Obtusely as ever, I'm just trying to figure this one thing out - why is it that very often civilization proceeds from the most trying of times to progress, while during times of stability and happiness, our achievement levels dwindle? My only evidence to sight is my casual reading of the Dune series by Frank Herbert and a meandering of my own observations of Truth. After all, as Ani Difranco says: "we all rehearsing for the Presidency."
Arrakkis, Dune, Desert Planet. The inhabitants of this harshest of climates were an unerringly efficient, capable, and moral society (in reference to themselves of course). Noble, yet barbaric in terms of the amount of risk they lived with (risk of pain, injury, death, or even just general discomfort or irritation associated with "primitive" existence where nature is not mitigated for the comfort of humanity. Robustness follows, and with it some measure of graceful nobility - respectability.
On that note, I wonder what the histogram of U.S. president's and their geographic origins would show, considering Hawaii and Alaska finally, after years of being states, have now both contributed to the playing field of Presidential Race figures, including the first U.S. President born in Hawaii. Like Alaska, Hawaii has a tremendously important cultural heritage of native wisdom, far more in line with the emerging demographics of South American and Central Asian nations (in particular). Since I consider many of these emerging nations (India, Iran, Venezuela, Chile, Bolivia, etc.) to be a cultural blow-back from the corporate conclusions of the European conquistadors from antiquity, I'm very curious to see if the "melting-pot" of ideas in the United States will actually effect our self-preservation by the embracing of non-European perspectives as mainstream. Or, maybe I just want to justify my own insignificant yet irritating chafe at being a semi-marginalized outlier. So I like fucking Nirvana - what's the beef with that?
Apple's singularity of successful dogma competes with Microsoft's egalitarian modernist democracy, and consequently, both organizations produce variations on a theme, but whose origins in theory are of different ilk. Surely we see these characterizations - which brand is more "elegant" or "pure"? Which is the "smart" choice or the "pragmatic" choice? Granted that viewed from above - each of the opposing brands are dreadfully similar overall. But, to AN INDIVIDUAL there probably is a right and wrong answer as to which one is superior. Each computer owner has an opinion, strong or weak; they may slightly prefer PC's, or they may be die hard Apple fans. Which is more familiar to them? More importantly, which has been prone to urging their investigations? Which has resounded some internal, personal chord with respect to their respect? Which brand has earned my trust?
In the other corner of the consensus room, the outliers exist on the fringe. Some folks don't have computers, or know how to utilize them much. Some prefer their trusty typewriter, or mid-level word processor briefcase. Some love Henry David Thoreau's ideas and just want to make and use pencils, teaching their children to do the same. Some are astronaut-visioned or mental magicians who process information in ways our experiences cannot fathom. Each choice is one decision made before we are ourselves that determines our course, but only through the evolution of our actions. Our choices, through one interpretation, are essentially: follow your heart - either against the herd's (herds'?) folkways, or along with it, depending on your ilk; or, supress your desires to: follow your peers despite their irrelevance to your heart's desires, or to become a counter-insurgent to injustice.
Based on what little is at hand, and how important everything is, seems like the robust upbringing will win more often than not, but that the constant progress of consensus towards the acceptance and inclusion of diversity is by far the most paramount course.
I guess we'll see. Thus the American experience as a universality is the fight to stay domesticated while remaining as wild as possible, and therein has historically lied our strength. The only trick now is to start spending money on things we're supposed to spend money on, instead of getting wilder and wilder as we have been. After all, if we take more time to clean and trim our fingernails, floss our teeth, and keep our nose clear, our pleasure to pain ration-rationalization should shoot up at least a little bit, and every day will be a little bit brighter.
