Work it out!

So i joined a gym the other day. I am not interested in working out so much as renting space. I do this thing called 'body-flow' and i need room. I also need a place where i can focus on it instead of answering my phone and watching tv as i'm wont to do.

Si i found the way to dissolve racism

I was reading a book about business and the most interesting thing i read. The author was talking about solutions to problems operate assuming the problem. However, in science, in addition to haveing this notion of 'solution' they also have a notion of 'dissolution'. Basically he was advocating designing a environment/context/world in which any problem has not solution, but rather dissolves into the world.

MLK in part of his most famous quote said "judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin". I think this was prophetic, not only because it was idealistic, but also because it held the solution to the problem of racism. In a related incident I was browsing a bookstore and read part of a chapter that said that we could end racism by discriminating! The author went on to say that the process of discriminating itself was neutral. The problem was that people actually stopped discriminating between people and that posed a problem. They made the first distinction between people: race. And that was it. What people didn't do was keep discriminating according to other factosrs: integrity, communicative ability, charm, deceitfulness, gumption, etc. There are a whole host of characteristics that people use unconsciously to discriminate between people: who's honest, who is reliable, who is shifty etc.

So what's the solution? Well, it's actually a dis-solution. It's a method to envelop race as one variable in a person's character. It's called paying attention to character. And how do you do it? Pay attention to character. The problem is such that no person or group has come up with a relatively consistent and coherent way to analyze people. The feild of psychology is rife with an obsession of stimulus-response and white rodents. Psychiatrists wan't to prescribe then diagnose the side effects. Astrologists have too much make-up on. Psychotherapists want to talk without discussing why they're asking such probing questions. . .

I'm deliberately being a victim of a different -ism (occupationalism instead of racism) to segue into the point. The point being that there is no widespread coherent model of how people function that enables people to create a different set of standards about human behavior. So i propose that someone somewhere come up with like five criteria upon which everyone can be categorized and whose explanatory power is significant. Sure, there are all kinds of typologies and metaphorical things. . . but INTP says nothing about gumption or integrity. . . sometimes, sagttariuses are stupid not witty, etc. I wan't something that enables people to not see all the flaws in the system, but to see the beauty of it.

In short, the way to end racism is to start discriminating. Discriminating as a process, not discrimination as a product. We have to distinguish between people who have integrity, who communicate well, and all kinds of other things that make life work but aren't scripted by genes, race, gender, birthdate, section of the city or what have you. A set of criteria that are based on choice.

down with microsoft

not really. I just found out about a free program from Sun microsystems that replaces the Microsoft Office suite. It's called OpenOffice and can be found at Openoffice.org

I haven't tried it. I'm waiting to get my new computer to put it on that. I think I will be able to cannibalize my old computer and make that little 30gig hard drive a slave drive loaded with linux. The cool think about open office is that its cross-platform, it has versions that work on linux, mac and pc's. That'll make my use of linux a likkle more easy.

Actually, a friend of mine showed it to me. I didn't get to delve into it, but it looked like it had most of the stuff i'd use from Word anyway.

another regular day

I am having another regular day. I realized that i've double-booked two commitments this weekend, and i have to replace myself for one. I'm supposed to be assisting a leadership training program this weekend and attending a school-related function. I double-booked the same before but the school-related event staff was a no-show. This time i forgot in advance and hopefully can find someone to take my place.

In other news. I love the ipod. But today i read that the format sucks when you listen to it on high-quality equipment. I read in wired magazine about an mp3 maker called "lame" that's supposed to be really good. Apparently, most of the sound quality in a file deteriorates the smaller it gets, duh. But, you can stave that off if you're smart about it. The people at "Lame" did double-blind sound quality tests for their files. So basically, they got people to listen to recordings of Cd's and recordings of mp3's and tried to have them figure out which was which based on sound quality. They failed to do that. So that's basically saying that with this mp3 maker you can have mp3s that sound as great as CD's with the compression of small files.

