Safety & Me

Posted by Frankly Francis on March 21, 2010 under Social Issues/Politics | Be the First to Comment

I submit for your consideration the notion that our federal government’s actions (unwittingly or intentionally) make us less safe and further make us less free.

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” – Benjamin Franklin, American Founding Father and Statesman

Dr. Franklin said this in 1775.  Before the Declaration of Independence – not after the successful revolution.  He was about to put his life and possessions on the line when he wrote those words.  Putting your life on the line is not a light weight action…and I do not think those words should be taken lightly.

Is there even a connection between safety and liberty?  Let’s take a look: On a national basis, I see the act of invasion/aggression by another country and acts of terrorism as the most dangerous things to our way of life.

Terrorism

If history is any teacher, nations/countries are perilous to our human health as individuals on Planet Earth – not that we can’t be terrible to each other in anarchy or that organized religion can’t cause tremendous death and suffering.

America, over the course of the last 100 years, has been intimately involved in all levels of world affairs.  American foreign policy is pervasive throughout the world.  And for both good and bad, it affects and causes real reactions.

I’m reminded of the 2008 Republican presidential primary debate where Ron Paul was laughed off the stage by the audience and the other candidates (especially by Rudy Giuliani, the guy who put NYC’s Disaster Preparedness Center in the World Trade Center…very smart) when he asked if anyone had bothered to figure out “why” the terrorists attack America.

To me this kind of question seems logical, but has it really been asked?

It can be safely said that terrorist acts are a reaction to American actions.  I am not absolutely saying that, however.  And I deplore acts of terrorism.  I do not believe in initiating violence.

So we could ask, if America was not taking actions in foreign countries, would America be threatened with foreign terrorism?

I think it relatively safe to conclude that if our government upsets people in other countries, we will face inevitable blowback, which may come in many different forms.

I’m not suggesting complete isolationism, but I would rather take care of our own people before we take care of the world.  Nor am I suggesting not providing aid to other countries in a time of need.

What I am suggesting is that our government’s actions (again, unwittingly or intentionally) have threatened our safety and exposed us to terrorism that we would not otherwise be exposed to.

So, the next part of the equation involves our liberties.  Since the passage of The Patriot Act, the federal government is at an all time high in restricting our freedom, has wrongly inconvenienced us in all of our travel, and not really made us safer.

Do you feel safer today than before 9/11?  I sure don’t.

SCORE: Government 1 – Safety & Liberty 0

War

In WWII, the US military spent years planning for the occupation and administration of post-war Japan.  The Japanese bureaucracy and much of the infrastructure were kept as intact as possible.  Note that the atomic bombs were not dropped on Tokyo.  The idea being that the Japanese people would submit to their existing officials and bureaucracies, which we would control.  It worked pretty, pretty good.

However, most recently, the Iraq invasion and regime overthrow was another matter.  America took out infrastructure, bureaucracy, military and government completely.  Chaos that will never end.

Wouldn’t a foreign country, contemplating aggression against America, be more inclined towards it, if it could take over an existing centralized national bureaucracy that had the ability to control the people?

That country would just have to conquer the federal government to control America.

They would be able to use the existing American government against the American People, just as America used the Japanese government to control the Japanese people at the end of WWII.

Fortunately for the Japanese, we were pretty good occupiers.  Would any foreign country occupying America be as good to you?

Conversely, if the federal government were not all pervasive, then that aggressor nation would have to conquer the American people individually to achieve control.  Even as apathetic as I know the American people to be these days, let another country try to conquer my neighborhood – they’ll wish they had never left home.

So once again, when we look at our liberties, a strong federal government is a liability to our freedom.

SCORE: Government 2, Safety & Liberty 0

Who’s Your Daddy?

The President of the United States of America is the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces and he is the leader of the federal government, but he is not my leader, nor is he your leader.  He’s the guy we hired to do a job for us as our servant.

We should remember that we are each a resident of a state and that America is a Union of States.  We are not a nation of individuals – we are a nation of governing states.  This is a fact that does not seem to be realized by many Americans today.

Conclusion

Logically, limited national government is both safer to us both internationally and domestically.  I’ll sleep better when this is the case.

Frankly,

Francis

The Last Lecture – Randy Pausch

Posted by Frankly Francis on March 6, 2010 under Books/Authors | Be the First to Comment

A fair time ago, The Last Lecture was recommended to me by someone whose opinion I respect.

For those that have let the memories slip away, Randy Pausch was a Professor at Carnegie Mellon who was diagnosed with terminal cancer at the age of 46.  In 2007, he gave a “last lecture” that got all kinds of attention and subsequently expanded upon it in best-selling book form.  He died in 2008.

Back to me: I sure took my sweet time getting around to reading it.  I really didn’t want to read it.  We all have our own unique make-up, quirks, and traits.  For better or for worse, I operate under the idea that the masses are always wrong.  So as everybody was reading The Last Lecture, then by my standards, it was not for me.

As Mark Twain said, “When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.”

But in all due fairness, the masses are not always wrong.  And they certainly weren’t wrong in their embrace of Randy Pausch’s memoir.

I’d like to say that I enjoyed reading it, and to a degree I did, but my overall take on it was not too dissimilar from my post funeral home introspection…in that having paid my last respects to the deceased and my sympathy to the family, I realize that the vast majority of the things that I have to do and deal with that seem to really matter, really do not matter all that much.  I do my best to not get caught up in petty details, but I would be misleading if I said that I don’t get caught up in the petty details.

Professor Pausch’s book goes a long way in pointing out what is important and what is not so important.  He does not get deeply philosophical.  He certainly does not say anything that has not been said before.  His take is refreshingly simple and straight forward.  I would like to think that it is naturally intuitive, but even if that is the case, it never hurts to have meaningful things pointed out.

Randy Pausch

Occam’s razor dictates that the simplest explanation is the best explanation.

In fact, Pausch’s quote “We cannot change the cards we are dealt, just how we play the hand” should make Occam proud.  I think, for ourselves and more so for our own understanding of the people around us, we would be well advised to embrace this principle.

My summary:  It is a short, easy read that offers valuable insights – well worth the time I spent on it.

In closing, my too late thanks to Randy Pausch for taking the time during your last days to express your thoughts.  I wish you were amongst us longer.

Frankly,

Francis