Photo by Gil Jimenez

I was chastised the other day for using the term “Merry Christmas” on the company website. My director strongly recommended that I update the expression to a more all-inclusive one: “Happy Holidays.” Of course, I well-understood the reasoning behind this recommendation—I was part of a generation of American children who grew up with the Disney Channel not only wishing us “Merry Christmas,” but “Happy Hanukkah,” and “Happy Kwanzaa” as well. Nonetheless, I grew quite frustrated at this recommendation. To me it was just one example of how modern society has disrupted and destroyed culture.

I might say “Merry Christmas,” but I’m not a Christian, and I don’t pretend like Jesus was born on December 25th instead of in April. I’m just partaking in the same cultural phenomenon of winter celebration that began with the pagans, which Christians later hijacked for themselves. Perhaps if I thought into it, I should decide that I’ve been disingenuous, and that I should more appropriately refer to my holiday as Yule or Saturnalia, but I’m cautious to call myself a pagan since that makes it sound like I’m a polytheist that sacrifice’s animals in his backyard, secretly worships idols and partakes in ritualistic orgies.

Christmas, and the communal winter festivity surrounding it, is first and foremost a cultural event and always has been, and when I use the term “Merry Christmas,” I don’t mean to convey any message besides a reference to that shared culture. Yet as we continue to find ourselves disintegrated into institutions and workplaces among people that do not share even this most basic element of culture, our culture is dissipated and our ability to relate and communicate sincerely is disrupted by political correctness. The warmest expression of winter greetings suddenly becomes an actual act of discrimination.

But really, how fair is the use of “Happy Holidays” anyway? Even this secular and acultural expression doesn’t take everyone into consideration. What about my Jehovah’s Witness friends? They don’t celebrate any holiday. If we were really to get serious about nondiscrimination we should prohibit all public communication whatsoever of holiday greetings. It would only be fair that public discourse should be exclusively limited to practical and productive things, and culture references be removed all together.

I may not be a Christian, but I accept the cultural term “Christmas” because that is the cultural name that has come to represent the traditional winter celebration in my culture. The name is arbitrary, just as culture is arbitrary, but culture retains importance and meaning because it represents what a community shares. So as we live in a world where culture is being displaced by the mechanism of a modern and global society that does not recognize community, forgive me if I cling to what little sense of culture there is left.

Photo by Chase Nordengren

Photo by Wesley Fryer

Photo by Lenny

My First Tattoo by Lisa

Photo by Benny Lin

Peace, Hope, Love, Live, Laugh, Joy, Dream, Cherish. These are the words that consitute the new secular dogma. And it seems well enough that these could be words to live by. Oh Peace is a desirable state of things. And Hope is always good. Love is, by far, a necessity. Laughter, of course, is a lovely experience. Who doesn’t want Joy in their lives? What would it be like not to Dream? And, by God, we should Cherish everything we have.

But these words are part of our language, they have always been ours, so why is it that we feel the need to go out and buy effigies of these words to hang on our living room walls to show that we believe in them? What idiocy is this?

The popularity of these “word products,” at first, seems like a rather benign fad. But as with all things that seem innocuous and completely without detriment, there is an unforeseen consequence.

People come to believe something profound in these words. They feel that they are paying homage to the word by acquiring actual effigies and placing them in their home. But words are representations, and by creating effigies of words we effectively separate them from any actual context. These words are extracted from context and given a level of inherent importance and value. The word is taken to represent something good, or goodness itself, which is also a term that means nothing if in and of itself.

Not only are these words no longer in context of actual situations, but they are not even in the context of other words. Hope what? Love who? Cherish what? Live how? Laugh when? Dream what? Peace why?

Words must represent something or at least be associated with something specific, because that is what they are–representations. But these idolized words come to represent nothing, but another representation–the general idea of goodness. They are tied to nothing, and therefore they don’t actually mean a thing. Hanging a word like Hope on your wall is akin to the idolatry that the Bible teaches against.* “See, they are all false! Their deeds amount to nothing; their images are but wind and confusion” (Isaiah 41:29 NIV). These words are hallow like the idols of ancient Israel.

So how can something that doesn’t mean anything end up being harmful or misleading? Well, you can smack the word “Hope” on anything, like a presidential campaign or a business operation or diesel truck for that matter, and though it means nothing at all, it seems to mean that whatever the word is associated with is part of that assumed goodness. While it retains no actual meaning, some people ignorantly believe that any message which utilizes one of these word must be a message of goodness, and so they don’t bother to look at the dirty details.

These words almost seem to be invoked as commandments of the secular dogma, but they can mean very terrible things as well. What is a commandment for Peace, when you must fight for your own freedoms? What’s to stop someone from Hoping their neighbor will suffer ill-fortune? What’s to keep a man from Loving a women who is not his wife? Who’s to say that a hospitalized person in a vegetable state wants to Live? There are certainly times when Laughter can be terribly cruel. Dreams are not without nightmares. Why shouldn’t we enjoy sorrow, when we have lost our Joy? And if we are to Cherish some people, then we must also hold others out of favor.