This would really be relevant if i had a bigger ipod, i've got the shuffle. So i'm now hoarding what i have in aac format because they're smaller. when i get to upgrade, i'll probably switch back to the mp3 format (even though i used to do the wma format) with this Lame thing. I think i'm becoming an audiophile. I molest music.

judo

I went past the maxercise (www.maxercise.com) studio yesterday. I go to Landmark Education in philly, and the Maxercise studio is right around the corner. They teach gracie jujitsu, judo and aikido. I want to do the judo and aikido first. Not only because it's cheaper, but because i'm a little scared. Pain and injury, i can handle it. I would just expect that the people that go right into gracie training have got an axe to grind. I'm not trying to be the chopped wood. I also like that they have a gym. I can go there to practice my bodyflow (http://www.rmax.tv/kinetic.html -watch the video montage). I also want to go do judo because i'll have a community with which to practice. I don't exercise much because there's nothing to exercise for. Exercise right now exists like its for nothing in particular, but if i had a sport to apply it to, hype stuff. I did some light research on judo through wikipedia, basically it's a refined form of jujitsu.

ipod and computers

So they're the greatest thing ever, next to breathing eating and sex of course. They even beat the invention of fire, sliced bread and gluestick. There's a commercial were a young person is walkind down the street listening to their ipod, while their shadow is going balistic, dancing. The cool think is that that really represents how much people are really jamming to the sounds of their ipod internally, while having a hard candy shell like m&m's.

The only problem is that my computer situation is outta-whack. I have the ipod shuffle, a present from my girl. Wonderful thing it is. These small players were made for people who have laptops, or consistent access to computers where they can play with their playlist. I have my computer in my brother's apartment, and i'm almost never there. So, i'm not really building my music library that much. I got wind of a few sites that are really cheap (www.mp3search.ru and another one i can't think of) so when i get a moment i'm going to drop like $50 (at 10 cents a song, that ain't bad eh?)

I can't wait to get a computer. I'm going to get the baddes MFin computer under $400. Just kidding, i'm looking to get something with an althlon 64 (3500), 19 in monitor, 512 ddr2 ram and a dvdburner (cd burner gotta be fast). I'll probably partition the hard drive into three sections, one for music, one for games and one for the rest of the XP OS.

Speaking of which, i got a norton three-pack (systemworks, firewall and spam filter) for 89.99 and a $90 rebate. I put it on every computer i could get my hands on (mine, mom's, girls and soon my dads). I feel so much safer with that on it. My folks haven't had something that does the 'dirty-work' such as defrag for speed, run anti-virus and prevent them, for a long time, perhaps ever.

10 year reunions

So i went to my high school ten year reunion on friday, the day after thanksgiving. I had a blast. Apparently i had to learn the hard way what 'semi-formal' means. I went in a blue-brown-white striped shirt and some slacks. I cared for about five minutes that other people were in suits. But then i realized that most of the people, already know i'm a fool.

There is nothing like partying with people that you know and who you care about.

That's about all there is to say. The only problem i have with reunions is that they're a one-time thing. Why can't we have like an alumni gathering like twice a year (for each graduating class) and like monthly as a networking thing. Well, that's just an excuse for me to drink some more, but so what.

I'm just glad i didn't make a fool of myself (i think). I realized i knew a lot more people than i thought. I have it that i was some introverted nerd in high school. I think the real problem was that i didn't hang out with school friends outside of school. The weird thing was that throughout the whole reunion, there were no weird 'get re-acquainted' moments. Soon as two people knew who each other were, family again.

Central High School of Philadelphia
Graduating class 254
. . . and so much more

why the revolution, or anything like it, won't be televised

Yo. I just read one of the hottest articles ever. you can find it at http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8673. When i tried to read it a second time, the server was under attack. By who? i don't know.

Anyhoo. The article is about how the Net as we know it (or as most know it) will die if the telecoms and cable companies get their way. Basically they're doing what big oil and car companies did back in the day. You see, the big oil company used to be Standard Oil, owned by John D Rockefeller. One of the the richest men to ever walk the planet (he owned 35% of the American economy!- makes Gates look poor). I guess he was obsessive compulsive. Basically he had a little company selling gas. However, he'd get shaky kinds of gas and he didn't like that. So he bought a couple refineries in order to make sure that he had a good quality of gas. Then he didn't like how his gas suppliers were unreliable, so he bought them. His basic thing was to make sure that people got good quality gas on time. And from this singular vision, he created an empire. Standard oil used to be the combination of texaco, exxon, mobil and two other oil giants!!! You thought they were big.

Now the car companies. If you look at pictures of cities back in the 30's, you're bound to see lots of light-rail: trolleys, small trains etc. Back in the 30's, car companies started buying congress to make sure that these rail systems became underfunded and died. Why? because they didn't make trains, they made cars. So bascially they lobbied and bought national and local congresses across the country simply to get them to stop funding their competitors. If you notice, people argue about AMTRAK all the time, but nobody says anything about the billions that the oil, car and airplane companies get in government subsidies and write-offs. Why? Cars.

So what's happening with the Net? Well, the telecom services are basically acting like the car companies. They don't like giving people access that want it. They want to restrict access to the Net to specific ways: cable and satelite. However, there are new things like wi-fi networks and various other ways of choosing how to get on the net. They're trying to outlaw and restrict how people get on the net.

