Two years. Wow. I have changed quite a bit in those two years. Hey, even in the last year. And especially since the start of college. I've experienced a lot in those two years (at least relative to the rest of my life), and I've learned a lot too. Sara asked me a couple weeks ago what I had learned this past year of 2005 (I think she was journaling about it for herself when she asked). I didn't have much of an answer for her then. I'd like to answer that question more fully, in honor of the blog's birthday. I'll start off with the one lesson I told Sara about that night:
- I've learned, to a degree, to take risks. I have acknowledged the benefit of taking risks for quite some time, but it wasn't really until '05 that I started taking them. I've gone to Honduras without really knowing what I was getting myself into. I've been brutally honest with my family and friends about where I now stand. I've begun a beautifully romantic relationship with my best friend, Sara. I've questioned things like I've never questioned before- and actually found out that my old answers didn't hold up anymore. And I've begun to explore the world of possibility that is available to the ex-worker, not fully but cautiously taking my first timid steps into a world very foreign to the one I grew up in.
- I've learned that even when it's readily available, alcohol is still not very appealing to me at all.
- I've come to realize that even with all of the reasons not to, I'd still really like to be a father some day.
- I've learned how to save the world (and I'm happy because it doesn't involve converting Uncle Dan to my viewpoint) and that I don't need to be saved from this world. This world is living and breathing, and I am living and breathing. And it is wonderful. And the world will go on living and breathing after I've died. And that is wonderful.
- I've learned to lose any shame I had about the appearance of my body.
- I've learned to express my love for other people more freely and to be more spontaneous and free spirited.
- I've learned that wage-slavery sucks hardcore (and that wasn't even a full dose. that was probably more like a vaccination shot for the disease)
- I've learned to somehow survive in America as a teenager without a car or a cell phone. Like, oh my god!
- I've learned to speedread, kinda.
- I've learned to enjoy reading on my own again, even while school is commencing.
- I've learned (or rather confirmed) that with the education I've already gained with high school, I can coast for most of a semester and still pull off 4 A's and a B+ (of course, I realize that this is dependent on the classes I'm taking, but one of my teachers was definitely known for giving out C's, and I definitely slid right through that class with an A, whatever that means.)
- I've learned that grades mean nothing, just things people made up and believe in, like money- and made up for the sole purpose of motivating you to do something you wouldn't be interested in doing otherside, also like money.
- I've learned even more fully just how little I know, how much I have yet to figure out, how much farther I have to go to get where I'm going (or to even be able to start the journey), and how to begin to accept that as a constant in my life for pretty much the rest of my days.
So, how do you save the world?
ReplyDeleteWell, there are two perspectives to look at when answering this question, because obviously, I can't save the world all by myself. That's not what I was trying to say at all. What needs to happen to save the world (to take the emphasis on me out of it) is that we stop increasing food production. It is our sheer numbers that threaten to end our existence as a species and is currently killing off other species at a very alarming rate. The size of our population has a direct correlation to the amount of food available to us, and we have taken control of the amount of food available to us and choose to increase it liberally, often with the supposed goal of feeding hungry people. But this increase in food supply does not permanently sustain the hungry people, it allows the human species as a whole to increase in size again to meet and again exceed the amount of food specifically grown for human consumption available to us. So if we stop increasing food production, population will stop increasing. That, of course, is still not a sustainable situation, but it would at least stabilize the situation. Basically, it is a preemptive measure to do gradually what will otherwise happen naturally and not so gradually, affecting the human population very acutely. The goal is to keep the human species alive after a collapse, alive and sustainable, instead of having massive die-offs.
ReplyDeleteNow the other perspective, that of what can I do to save the world, or what part can I play...I don't have anything specific beyond what I've talked about in the past- finding a different mode of existence, being creative in finding a new way to make a living, finding a new story to live in (not the story where humans are the crown of creation and deserve to carry out such stewardship as clearcutting forests, dumping human waste into the water and skies, and in general, consuming every last thing that is in some way consumable). But, as I said, I don't need to convince you of anything to do this second part, and it's futile for me to try to force you to going along with the first part. I'm not saying that this way that I'm describing is the right way to live in this world. You can live the way you want to live for as long as you can squeeze enough oil out of the earth to still do it. I would like to live in another way to fit a different situation where cheap energy is no longer available. But here's the kicker- your way does not want to make any room for any other way and will do its best to reabsorb me into its machine of reckless consumption. And that is when I take personal offense at your way of living. That is called oppression (an overused word, maybe, but it fits the situation).
so anyway, that's a glance at the kind of thing that I think needs to happen to save the world.