So these meaningless effigies and these word slogans that people throw about with this noble air can just as easily mean something good or bad. Out of context, the words still mean absolutely nothing, yet by some faint and meaning which people give these words, they are easily lead to believe that something meaningful and positive is being said.

It is this belief in representations and images instead of the actual objects they represent, that has led man astray for ages. And it exists in many more forms of representation than words, but this trend of emblazoning words on walls and pictures, and products, is just a sign of a world very disconnected from reality–very disconnected from context. And the way in which consumers have bought into this worship of words so whole-heatedly is a chilling sign that our society is descending further from the truth into an age of falsity.

*I reference the Bible to support my case in this article. Of course, it is quite ironic, however, that dogmatic Christians who praise the “word” of God are guilty of the same form of idol worship that their holy text condemns.

Photo by Sean Dreilinger

I was out buying a winter hat and some mittens, when I overheard a dispute in the next aisle between a mother and her small child. “But Mom, we have the money,” the boy whined.

Now, I have no idea what it was the boy wanted, but what was interesting to me was the way the mother handled it. The mother was silent. She ignored her little son, who I’d guess was about four years old. It was obvious that the boy had recently learned reasoning skills, and I laughed to myself at the irony of the situation.

“Mom, we have the money.” He whined again, but the mother was still silent. She continued to ignore her son, as if his reasoning had stumped hers. It seem their roles were reversed. The mother was the obstinate one, and the child was the one trying to reason. “But we have the money.” he whined again, but she still refused to answer him.

Now, of course, just because parents have the money to buy something doesn’t mean they should buy it for their children, but this is something that this child didn’t understand, and this was a perfect opportunity for the mother to teach her son this point. But instead, the mother passed it off as a moot point. A point not worth discussing with her son.

Perhaps, she thought it was a point to advanced for her son to understand, but it would be wrong of her to think this. Children have an amazing capacity for understanding, and it is the adult underestimation of children, and the adult’s lack of communication that often inhibits the intellectual growth and maturity of a child. This lack of communication compounds itself and exacerbates misunderstandings between children and parents. Sure, it’s difficult to explain the concepts of money and the importance of savings and budgeting and the fact that you can’t just buy everything you want, but you’ve got to begin somewhere, and the earlier the better.

Some parents feel cursed by these moments when their child disagrees with them. Somewhere down the path of modern society parents have come to believe that parenting is supposed to be a hassle. Our perception of parenting is the Married with Children paradigm. Parenthood and family is supposed to be somehow sentimentally enjoyable while most of it is a pain in the ass, but this is a terrible outlook, which actually detriments how parents will handle a situation before it is presented to them. A parent who thinks this way is likely just to pass most family problems off, saying “That’s just the way it is,” instead of challenging these issues for the better. Some parents just wish their child would behave, and when he or she doesn’t they just accept it as the undesirable reality of parenthood. But it doesn’t have to be this way.

The way I see it, every point of disagreement between a parent and child is an opportunity for development of intelligence and reasoning skills, no matter the age. At the same time, it is a chance for parents to develop a more intimate relationship with their child. Some parents, however, seem to prefer to stifle their child’s reasoning and intelligence, by exercising their power, instead of communicating with their child. In this way, they also stifle their relationship with the child. As a parent, the way of power is the easier way to get things done. Explaining things is difficult and it takes an investment of time. It’s easy just to say “No,” or just to deny a response to your child’s unreasonable pleas. But in this way, the child never develops an understanding of the social experience. He doesn’t develop a close relationship with his parents. He never develops a respect for his parents as people. Instead he only comes to respect the power which his parents represented. But if parents communicate with their children, and respect what their children have to say, even if it is,at times, unreasonable, parents will not only benefit their child’s intelligence and reasoning skills. They will also earn a respect and trust from their child which is necessary to develop a healthy parent/child relationship.

A poster designed to support the American Foundation of Suicide Prevention's 10th annual National Suicide Prevention Day.

“Every 16 minutes someone in the U.S. dies by suicide. Every 17 minutes someone is left to make sense of it.” This message was designed by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention to promote it’s 10th annual Suicide Survivor Day, on Saturday, Nov. 22.

I listen to a radio story about the occasion, an attempt at spreading awareness, but an awareness of the wrong kind. My body shakes like I’ve just been in a fight. The adrenaline pumps through my system. I’m upset and angry, but I’m less upset about the people who’ve committed suicide, then with the way our societies chooses to handle it.

In this radio segment, the suicide victim is deprived of victimhood, and it is handed over to the the dead persons relatives and family, and friends. Yes, I imagine having a close friend or family member commit suicide is a horrible event. But how can we so easily pass over the elements that drove the deceased to kill themselves?