The article goes really deep into what the phone companies are doing, and why the people vying for a 'free net' are losing the battle, not only in the public domain, but also in the courts and committees of congress.

So basically the phone companies are doing what the car companies did: eliminating the competition. I'd go on, but just go read the article. It's long, but its hot.

Google RULES!!!

So i got the google sidebar. It's not doing much becasue most of the time i leave my computer on. Apparently it's supposed to be able to search your hard drive and all your computer-related history to find all the stuff you want. I heard of this in a program called "groxis" that displayed the information in terms of a mind-map or something. That program sounded cool, but light years away from me at the time.

I just hope that anything i type won't be used against me in a court of law. What would happen if Ashcroft and Cheyney became heads of google? argh

Metis

A friend of mine, and seems to be future partner of some sort, has been toying with similar ideas as i have - the creation of a business engine. Basically, an incubator, but accelerated. I guess its more so an incubator network.

So Kareem, his name of course, has the name "metis". Apparently Kareem found some reference where some anthropologist talks about 'metis'. Metis is supposed to be a ancient greek word for the knowledge that veteran seamen have about the tides and storms. This isn't something that you can teach in the course of a couple years. Rather, its the life-long wisdom that they gain from thier particular trade. Unfortunately, most of what i've seen, metis is the name of a tribe in australia. I'm waiting for the footnote reference. Basically he wasnts to create a 'metis' for enterpreneurship.

I'm all kinds of excited.

i haven't been here in a while

blogging must be a fickle thing. but life isn't.

In the past couple weeks i've been grappling with some deep issues, committment, spirituality, existence, why my socks keep getting holes (because i don't cut my toenails very often). I think i'm in my 1/3rd life crisis. I dont know what to do with myself. I don't think i'll get into grad school. I only kinda want to puruse a career in teaching, and i'm half-a$$ing the idea of starting an incubator (but that's what i really want to do).

I'm a new fan, again, of my ipod. I lost it for a couple weeks, until i found it in my shirt pocket while doing laundry. Now it's loaded with a 5* mix of hip-hop -mos def, roots, biggie, common. From this i notice that i'll have to be way more careful about how i listen to and rate music. I got a best of Jay-Z mixtape and went through my 5* hov songs, not all of them were 5*. Because i don't want trash on my computer, i'm more apt to listen to an album a couple times to see what i want to delete. I'll have to make songs to delete 2* instead of three. That's just so i can keep track of the three levels of songs i have: 5*-eternal classic, 4*good, but not classic, 3* mood good. so that basically means that i have to re-star many of my songs. It doens't help that my computer for some reason plays song in some weird techno-electronic mixup where i can barely understand the beats and words. So i literally can't use itunes to listen to music. I just charge up my ipod and listen to it while on the computer. I don't mind the inconvenience, becasue then i can blast the music. but then i think about hearing loss becasue i'm gonna live a long time. rambling i am, enough yet for you?

sure am determined

So i'm almost finished the book "Moral Politics" by George Lakoff. I love it because in that little tome, he's elucidated several themes of my life: family, politics and morality. So i'm reading it, and recommending it to anyone who may be interested. And my friend calls me. He wants me to go to the Million Man March anniversary party. I say no. I don't want to go because i think its nearly useless. I want something with a coherent paradigm. Not a bunch of speeches. I want something with some programs, or at least something tangible that i can sink my feet into. Not there. Of course, that may be a function of me not hearing about this until the last few days. But i'm not impressed. I wasn't then, and i'm not now. I do love the aims, but i'm not sure about the means. People in a group. I want organization.

So what am i determined about? Well, for one thing, to make my own values explicit. So this Moral Politics book outlines the primary values that liberals and conservatives have which give rise to which issues and programs they deem important and which sides of the fences they sit on. In addition, the book even gives you a way to analyze the variations of liberal and conservative viewpoints, and the people that have some of both. So basically it helps you to uncover your own (which is especially helpful) and another person's ethics, politics and family views (even when these don't co-incide). So i'm determined to outline my own ethical system.

So i started this a couple weeks ago when i started re-writing my book. Its a self-development/self-improvement book. Well, its really a philosophy book with those things as outcomes [after reading MP, i don't know what isn't]. I've been toying with Ayn Rand's rabid individualism, but cooled out with my awareness of systems thinking (man is an island, but perhaps part of an island chain). So my moral system aims to balance both the values of individualism and the values of collectivism. Not really, but that's the only political labels i have for what i'm talking about.

