITUDES SUCK!

Hes right. Our attitudes DETERMINE our future. The attitude that we have no responsibility, no accountability to each other seals our fate. This is also true of my attitude of self preservation. What war would ever be won if the troops all held this same attitude? I need a change of attitude - and so do some of you. It is my view that by embracing individual responsibility, we ourselves are then absolved of guilt in the form of complacency (a sin).

Dogs - you are right, we must drop our fearof speaking, doing and performing. Too many among us are afraid, some for very valid reasons (read Minnesotas post and the daily news), others out of just plain paranoia.

Minnesota - I know many other stories like yours. They too are true, and give place to fear, paranoia and in the inability to act (in some cases). In other cases, they give rise to activism. However, I would assume (I have no hard numbers, just plenty of experience) that for every activist born, at least 100 more would rather choose silence and complacency, due in large part to fear. Maybe a 1000 more.

Having said all that, what I am still searching for is purpose, direction and hope. It is not enough for me to do my preps and hope for the best for the rest of you. This leads me to the heart of the matter.

How does one find hope? Belief in something that has proven to me to be nearly hopeless? Is this why some of us have given up, that we no longer believe there is hope? Please, no trite answers.

-- Ray (shusters@montanasky.net), September 26, 1999.

This IS a trite answer but it works well enough for me. Life goes through seasons. Attitudes and people go through seasons. Right now we are in autumn. Soon it will be winter. Inevitably there will be spring, as sure as sunrise. I think that we will see this "spring" in full bloom within 20-30 years, and it will be well worth the wait. With the huge amount of easily-accessible information available, we will be able to look back on history in a way that few have done before and understand it far better. History will finally matter. We'll thus be less doomed to repeat it (at least for awhile).

The reason why I believe that there is hope is because of the Ultimate Truth About Good and Evil: evil eventually loses. Why? While evil kills good, evil also kills evil as well. Good does not attack good; it nurtures and multiplies good. Evil eats itself out of existence; but when good feeds itself, it grows. Why? You can invoke God, nature, the cosmic life force, whatever...

Case in point: universal lying makes lies impossible, because the instrument of lies (language) is corrupted. Universal murder makes killing impossible ("he who lives by the sword dies by the sword"). Universal theft makes stealing impossible, because the notion of private ownership becomes meaningless.

In other words, when Evil spits in the wind, it eventually comes back at him twice as hard.

Stand back, ease yourself out of the way, find a safe place. When the dust clears, you walk out with your nose clean after all the bad guys have wiped each other out.

When the "winter of our discontent" arises, it is a time when issues become crystal clear, unfettered and unadorned, sparse silhuoettes against a backdrop of the cold blank sky. The issue becomes not how we get what we want but more basic--how we survive the cold and the dark. The instincts that enable the good to survive are virtues that prepare the earth for spring.

I realize I am being extremely vague, but this is coming off the top of my head and I will flesh out these thoughts better in more detail and coherance. But trust me. Spring always comes. It's simply not natural for things to remain "winter" forever.

-- coprolith (coprolith@rocketship.com), September 26, 1999.

"Stand back, ease yourself out of the way, find a safe place. When the dust clears, you walk out with your nose clean after all the bad guys have wiped each other out."

Exactly, coprolith, exactly! This is the strategy I believe is the best for confronting Y2K. It keeps you and your family alive, AND your soul untarnished (forgive the metaphor). Some serious preps are implied in there, of course...

www.y2ksafeminnesota.com

-- MinnesotaSmith (y2ksafeminnesota@hotmail.com), September 26, 1999.