This appropriation of victimhood was no better exhibited then on one Sunday as I sat for lunch at a restaurant. As I ate, I overheard two women next to me fresh from church who were speaking of their troubled children. I discovered that one of the women had moved because her son, who seemingly had everything anyone could have wanted–a nice wife, a house, a good job, and, of course, a loving family–, had committed suicide. The other women, a local, told about how her daughter was a depressed alcoholic. Here these two women were, trying to bond over the pain that had supposedly been caused them. They spoke as two innocent and unfortunate victims, but I couldn’t help but imagine the pain they’d caused their children. I could see myself just how terribly prude and unapproachable these church ladies were. They rested so high on their moral and righteous pedestals, that they were completely lacking in the compassion or understanding that marks an authentic human being.

My aunt told me second-hand that a man from my home town committed suicide a couple months ago. She said, “It’s a terrible thing. Don’t tell anyone, because it’s really not supposed to be out.” I inquired about any the reasons why, and my aunt responded. “I don’t know what the reasons were, he had a good job at a physicians office, he had a wife and two kids. I tell you, there is no reason good enough to kill yourself, when you have a family who loves you. Someone who does that, is just thinking about themselves. They’re not thinking about how they’ll hurt others.”

I can imagine many people raising a toast to something like that being said, but this is absolutely what makes me quake with anger. The modern discourse on suicide is redirected from the heart of the issue, onto its second hand effects. Have we no pity for the dead, who can no longer judge us for lack of it? Do we not care at all, why this man was driven to end his life?

It seems everyone just passes it all off, as a terrible tragedy, a unfortunate occurrence, a statistic, a freak accident, with no actual rational cause. And (must I really say this?) if a man kills himself, he has damn good reason! But instead of recognizing it as the most extreme indicator of pain and suffering that can be expressed and letting it resound thoroughly so it cannot be ignored and must be addressed, we turn to comfort the people who are likely the most responsible for the death. We try to to hush it up. We say foolishly, “Everything will be OK.” “Don’t Cry.” “It wasn’t you’re fault.” But I say let them cry and cry and cry, let their hearts bleed, let them feel every ounce of responsibility, so they will never allow this to happen again.

Don’t mistake me for saying that the relatives and friends should not bare full responsibility for a suicide. It is not any one person’s fault entirely, and it was ultimately the decision of the deceased, but every single person who ever knew the this person, had a chance to get to know him or her better, and a chance to help him out. You always can recognize the folks who didn’t make any effort at all when they claim they saw no warning signs. This type of person should be considered criminally negligent, especially if they claim to have loved the person. It takes a real loveless soul to ignore the painful emotions that expose themselves as true as day in the human countenance, or to have caused the person to utterly hide or suppress them.

In my opinion if you haven’t done your best to know an unhappy person, and take the time not only to understand the real issue behind it, but to share it as a problem of your own, and to work with that person to help him fix it, then you cannot claim impunity when that person decides to end his life. I do understand, however, that as much as a person tries to comfort a victim of depression, it doesn’t always work. I know first hand.

I have a friend, who has told me on more than one occasion, “If I didn’t have a family that loved me, there wouldn’t be anything stopping me from blowing my brains out.” I have listened to this friend and I have comforted him through the hard times, but I no matter what I do, I have been unable to pull his spirits out of the pit. Fortunately, he is still alive. I know this person very well, and I care for him very much, but I can’t be the solution, I can only encourage him to take the steps he needs, and I’ve tried to take these steps with him. But so far, he’s chosen not to.

Suicide is undeniably the ultimate result of the mental illness epidemic that is overrunning the modern world. Over 90% percent of suicide victims are severely unhappy or unstable at the time of their death, according to the AFSP. Of course, the foundation terms it a “significant psychological illness,” instead of unhappiness, but I purposely disuse the term, because it places fault on the individual rather than the society. The same goes for the act of suicide itself where people place the fault on the suicide victim, rather than on the community, the circumstances of which, caused him to end his life. In both cases, we tend to treat the depressed or the suicidal as acting completely irrational, never once, will we even consider the possibility, that depression or self-termination isn’t actually a rational reaction to our society. We couldn’t possibly believe it, but it’s time to change our thinking. that Does anyone recall the suicide rate in East Germany.

Suicide is the sign of the failure of a society (take the startling rate of suicide in East Germany), but it happens so frequently in our society, and we’re so embedded in our traditions, that we are reluctant to find fault with our society, or our way of life, or our traditions. And naturally there is an incredible reluctance for the government to admit any increase in the suicide rates. There is this quibble about the increasing number of people diagnosed with depression as to whether it is increasing or if more cases are just being diagnosed. When the Associated Press reported on increase in calls to the government’s suicide prevention hotline,, program staff attributed the increase to efforts to promote the hotline, rather than an increase in suicidal people.