I have thought of a new basis. I realized that individualism and collectivism is a false dichotomy. A person can't exist without a community (at least parents) and a community can't exist without individuals. So there has to be a natural, not comprimised or negotiated, balance between these two extremes. Sure, it sounds like i'm going to spew some 'moderate' or 'middle-roader' stuff, but that's not what i'm talking about. What i'm saying is that there is a viable moral system that is coherent and distinct from either and both liberal and conservative moral systems. I aim to construct and popularize it. I'm not talking about re-hashing a perot-like third party or being a libertarian or right-leaning progressive. I'm saying that somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum is a network of values and ideas that is coherent and can form the basis for a third party.

So far i have outlined the values into individual, ethical and political [btw-these are in hierarchical order from most important to less] and of course, this would make the most sense if you've read the book, but if not here's a link to an intense summary [http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/New_School.pdf] :

On an individual level i value:
Wholeness- character and integrity
Strength- backbone and self-possession
Self-Nurturance- long-term self interest and protection
Self-Development- awareness and involvement
Happiness- in the context of relationship to life, reality and others

On an Ethical level i value:
Order- hierarchy of wisdom, hierarchy of competence
Empathy- absolute empathy plus moral instruction and the strong golden rule
Nurturance- supporting self-reliance and regular exercise of social ties
Social-Ties- non-sacrificial maintenance and showing compassion

On a Political level i value:
Distribution- contractual, scalar, procedural
Authority- contractual, overt and covert
Restitution-Retribution this would be scaled according to the severity of the infraction.

The book i'm writing covers the main branches of philosophy: metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics and art. I've been at a loss on what to put in in some sections (mainly ethics and politics) now i can put forth what i'm talking about concisely and coherently. In the book i'll be clarifying all of these things, but in a couple more posts i might clarify these things as a teaser, or at least to get this stuff out.

learning history

So i'm a fan of history. I love it because it helps you understand today. Nowadays all you hear about is things becoming accelerated: the internet, lifitng speed limits, gas price increases, my income to debt ratio . . . With history, it gives a person a chance to look over long periods of time and look at the different factors that influence daily life.

I mean shit. Life, the world, is complex. Really complex. And there are literally millions of things that go into how the world works. You can't find them all at the same time, but you can notice the important stuff through reading history. Things like the development (continual) of language, technology, communication, the evolution of transportation: foot, animal, machine, and how that affects the daily lives of people, not just their ability to travel, but the movement of goods, materials and ideas really quicly, etc. that's why i like history.

Other people don't like history. Because they haven't been taught how to deal with it. I mean, in grade school nobody was taught how to think about history, just how to memorize facts. More importantly, i think, people weren't taught how to understand how history happens. There's a big difference between remembering the fact(oid) that in 1492 Columbus sailed the ocean blue, and having a movie in your head about it.

Along with the movie comes a whole host of considerations: how they measured distance, how they oriented themselves to the stars, what they wore, what they ate and drank, how the Captain held his power, how the shipmates repaired sails, etc. A whole lot of day-to-day information is missing from that factoid. So what i've noticed in my own experience is how i make history come alive in my head. I imagine it! Sounds simple doesn't it. there are two things that make me facile at history: 1) how i understand it and 2) how i 'format' it.

More later

Moral politics, the sequel.

So i'm about halfway through the book. To put it simply: Moral Politics by G. Lakoff may be the most insighful book about politics ever written. It explains the moral system undergirding liberal and conservative standpoints on issues. It explains the values that we hold that give us our national and personal political platforms.

In real life, i saw a couple political advertisement for each [maybe better put against the other] candidate in the NJ Corzine-Forrester race. I saw exactly what values each attack played upon in the liberal or conservative moral viewpoint. What i thought was ingenious though, was that one ad attacked the other candidate for having certain values that their candidate didn't have. The other ad attacked the other candidate by pointing out the inconsistencies between his platform and his behavior in his own moral system.

Simply put democrat attack republican for being a republican and republican attack democrat for spouting democrat views but behaving like a republican. What was especially hot was how that second attack centered on a particular view of republicans that democrats vilify about republicans.

One thing that i noticed was that Lakoff put his book in terms of conservative and liberal viewpoints. What i liked about that was that it almost explained why there are so many 'moderates' on both sides of the fence. This comes from people having a few values from both moral positions.

When you have some conservative views and liberal veiws (maybe you're for gay rights[liberal stance] but also for gun control[conservative stance]) it's because you hold certain values that allow for these things. Not many people are fully conservative or fully liberal, we usually have a mix of views. This book will explain what you value, which guides you to hold the political positions that you have.

why I love landmark

So I lead introductions to the Landmark Forum. That's a bit hard for me to say because if you google it, you'll find some nasty stuff about it. But, if you google anything, you'll find nasty stuff about that too. So what is the Landmark Forum for? Its about living a life of Possiblity.