Interesting thought process...
ReplyDeleteYou take "personal offense" at your perception of the intransigence of my "way (which) does not want to make any room for any other way" etc. etc. to "reabsorb (you) into its machine of reckless consumption."
I suspect you take offense only at my ideas, not my "way of living" because I highly doubt you've witnessed any instances of reckless consumption by me. If so, please elaborate.
I'm delighted that you wish to act ethically, as you believe it, in trying to figure out your path in this life. Where we disagree, I believe, is in the success of the ideas you ponder on implementing as a "solution" to the world's problems.
The very thought that we should "stop increasing food production" to save the world might lead one to believe, on the face of it, that you are espousing either;
1. Genocide - of those peoples who benefit from foods that are freely traded... purchased (virtual bartering.. I produce A and get a barter voucher (money) for my product, that I can use to complete the barter through a third party who has a product that I actually need, which the person who "bartered" my original A didn't have for me...) from those who have an excess of food. I know you understand that famine and bad land management cause humanitarian crises that excess food helps to alleviate.
To forcefully limit the production of food for the sake of "the world", knowing that these situations will arise and millions will starve, seems profoundly genocidal.
2. Racism - see #1
3. Communism - a method of governing that forces people to produce only what their rulers allow them to produce. Not leaders, rulers.
or,
4. Self-hating Speciesism - which assumes that what one observes of the world... that the planet we live on is designed to thrive off of a self-sustaining cycle of birth and death with each animate species (with the exception of us... why is that?) being the nourishment of other species, replenishing the life on a planet that could not sustain it were this cycle broken, is a mirage whose evidence I can ignore when suggesting solutions to a problem that exists only if I deny the reality I observe.
And although the world might seem to be "broken" due to the perceived inequities and perceived injustices one sees, one might conclude that believing one knows how to "save the world" is naive.
But perhaps it's more of a reflection of positive spiritual growth into a deeply held reverence for that profound reality into which a soul discovers its unmerited position in that hierarchy, which impels it to act. That's the image I have of your journey.
We Christians have already concluded that, although Humpty Dumpty had his fall, the real King put him back together again. And that lack of fear for the future that others might perceive as hubris and recklessness, is nothing more than our humble obedence to our Master's admonition to "be not afraid". Fearless Leader, lead on!
The plan I described (which I realize will never ever be implemented willingly by a civilization, because that is the foundation of civilization) is not genocidal. If we stopped increasing the amount of food that we produce, the population we have now would be able to be sustained by it, just like it originated with that level of food production. There would not be an increase in famine as a result. The same people would be hungry because the same people are holding onto an excess supply of food. But now that there is no increase in the amount of food being produced, the population of hungry people cannot increase proportionally, effectively halting the population explosion. But even this level of food production can only be kept up as long as there is enough oil to do so, for modern farming is an industrial endeavor consuming large quantities of oil at every step of the process (this is one of the ways that both of us are living lives of reckless consumption without being directly aware of it (I suggest you take this quiz to see more of what I mean: http://www.myfootprint.org/). I'm not suggesting communism. The only way this "'solution'" will come to be enacted is if the rulers of the world all have a change in vision (from the vision of crown of creation to the vision of the intimate bond and interdependence between humans and the rest of the world). That option number four, what you said in there about the self-susttaining cycle of birth and death, that was right on. It is that cycle that I want us to reenter (I'm not sure how I have excepted us from that in the past. please tell).
ReplyDeletesure it's naive to say that I know how to save the world. I'll admit that. My idea of what needs to happen will most probably change in the future. I allow myself to be hyperbolic sometimes, and I'm not going to apologize for believing that I have the truth any more than you will.
I think my perception of my journey and your perception are very different, because I'm not sure where I'm going, and I'm still shakey on where I've been, and who the hell knows what I'm doing right now. Living in contradicion, that's what I'm doing.
I see alot of contradiction in what you write based on how you wrote before (you seemed like a really happy person, full of life, strong "Catholic" faith, wanting to make a difference in this world by being directly involved in the world . . . not secluding yourself from the world, etc.).