Really, all it doesn’t matter to what precisely we have to attribute these increases, the fact is they are increasing. The fact is it’s a problem, and if it’s not getting bigger, it was bigger than we imagined to start with. But statistics, are incredibly irrelevant to me. Statistics are for legislators and administrators. I know the problem is bad, the subject strikes my locality often. And just with the frequency at which the subject strikes my ears at random, I know the problem is bad:

Let’s not forget the suicidal friend and the man from my hometown already mentioned above, and let’s add to that. When I was in high school my girlfriend tried to kill herself, by swallowing a bottle of pills. Around the same time a boy from the middle school hung himself in his family’s garage. I had another friend who suffered from manic depression. My cousin, was almost driven to suicide after his wife left him. A boy who lived in my dorm killed himself by shooting himself in the head with a pistol. My roommate planned to purchase a rifle from Wal-Mart to kill himself, but I intercepted the gun counter clerks call to inform him that he’d passed the background check. This roommates girlfriend became chronically depressed after he left her. My boyfriend suffered from manic depression, also known as bi-polar disorder. My new roommate was clinically depressed before he came to live with me. The problem isn’t just bad, it surrounds me everywhere I go. And by no means is it to be blamed on solely on any one of these individuals. I myself have been depressed, and in the past I have contemplated suicide, but I’ve been able to reign in my problems because I am an abnormally self-reliant person. But it’s important to notice that I’m just another unreported statistic.

Let’s consider an even more important, but uncounted statistic. The immaturity with which we handled suicide in the modern age has caused an inestimably-skewed under-reporting of suicides. You know, the man from my home town who worked at the physicians office who committed suicide? Well I looked up his obituary in the local paper and there was no mention of suicide. He just “died.” It did not read as it should have appropriately, “committed suicide at Craig’s Crest parking area on Grand Mesa. He was found in his car.” I imagine this omission occurred in deference to his relatives, but who is this omission really protecting? Are we protecting his loved ones, or are we protecting the system and perpetuating the same ignorance that lead to this man’s suicide in the first place?

Now, the AFSP actually has a set of recommendations for the media in reporting on suicides. The foundation suggests not giving prominence to reports on suicide. For example it recommends that stories on suicide not be run on the front page of any newspaper, and that the word “suicide” not be used in headlines. Instead of encouraging awareness of the problem, the AFSP wants to bury it. What they’re afraid of is a trend called suicide contagion, or “copy-cat” suicides. When the media covers a suicide, research has shown that people may be more inclined to impulsively commit suicide. While, this method may help prevent actual suicides it is not at all addressing the overall issue of a suicidal population–the problem of unhappiness.

You see, organizations like the AFSP, don’t actually look to solve the problems that cause suicide, they don’t actually help anyone with their depression, or their lack of interest in life, they just act to prevent people from pulling the trigger or jumping off the bridge. They conduct depression screening tests at college and universities, and direct students at risk to professional help if they appear to be at risk. But I’ve known at least three very depressed people who sought out professional help, and their experience with these professionals didn’t make them any happier, the conversation nor the medication actually improved anything in their lives, sure the drugs made them feel better temporarily, but the role of the health care professional was simply a distraction–an inhibitor of the patients will.

Now, AFSP educates people institutions about depression and mental health in order to prevent suicide, but the population remains just as unhappy. In fact the AFSP has devoted an entire project to the country of Hungary, which has three times the suicide rate as the United States. The AFSP acts in advocating the treatment and diagnosis of depression and other mental illness as a method of helping people. But in all reality, the AFSP is just abetting an oppressive society, by putting unhappy people on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (anti-depressants known by the acronym SSRI), or pairing them with psychologists so that they will be distracted from the natural fruition of their will. This whole prevention process is designed, not actually to help anyone, but solely to keep them from killing themselves. It doesn’t make them any less suicidal, rather it cloaks the terrible suffering of people under a terrible society.

It is in this mindset that AFSP administrators and government officials are led to believe they have reached some great success when the suicide rate has dropped, but where no actual improvement has been made. For instance in Washington D.C. when the infamous Ellington Bridge was fitted with an insurmountable suicide barrier, the cities suicide rate dropped, thanks to absolutely no improvement in quality of life. The project was cited as proof that available means to suicide encourages suicide. Prevention of such suicide was lauded with respect to the statistic that just “10 percent of those prevented from jumping from the Golden Gate subsequently killed themselves.” Once again, less people may be actually committing suicide, but there are just as many suicidal people, if not at increased number with the prevention of their deaths. The problem of unhappiness persists, and it will remain and grow until it is addressed.

There are so many people like me and my friends, who are surviving, but who are not happy. We are all suffering from no wrong-doing of our own, it is the wrong of the institutions and governmental entities, our forefathers and our mothers and fathers. This represents an overall failure in leadership of a people. And we continue to suffer because we have little recourse and few option to act against the calamitous systems of power alone. Despite the challenges we face, let us not forget the real victims of suicide, and the real cause of it.

Today is the day proceeding Election Day and there is no time where patriotic sentiment runs higher. A competition arises between presidential candidates as to their national pride. And a great argument is engendered among citizens as to what vote will most benefit the country.

Senator John McCain’s nationalist slogan “Country First” implies invidiously that Senator Barack Obama won’t put the country first–as if Obama’s proposed “Change” will be a strike against the country. Obama claims otherwise, that his “Change” will strengthen the country.