Let me explain by using the metaphor of the goose that lays the golden egg. The rhyme goes that some foolish farmer cut open the goose to get more golden eggs. All he found was innards. So he sacrificed the goose that laid the eggs to get the eggs themselves.

So let's say that any possibility (little 'p') is an egg from this magical goose. Well the Landmark forum is like that Golden Egg-Laying Goose. It's about creating Possibility (big 'p'). What happens is that this big 'p' Possibility is the mother-goose of these golden eggs. What happens in the Landmark forum is that you get in connection with the realm of Possibility (big 'p') so you can

Think about it. When you think of doing something that you really want to do, sometimes you get scared, maybe a little cynical. Why? Because you have a story about your life that highlights all the times you failed and almost succeeded. In these instances you didn't do as well as you would have liked, you chipped away at your connection with the possibility that you can be anything you want to be, and have a life that you love. So you threw the baby out with the bathwater. You strangled off big 'p' Possibility in your life instead of keeping it specific to that possibility. It's like tripping over a chair and hating all furniture. Absurd eh?

So the Landmark forum helps you to see that you do this, and helps you notice that you have a choice in the matter of big 'p' Possibility. You can have Possibility in your life. A realm of big 'p' Possibilityin which little miniature little 'p' possibilities can exist and flourish.

Come to think of it, that golden egg-laying goose example might've sucked.

The book: Moral Politics

A couple months ago i read this little pamphlet/book by cognitive scientist George Lakoff. It was called "Don't Think of an Elephant". He examined in the book the issue of framing in politics. Basically his point was that the 'conservative machine' has gained an unprecedented amount of power in the last few decades because they spent money on getting the morals that underly their platform not only out in the open, but with catchy slogans to boot. The purpose of this book was to get the progressive movement a swift kick in the behind so that they can get their act together likewise and organize not only their programs, but the morals that make the programs valuable.

So i am now reading his earlier book Moral Politics. This book is longer. Its purpose is to examine deeply the moral systems that give rise to the conservative and liberal movements. It's doing a great job. Go read it if you want to know some more. I also suggest that you read Don't Think of an Elephant first.

I'll be giving you a blow by blow as i read through it.

this weekend

my mom's birthday was this weekend. I went to help her out around the house. I missed the eagles game. That's real love. We had a pretty deep conversation about the family and all of its dysfunctions, with my aunt. It was a nice day.

But on saturday, i spent it cleaning the house i'm about to buy with my father. He's a garden wizard. He had me pull some weeds out of this little tiny front yard (5x8 feet?). I came back like two hours later (get how comitted i am right) and he had a whole garden for me. He had some ivy plants and three colorful suckers, but i don't know their names yet. This happened after the appraiser came and walked through making me nervous. I am trying to figure out how much i have to pay for the house/mortgage and so forth.

i probably had a deep thought or two. but i forget what they were.

GO EAGLES!!!
ps: i LOVE the eagles, but i still think if we see the bowl again, i hope it is against pgh, but i would take the patriots on a 3-2 fav.

My revolutionary reading list

Sometimes its hard to explain the whole enchilada when it comes to my revolution. So what i'll do here is create a reading list of about 20 books so you can do your homework on what i think. With this i'll explain what the book is about and why i'm recomending it. So i'll be adding and subtracting a few, here goes:

Warriors At Work: by Mustafah Dhada. It's a book about the revolution in Guinea Bissau enactd by the PAIGC back when they ousted the Portugese from their country. The book is comprehensive in that it covers the war itself, and in a separate section the social-economic programs that the PAIGC orchestrated during the war.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu it's a classic, what more can i say?

The Tao Te Ching, another classic, more mystical than the first. If read from the right angle, i heard it was one of the first treatises on systems thinking.

Natural Capitalism by Hawken, Lovins and Lovins this book explains how to create a sustainable economy. Devoid of pleas and morality, this book goes into the nitty-gritty of how companies have been making environmentally better products and profits in business using sustainable strategies (architecture, carpet making) as well as some governmental concerns and examples.

The Nature of Economies by Jane Jacobs The activist that saved New York from becoming one big project. . . she hits us off with a book explaining how the economy is just like evolution. Through a series of conversations from characters in the book she explains the nuts and bolts of economic development, stagnation and how economists and politicians can grow a green thumb for the greenbacks. Apparently, money doesn't grow on trees, but the economy evolves like an ecosystem.