ReplyDeleteNow you seem to write with anger at the world, wanting to control who gets to live and who doesn't, who deserves to eat and who doesn't, you question whether there is even a God (or "god" as you say now, "if there is one?"). What happened to you? What made you change so much? And such drastic changes indeed! No college degree? What a waste of your gift of intelligence! You could really make a bigger impact on the world by continuing your education, get your degree, keep learning about how you can really change the world by actually living in world amongst the people and "show people how they could change to make the world a better place"!
It seems that when you had a stronger faith in God your life seemed more fulfilling in your words that you've written before. You even considered becoming a priest.
Now you seemed to go against everything you once believed in. Are you rebelling? Was your family life that terrible? What's going on here? Isn't SLU also a "Catholic" college?
Yes, you do have some great ideas . . . except for the areas where there seems to be too much "control" over people, hence COMMUNISM! Listen to your Uncle, dude. At least someone is trying diligently to guide you in the right direction. Come on . . . you're a smart guy . . . go figure, man!
First off, I am much less likely to take completely anonymous comments seriously. You can at least leave a first name, if only for reference.
ReplyDeleteBut from what you have said, it sounds like you have been reading this blog for a while (or read way back into the archives upon recently finding this blog). It has been since the beginning of the school year that I have talked about not getting a degree, so you either were reading way back then or you are some sort of family and heard very quickly through a grapevine that I am again considering dropping out. I think I have an idea of who you are, but I can't be sure. Anyway...
Yes, I have changed very much and in a relatively short period of time. I agree wholeheartedly that what I used to say is contradictory with what I'm saying now.
It's interesting that the myth of progress can be such an integral part of civilization, and yet a change in ideas is seen as such an evil. I suppose it does fit in that myth, only that it is viewed that I am regressing, I suppose.
Yes, I am no longer Catholic or Christian. But I have always been a pretty happy person, at least on the outside. And I am still a very happy person. Even more happy, actually. If I sound like I am angry at the world, it's because it is true- I am. But only certain parts of it. I won't deny that. Anger is a very valid emotion when you come across such an assault on your nature and the nature of every living thing around you. But that anger does not consume my life by any means. I am actually able to find a lot more peace now, even as I step away from my pacifist past.
Please explain in what way I am secluding myself from the world. If anything, I am attempting to separate myself from those entities in this world that, in fact, act to keep me secluded from the world (the real one).
Your assertion that I am seeking to control other people and their right to live is completely and utterly ridiculous. If you understood anything that I've been trying to say, you'd see that control is the antithesis of what I am going for. That bit about saving the world... I can retract that if that makes you feel better, because it's a moot point, as I now realize. What I was describing a top-down approach to the problem of overpopulation, and that was my bad. That does not sit well with me. I do not know how to save the world. I am only aware of some ways in which I would like to live in this world. No control wanted here.
I changed so much because I kept asking questions and seeking answers. I found that my old answers weren't holding up anymore. I felt lost for a bit. I'm starting to feel whole and guided again.
The priest thing is a perfect example of the way in which I was not happy before "the change." I felt completely obligated to explore the option of the priesthood, guilted into it with a constant barrage of messages throughout my childhood that there is a shortage of priests. It was only guilt and a desire to please authority figures that led me to think about the priesthood. It quickly became evident to me as I actually started to meet with priests to talk about the possibility that this was not something I actually had a desire to do. I am not dissing the priesthood at all. I'm sure that some priests have very fulfilling lives. But it certainly wasn't for me.
College is not a place of action. There is potential to learn things, to discuss things, to argue about things. There is very little to no potential to do anything about it of importance during or after that "learning" period. I want to start acting on what I've been thinking and discussing and arguing about. I don't need much more (any more, really) time in this ivory tower. A degree is good for one thing- getting a job. And a job automatically plugs me into the capitalist system, along with the rest of the ills of civilization, even if that job did serve some function for social change.
Partially, I am rebelling, yes. It is hard for me not to get reactionary sometimes. But I am trying to move beyond that to be proactive.
My family life was not that terrible. If I will have a family of my own, I would change some things, but I think my parents did a really good job.
SLU is a Catholic college. I made the decision to come here a long time ago. I didn't second-guess that decision until I was here, when it was too late. But I don't see what relevance that has now.
Are there other of the ideas I've talked about other than the above that smack of control? If so, let me know, because I agree with you that that would be communism, and that is not what I want at all.
My uncle...he has great intentions. He cares a lot about me, I can tell that. But, if anything, I think I would say that what he is doing is misguiding me. Oh, and there's no "right" direction.
Please leave a name next time. Thanks.