But I’m rather put off by all the pageantry and this contest for Mr. Patriarch of America. I’m tired of listening to these unctuous politicians and their meretricious monologues about “this great country.” How can any man look out earnestly upon this society and be proud?

How could you overlook the fact that over 2.25 million Americans are incarcerated (2006)? How could you overlook the fact that 63% percent of American children do not grow up with both biological parents How could you not realize what this statistic indicates about the of our countries social health? How could you miss the fact that 9.5% U.S. adults–that’s about 18.8 million people, suffer from a depressive illness , where millions and millions more self-medicate themselves with illicit drugs or alcohol? How could you dismiss the fact that over 32,000 Americans commit suicide in a single year , even where many suicides go unreported due the stigma our culture attaches to it?

Photo by qwrrty

Is it really rational to get so worked up with anger and hate over this presidential election?

We’re fast approaching Election Day, but I’m not rallied behind one candidate or the other. I’m not struck with anticipation for Nov. 4. Would it be a crime to say I’m rather ambivalent?

Presidential Candidate John McCain even visited my home town, Durango, Colorado, just a week ago. It was the first time a presidential candidate had visited Durango in 48 years, but I really didn’t feel the need to hear him speak. What was he going to say that I hadn’t already heard before?

I could have marched outside the gates in protest with an Obama sticker on my forehead. I could have made myself a fancy McCain sign and cheered in the crowd. But I just can’t buy into that nonsense. How absolutely foolish all these folks look in their big white McCain/Palin sweaters and in their SUVs with “Obama/Biden ‘08″ bumper stickers. What kind of persuasive tactic is that anyway? It’s not an appeal to reason, that’s for sure.

Politics is this big absurdity. We all recognize it. We all know how dirty and unsavory it is. It’s about men with money and connections soliciting the vote. They’re not appealing to any noble standard of truth or harmony or righteousness. We don’t vote for a politicians because they are honest, or because we trust them. Its a big game–a tantalizing theatrical performance–where each player appeals to as many people as possible while revealing the least about what they really think. The candidates hand out promises in the form of tax-cuts and energy policies, like handing out candy to children and asking for their favor. In return, American’s vote for the man who promises them the most sugar and the actual direction of the nation as a whole is an afterthought.

As much as the big two candidates stress their differences, really, for all practical intents and purposes, they’re leading American in the same direction–the way it’s been headed for a long time. They only have trivial differences about the best manner to get to the same destination. Obama might offer government health insurance to citizens, which is just one additional step in many taken in the past toward a more socialist government. But McCain wants to establish a New New Deal, but this time instead of socializing the highway construction like Roosevelt did in the 1930s, we’ll be socializing the construction of nuclear power plants. In addition, both candidates backed the final draft of the bailout plan to spend $700 billion in tax payer dollars to rescue the financial industry, which gave the U.S. government partial ownership of many major banks.

McCain and Obama are both behind the continuing expansion of government. When I first heard Obama speak of “Change” I fantasized for a moment that he really meant to challenge the current paradigm of growing government. But I’ve found he represents the same paradigm with a new face and some unoriginal ideas. He’s just a politician. His message and his campaign are not revolutionizing politics. The supposed “fundamental change” he says he is going to bring this country, just isn’t fundamental enough. It’s not fundamental at all! But at least he is straight-forward about his intent to increase government spending.

McCain still speaks of the dying ideals of conservatism, and if I felt he really meant them, perhaps I would even vote for him. I like the “I’m-not-going-to-continue-to-throw-money-at-a-problem” McCain. I like the “freeze-government-spending” and the “I’m-a-Federalist” McCain. But Republicans like McCain will hail free markets, small government and power to the states when everything is fine, and when there’s a predicament like 9/11 or the housing crisis they swipe up unwarranted power and abuse it without a second thought and we end up with the Bailout Plan and the PATRIOT Act.

Whichever way you vote, this country heads down the same path. This is no revolution! Despite this, tensions run especially high between opposing parties. The streets are loose with blue and red zealots. Neighborhoods are split apart, marked overtly by yard signs that might as well read, “We don’t serve blacks.” Idiots from each faction hurl stupid insults at each other. What madness it is to believe so whole-heatedly in any politician! These people look and act like buffoons.

Photo by Bob Bobster

A family divided.

I’m not likely to vote for president in 2008. I’m sure there are folks out their who will hear this and gasp as if it’s an utter sacrilege, but I really think that abstention is the only respectable decision. It’s undignified to cast a vote for the lesser of two evils, especially when they are practically one in the same. And I’m definitely not going take part in this ridiculous political warfare, that divides families and communities.

When it comes down to it, politics is a very limited realm. Only so much can be accomplished with money and power. There is so much more that we can accomplish outside of political systems. It’s time to forgo the presidential rallies; let’s reunite with our neighbors and forget our party affiliations. Let’s take a personal investment in our communities. Let’s have an affect on the people in our lives. This is where real tangible progress is made. In the smiles and the warm embraces of those we love. Let’s have faith in our own power to bring good into the lives of the people nearest us. Whatever we do, we cannot place our faith in politics.