Metu Neter Vol. 2 by Ra Un Nefer Amen volume one is a dense doozy. Volume two i like and recommend because it contains an explanation of different kinds of thinking, abstract and concrete, analytic and synthetic etc., and that in itself helps to clarify my thinking, and hopefully yours, about how to approach problems. Many times problems don't get solved not because they're intractable or incorrigible, but because we haven't found the flaws in our thinking on how to assess and approach the problem.

Two books by George Lakoff: Don't think of an Elephant (read first) and Moral Politics (rsecond) these books examine the political spectrum from the view of cognitive science. He shows in these books why the 'liberal' and 'conservative' frameworks are consistent and why they are what they are. Part of his grind is to show the 'liberal' establishment (or lack therof) why the conservatives have had this slow but steady rise to power in the last couple decades.

That's all for now. Happy reading

My recomended reading list

So I've read a lot. A blog from someone who doesn't read a lot better be from an artist or a conisseur or something, otherwise it'll be mindless drivel. So here's my recomended reading list:

Spirituality:
The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success by Deepak Chopra
Tree of Life Meditation System by Ra Un Nefer Amen
The Metu Neter by Ra Un Never Amen
Angels Fear by Gregory and Mary Catherine Bateson

Philosophy:
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance by Robert Pirisig
Objectivism:The Philosophy of Ayn Rand by Leonard Peikoff
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology by Ayn Rand

Novels:
Lion's Blood; Firedance (both series) by Steve Barnes
Parable of the Sower (series) by Octavia Butler
Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand

Self-Development/Psychology:
The Structure of Delight by Nelson Zink (gotta find it used)
The Craft of the Warrior by Robert Spence (gotta find it used)
Using Your Brain For a Change by Richard Bandler
Change Your Mind by Connirae and Steve Andreas
Transforming Your Self by Steve Andreas
***In this order, you can skip the first though

Thinking and Cognition in General
Metaphors We Live By by Lakoff and Johnson
Frames of Mind by Howard Gardner
Social Mindscapes by Eviatar Zerubavel
How the Mind Works by Steve Pinker

On Becoming a Warrior:
The Tao of Jeet Kun Do by Bruce Lee
www.rmax.tv
http://www.clubbell.tv/index2.html


History:
Many Thousands Gone by Ira Berlin
Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond
DK Atlas of Wold History
The Wealth and Poverty of Nations by David Landes
Civilizations by Felipe Fernandez-Armesto

Economics/Business
The Nature of Economies by Jane Jacobs
Natural Capitalism by Hawken, Lovins and Lovins
The Mystery of Capital by Hernando De Soto
Beyond Reengineering by Michael Hammer
The Pentagon's New May by Thomas Barnett

General Science:
Lila by Robert Pirisig
Mind and Nature by Gregory Bateson
Art and Physics by Leonard Shlain
The Ingenious Mind of Nature by George Hall
Consilience by Edward O. Wilson

Building a Movement/Revolution
The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People by Steven Covey
The Power Principle by Blaine Lee
Never Eat Alone by Keith Ferazzi
Linked by Albert Laszlo Barabasi
Changing Minds by Howard Gardner
The Hidden Power of Social Networks Rob Cross

and yes smarty pants, i have read all of these (except one-its on my to do list)

apparently, some people know what they're talking about

So i'm a teacher. I'm new at this game. I thought teachers did things to complicate my life. You know, little things like lesson plans, write out how projects should be turned in by students. . . you know, the various paper work that teachers do. But today i realized, that i get up in the front of the class room, and i have just a little idea of what i'll be doing during the class. Sometimes i don't have any idea. Then it hit me. I had a lesson planned!

So, when i say people know what they're talking about, i'm talking about the self-help gurus and people who say "plan your work, and work your plan" and its catchy and non-catchy versions. When you have a plan, you don't have to wing it. When i wing it, i'm asking myself am i doing it right more than i'm paying attention to what i'm doing or saying. Sometimes it isn't practice makes perfect, which i thought was how people became better teachers. Rather its knowing pretty much what you're going to do on a moment-to-moment basis.

So all of this planning and scheduling, its really an awareness exercise. When you have the big picture sorted out, you can hammer at the details of it. Lemme find out some people know what they're talking about?!

Hip-Hop "vs." Gangsta Rap

I was talking to my brother and a friend of his about a month or two ago and finally made public my opinion on why the 'battle' between 'hip-hop' and 'gangsta-rap' is utterly futile. That is to say that 'hip-hop' will never win this battle, or the war.