Photo by pixielauren

Original Caption: ''The kids getting candy at the mall in their costumes.''

Last Halloween, I was on my way back from a quick motorcycle trip to Mexico. I took a friend on the back seat down to Puerto Peñasco specifically to escape American culture and get a glimpse of El Dia de los Muertos. Our American ignorance proved unfailing. We were surprised or rather disappointed to find practically no public celebration. Perhaps, that’s because we assumed the day of the dead was the same day as Halloween, when it was actually celebrated on Nov. 1 and 2. But despite that important misunderstanding, we didn’t notice any marketing campaign pushing goods for the upcoming holiday. We didn’t see any skulls for sale in the supermarket or in the candy store. We were surprised to find absolutely no commercialization of the holiday at all.

We left Mexico on Halloween, the day we thought was The Day of the Dead, and on our return trip spent the night in a suburb north of Phoenix called Anthem. We happened to stay in a Howard Johnson across the street from an outlet mall, and when we ambled on over to the mall we found the strangest site. The children of the suburb were all dressed up in costumes, walking door to door with their parents collecting buckets of candy from merchants such as Gap, Nike and Ralph Lauren.

The contrast between Puerto Peñasco, Mexico and Anthem, USA was sickening. The sight horrified me for two reasons. This takes the meaning of a corporate holiday to new far more malignant level. This wasn’t just marketing and clever holiday packaging. The corporations were actually hosting the holiday itself!

Photo by Ken Rachynski

Children in line and in constume for candy at the mall.

What horrified me more, though, was what the event told me about it’s community. This suburb at the outskirts of Phoenix probably hardly existed five years ago, now it was teeming with a commuters and their unfortunate offspring. These people really don’t know each other. There is relatively little that bonds this community together and hence, these inhabitants of Anthem don’t trust their neighbors. So the safe alternative–the only haven of trust–turned out to be the corporations that set up shop in Anthem’s Outlet Mall. Isn’t that just sad? Is it not curious how the increasing disintegration of our communities drives us further and further into a dependence on the corporation?

When I further researched the Outlet Mall, I also found they offered free interactive kids programs on Wednesdays. Now, why do you suppose the outlet mall offers a free interactive kids program? I’m sure they’re marketing manager knows it’s worth the investment. Not only will this “free” class drag parents into the outlet mall, but it will also familiarize a whole group of young potential consumers with the brands of evermore paternal corporations. This terrifying event seems like an event lifted from the pages of an old distopian novel, but this scene is real, and iI’ll bet it’s not an isolated incident. Rather, it’s likely the beginning of a rather disturbing and popular trend where communities spring up in external elegance, numerous conveniences, complex city government and advanced infrastructure, but lack all the innards that make a real community of human beings a cohesive unit.

A funny story behind these pictures: My friend and I were looking for the social security office in town, when we happened across this unmarked building. I was utterly flabbergasted to find Homeland Security in my town. When I stepped out my car to take some pictures, a voice from a truck in the parking lot said, ''Can I help you?'' I responded paying him little attention: ''No, I don't need any help.'' Then he stepped out of the truck, pulled a badge from under his blue, collared shirt and asked me a little more aggressively, ''Can I HELP you?'' I told him how surprised I was to find Homeland Security in my home town, and that I was just curious what they were up to. ''Your not allowed to take pictures of this building,'' he interrupted. ''Why not?'' I asked. ''Because'' he reasoned. Perhaps the situation would have escalated, but my friend in the passenger seat of my vehicle, became worried, and told the man we were just looking for the social security office. On our way back, from the social security office I snapped a photo of the building in spite of the asshole who accosted me.

A problem that threatens national security is one of the most compelling reasons for the United States Government to take affirmative action. But let’s consider what national security for the U.S really entails in a global context.

If you listened to any of the three presidential debates this year, you have heard many areas of political concern listed as potential threats to national security. Among them are the economic crisis, energy independence, health care, entitlement reform, and even education. There are some valid concerns in each of these areas as to the stability of a nation, but national security entails more than that.

National security is about power and it is not only about the power to defend a nation’s borders; it’s about power to influence world affairs. It has less to do with fighting off terrorists, than guaranteeing our privileged place as a powerful nation.

Around the globe there is a power-complex. Each nation understands that power is achieved by economically out-competing other nations. Not only does a powerful nation have the resources to fight off threatening forces, it has the ability to influences its will upon other nations. Hence, there is a fear of falling behind in economic competition, that a country will not only loose power internationally, but will be made more vulnerable to the influence of other more powerful nations.

So fundamentally, national security is not really about security at all, it is about a pursuit of power between nations. When one nation has claimed superiority over others, other nations strive to meet or surpass that superiority. The superior state must then protect and improve its economic status, lest it loose power. And even those countries that have relatively little power, are forced to pursue power in order to protect themselves to some degree.