To understand what i mean, i have to take you into the fields of linguistics and semantics, the study of language and meaning, respectively. In the little book "metaphors we live by" semanticists Lakoff and Johnson propose the theory that everyday metaphors such as "good is up" and "bad is down" (ex, stock market, feelings, boxers etc.) have more of an influence in our lives than we thought.

These fellas took to task the metaphor "argument is war" by flushing out aspects of this metaphor we find in everyday language: " Your claims are indefensible. He attacked every weak point in my argument. His criticisms were right on target. I demolished his argument. I've never won an argument with him." These point to that we understand argument through the metaphor of war. Correspondingly, since this is a very well-developed metaphor, many of our conversations and 'heated discussions' devolve into pitche battles over who is right and who is wrong, sound familiar?

If that doesn't convince you of the subtle and powerful nature of metaphors, what about our notions of "love"? Many people understand, explain and express love in different ways. Think of a couple who have differing notions of love: one thinks "love is blind" while the other thinks "love is hurtful". What about either of them in a different relationship with someone thinking that "love is a collaborative work of art?" Do you think they'd get along? Even at first glance your gut tells you that these two (in any combination) won't make for a happy couple. Sure there'd be happy moments, but a happy couple? Nope. That's because you understand how powerful the notion of love is to a relationship, and how one understands what love 'is' has an influence on how they think and act, whether they're in or out of love.

So now what? Metaphors influence the way we think, and act. What's that got to do with the battle between 'hip-hop' and 'gangsta rap'? Look closely, is it really a 'battle'? Do conscious rappers come out and say bad things about thugs, and vice versa? Is it a overt battle, or is it more subtle and nuanced? Heard of player haters? Heard of hater players?

Why hip-hop will never win the battle or war against gangsta rap is that gansta rap has a monopoly on violence. There are options to undermine this 'battle' and 'war'.

The first is revolution, armed revolution (of which i'm not an advocate). What's happening in the communities that breed gangsta rappers and consume gangsta rap is violence. Plain and simple. Whether it's inner city shootings, or rural beat downs, or vice versa, violence is happening. The biggest kid on the block pretty much runs things. These kings-of-the-hill walk around with a veneer of moral authority to use violence. They use violence to protect their person, their people, their rep and their hood. That's understandable.

In a revolutionary situation, armed or not, the moral authority of violence lay not with the individual protecting his own, but with a force protecting the good of the community. In an ideal situation, that would be the police. But we don't trust them. So, the revolutionary nature of the situation would be a self-policing of the community by the community. Something real critical would have to shift both inside and outside the black community for the revolutionaries to gain the moral authority for violence: internal policing based on the good of the village or community, not its individuals. In the sixties, this took the form of the Black Panthers and like-minded organizations.

Now let's move on to a more likely and palatable option: Hip-hoppers get a new metaphor- competition and/or dance. Early 'battle rap'. . . Early competitive rap was a test of who could brag the most and the flyest. Emcees outclassed and outmaneuvered each other with lyrical wit, sometimes using threats of violence, threats of stealing the others girl(s) and outright disrespecting their opponent. It was the ability of the emcees to avoid taking things personally inside the cipher that both bolstered their own reputation (he can take a pounding as well as give it out) and prevented violence from breaking out. Unfortunately, some people didn't have this mental-emotional armor, and got sensitive. They brought the beef down to a physical level.

Brinksmanship. "don't push me cuz i'm close to the edge, i'm trying not to lose my head". Early emcees pushed the envelope to get each other's goat as well as put up the aura that they were invincible or at least flexible enough to laugh at themselves, thereby gaining rep for being a 'good sport'.

So we need an alternative metaphor, one that can replace the metaphor 'battle' to understand, experience, explain and express what goes on in a exchange of lyrics. The closest metaphors i can think of are competition and dance. Why i chose those is becaue they are both dynamic in nature. I also chose them because they are relatively developed metaphors. Unfortunately, we have no extensive vocabulary for either.

Why would the hip-hoppers need a new metaphor? Because of the collapse of reality and illusion. The battle is a game played where each participant portrays his or her own invincibility and power. When that illusion bubble is popped and the portrayal remains, people take things personally. Then comes the beat down. To prevent this violence from happening, a subtle but powerful shift must be created where the operating metaphor keeps the intensity of 'battles' but eliminates the overt threats of violence.