So the United States government is not going to think twice about a decision to abridge freedoms in the name of ensuring economic power. The state only exists to perpetuate itself. Concerns for rights and freedoms of the people are always secondary. Just consider a few examples in recent history such as the governments purchase of mortgage giants Fanni Mae and Freddie Mac, their partial ownership of banking institutions, or the enactment of the Patriot Act. These are all incredible infringements upon the peoples freedoms, for the sake of national security.

This pursuit of power requires the sacrifice or freedoms. Often, this sacrifice is justified with the intent of garnering more freedoms in the long-term, but over the long-term it is obvious that this pursuit of power among nations becomes a perpetual course with no end in sight. It follows logically, that as the power-struggle between nations continues, more and more freedoms will be abridged in the name of national security. The struggle for power is an unending process, and the freedoms sacrificed along the way are not likely to be returned to the people.

And really just about anything can constitute a threat to national security if it threatens to damage a nations power status. If it simply bares an effect on the economy it can become a national security issue. Free people aren’t inclined to be efficient, and so freedoms by themselves can be considered a national security issue. The Chinese government knows this well, and can thank its success as an economic power to it’s people’s lack of freedoms. And if there are too many homosexuals and not enough offspring to populate the military and the work force, gay rights could potentially become a threat to national security as well–the way it has in powerful nations of the past, and still is in China.

Is it not obvious how the pursuit of power is the enemy to freedom? Is it not obvious that social harmony between peoples cannot be accomplished through means of power?

Considering all this, national security should be more appropriately recognized as the reckless pursuit of power it is. It should be recognized as the violation of respect and trust for our fellow human beings around the world. It should be cited as the sole evil of modern society.

A month or so ago I received a call to action email warning against the governments ever- increasing interference with the “American ideal” of the free market economy. The author warned that the United States government is ever approaching an “anti-thesis to freedom” in the form of communist socialism. The email was specifically criticizing the government’s recent rescue of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a subject appropriate for the author–an ambitious capitalist who operates a Down Payment Assistant program. He drew an illusion to each act of government interference to the loss of a star on the flag. I made the following reply:

Photo by fauxto_digit

The fist of power so-commonly represented on the hands of monuments to our forefathers.

Dear Sir,

Perhaps, you’ve yet to realize that government does not exist separate from economic systems. It is in the state’s best interest to maximize, or at least stabilize, the economy, in order to secure a position as a world power. The government must interfere with laissez-faire capitalism (as you can see by the recent failure of several high-profile financial institutions) otherwise it collapses in upon itself in due time. A free market economy is volatile on a large scale and can only survive with a government entity to manipulate and regulate it. As markets grow, the government will have to interfere more often, and there is a necessary decrease in freedoms.

But what would you prefer? Would you prefer to live in a powerful nation or a free nation? Do you see what happens to free nations, which are not powerful? Take Tibet for an example, a country whose government is in exile and has been occupied by a powerful country, China. Now, I imagine you would rather lose all of the stars on the American flag, than loose the benefits of being an American and live in Tibet. I on the other hand, would prefer to live in a free nation because this is the only right way to live.

The pursuit of power requires the sacrifice or freedoms. Often, it is justified with the intent to garner more freedoms over the long-term,but over the long-term it is obvious that this pursuit of power among nations becomes a perpetual course with no end in sight. You see, when one nation has claimed superiority over others, other nations strive to meet or surpass that superiority. The superior state must then protect and improve its economic status, lest it loose power. And even those countries that have relatively little power, are forced to pursue power in order to protect themselves to some degree. The struggle for power is an unending process, and the freedoms sacrificed along the way are not likely to be returned to the people.

And the whole bit about communism is so out-dated. I certainly am no communist sympathizer, but if you think that the United States government is going to think twice about a decision to abridge freedoms in the name of ensuring economic power, you’re wrong. The state only exists to perpetuate itself. Concerns for rights and freedoms of the people are always secondary. It’s just that the Communists were more upfront about it.

Sincerely,

Preston Benson

My friends Ryan and Lisa accompanied me on a visit to the Whole Expo in search of some much-needed holistic healing.

I have one friend who takes anti-psychotics. Then I have another friend who is depressed over a breakup with my old roommate who was also chronically depressed. I myself am completely unmedicated and arguably mentally unstable as well. Seeing that we all could use a little more mental health in our lives, my friends and I visited a local holistic health conference called the Whole Expo.

Unfortunately, we didn’t find the mentally stabilizing and holistic environment we were looking for. Somehow tarot readings and psychic analyses just weren’t the metaphysical experiences we were searching for. We didn’t fit in, without bindis stuck to the center of our foreheads or giant crystal talismans hanging from silver chains around our necks.

Among the psychic booths, there were salesmen promoting strange devices including a laser machine said to whiten teeth, a foot bath that used electric current supposedly to detoxify feet and “space age” infrared amethyst crystal mats–all touted to bring greater health. I was seriously skeptical. The validity of all these technologies was seriously undermined just by being in the same exhibition hall as a “Photograph Your Own Energy” booth. I was quick to come to the conclusion that this whole conference was nothing but a big scam, but I stuck around because I was curious how an absurd event like this could be so popular.

Trained as mystical traveler, aye?

A pushy man pressured my friend Lisa into a “free nervous system analysis.” The man had her fill out paperwork, in which she disclosed information as to her terrible sleep schedule being a full-time college student and working night shifts at an assisted living home. The man took a hand-held gadget dotted with bright blue diodes and pressed it to her neck. The device was supposed to analyze the spine and indicate general health. After the “scan” he reported that she was sleep deprived and that she needed to pay for a full session with him. Now, did that hand-held gadget reveal this or did the paperwork tell him that? And come on, she really didn’t need anyone else to tell her she was sleep-deprived. When she declined the man’s imperative, he reproached her, “Don’t you care about your body?” and she walked away.

I realized, walking around, that the people who attended this event, were people of a particular kind. They were the “looking for something more” kind of folk. Many were overweight or looked otherwise unhealthy. Some were frail and aging. I especially spotted many lonely women. It seems of all things, these people exuded an extremely low self-confidence. All these people were in need, all of them searching for help and all of them fit to be swindled.

The unscrupulous merchant who accosted my friend was just one among many. I have never witnessed a more overt predatory display of business. It was an event that attracted hungry lambs with the promise of oats and hay, into a den of vampiric lions. Surly, these merchants are conscious of their scam. They have to be aware that they are con artists on some level, though I’m sure they’d prefer to be called businessmen as the word “businessman” validates almost any practice. And I think to myself, in a way, many businessmen are magicians. By slight of hand they find a weakness in our awareness and then they exploit it. And if the illusion is well played, the customer becomes a willing participant in his own exploitation.

We sat in on a free name-reading seminar hosted by a psychic who called herself Dolly Mae. She claimed that the composition of a person’s name held secrets about a person’s personality. She was an energetic speaker, quick to respond, smooth with her words, and confident. She had a magician’s charisma.

She told the audience about how Zacharys are fascinating people, but how they screw up their lives thanks to the ‘z’ in their name. She told about how names like Katie, with an ‘ie’ letter combination on the end are diminutive. She told about how people with an ‘o’ in their names are empathetic. She told about how people with ‘b’ in their names can relate to others well. And she told about how the letter ‘a’ means a person “is about himself.”

At one point during the seminar a woman in the audience asked, “I’m in the process of changing my name from Laurena to Maurena because it just feels better. Can you tell me if I’ve made the right decision?” Of course, Dolly Mae declined to answer the question as this was a “free” seminar, but she kindly invited the woman to visit her booth and have her name read for $20.

I realized at this moment, that the woman in the audience, like many of the people attending the conference, was seeking validation. Obviously, this woman knows more about herself than any psychic could ever tell her. And the people who she lives with should know her next best. But here she is looking for someone to validate herself, because apparently she can’t find it anywhere else. She wants someone else to recognize her own humanity. Isn’t it a shame that my own community has lead people like her to seek recognition by paying money to a stranger?

She’s changing her name for the people who don’t know her. She’s changing her name for people like Dolly Mae who make grand generalizations about people without knowing them. A name should take on the meaning we give it, and that meaning should be far more complex than anything Dolly Mae could write a book about.

As Dolly Mae described the supposed varying characteristics of different letters and letter combinations, I realized that the characteristics she was describing could apply to any person at one point or another in their life. I realized that all people share the same spectrum of emotions. Perhaps this is the one things psychics do understand. It doesn’t matter if you’re a professional wrestler, or a homemaker, we all share the human condition. Many times these emotions are repressed or suppressed, but ultimately we are very complex people made of very similar emotional needs, emotional desires and emotional situations. When a person seeks out a psychic, the psychic is only successful when they tell that person things he or she already knows. A psychic does nothing revolutionary, but validate what that person already knows. Yet there is something comforting and valuable in having someone recognize and validate who we are. This validation is best provided by those who love us. It’s simply a shame and embarrassment that so many people in my community don’t have someone to validate who they are.

When I went home, I began to do some research on the medical devices at the conference that didn’t seem quite legitimate. Most of them turned out to be gimmicks and scams, based on anecdotes and unsound science. It turns out that the teeth-whitening laser doesn’t use a laser at all, and that its whitening effect is only the result of temporary dehydration of the teeth. The ionic foot treatment was thoroughly documented as a scam on DeviceWatch.org. And the infrared light mats which were originally designed by NASA for astronauts seem rather useless considering most of us spend our days on earth bathing in the natural infrared rays of the sun.

If you think about it, a great deal of our consumption in this modern age, is fueled by our need to fill a void within ourselves. We wouldn’t need to purchase our own validation from a psychic, we wouldn’t need to whiten our teeth to impress others and we wouldn’t have to worry about businessmen preying on our weaknesses if we belonged to social circle where we would be known intimately. But for now, we, the disintegrated masses of the modern age, will seek the only temporary satisfaction we can acquire without an intimate social unit. We will seek it through consumption.