Okay, so i never promised that i would have well-thought out essays. Deal with it.

man this is hard

I remember searching used to be easy. I'm trying to boost a couple pictures off the web to add some visuals to my blog. . . but i'm just coming up with squat!!! I remember when i used to see random pictures, put them on my hard drive and just lollygag and love the pictures. Unfortunately having to upgrade computers i have the good stuff on old computers. Nowadays you can upload pictures and things. I'm not sure how all that works. I have a friendster profile and a yahoo thinggy, but just having pictures on the web? Well, i did get one of those "hello" accounts that blogger has, and i guess picasa to boot? But i haven't figured those out yet.

I would say that i'm going to stick to words, but that's not gonna happen.

Why do i have multiple blogs? And why am i blogging about blogging? Because i'm a weird dude, that's why. What's this blog about? The little things that aren't so thematic. The daily grind. How my bum itches occasionally. What i think about that's not in the realm of the other blogs. I'm going to try to be redundant, so if i put stuff that's marginally related to politics, in on of these blogs, i might go on a more serious rant on the political blog i have, same for spiritual and so forth.

I think of blogging as more expressing my thoughts and helping me to sort them out than to communicate. If i wanted to communicate with you, i'd write a book or seven (which i'm doing also-you gotta wait for that though).

Anyhoo. . .

Revolution eh? what kinds?

Well, my Favorite revolutionary is Amilcar Cabral. The best book on him is Warriors at Work by Mustafah Dhada. It is literally a big-picture blueprint for creating a balanced nation under external stress. During his ousting of the Portuguese, he created a mobile hospital system, created schools for rural masses, got a trade-and-barter network going, and increased the productivity of the agriculture in Guinea Bissau. All this was done while waging a war with the Portuguese, who had helicopters, flew sorties and manned forts. Unfortunately he was 'accidentally killed' when taken by the Portugese Army by one of his former enemies.

There are many dimensions to this revolution of mine. The First purpose is that the ultimate goal in a person's life being inner peace. Everything after that is negotiable based on circumstance.

I am talking of an economic revolution. People for years have been beating the statistics of how many black dollars are spent per year. I'm flapping my lips and thinking about how much black businesses make each year, how many (and how well) they employ people and whether they are in 'critical industries.'

There will be more to come. I just created this blog along with about three or four others. I'll be peicemealing this into something big.

oh yeah, if you use one of my ideas, i demand a reference. i'm about to trademark all of this.

Strategy Games . . . are you serious?

I love history, reading the books and stuff. Once my father and grandfather had a ten minute long argument about a house in some backroad in virginia . . . whether it was before this particular hill or after it. I was blown away. The detail-orientedness and spatial memory these guys have is phenomenal . . . my older brother got it, but not me. . . anyway . . . These were the two minds that got me interested in History

The problem with books is that they're static. The wonderful thing about strategy games is that they're dynamic. Strategy games are the war games that are on the computer and not PS2's and so forth. In strategy games you wage wars on multiple fronts. In addition to that, you build up the civilization that creates the warriors. What this has me realize is that 'war' cannot happen without an economy. In the preface to The Art of War (i think the Cleary translation) there's a admonition that says the great doctor heals a patient before the patient know he is sick. In terms of war and economy, you must undermine another country's economy to beat it militarily. Think America vs. USSR (inherent weakeness of socialism aside).

So I think all people should have to become expert strategy-games players. Why? Because they're the best way to learn how history and the current world operates. Imagine wanting to change a light-buld and knowing nothing of electricity running through circuts. How much success do you think you'll have? Not much, right. Imagine trying to change the world, and not knowing how it works . . . get the point?

Strategy Games are the way to go. They show you, metaphorically of course, in entertainment-time/density how the world works. What's entertainment time and entertainment density? Great question. Entertainment time is the pace by which a person is comfortable ingesting information. Any faster its a blur, any slower its a bore. Entertainment density is kinda the same, they delete some of the not-so-important variables and nuances enough so you're not overloaded with information, but retain enough important to keep it realistic and interesting.

What strategy games do i recommend? I say start of with the old Age of Empires, and upgrade to Rise of Nations. I have both of those, and haven't played any others. Of course if i had more free time i'd get to thrash-level at RON but i don't. I would also suggest Sim City and perhaps one of those 'tycoon' games. Why those? Because it's cool to understand the whole civilization/nation view, but we also need an awareness of local economy, issues and politics, which Sim City provides. Why a Tycoon game? Because you gotta know how to run a business.

Games:
Rise Of Nations
One of the Tycoon Games
Sim City (new versions)

I love revolution

I love revolution. I hate revolutionaries. That could be a contradiction. I just don't think that the revolution will happen via someone's personality. X got slaughtered. King got popped. Cabral got executed. So the revolution, not only will it not be televised. It won't even be centered in one man.

"Network-centric warfare". Ever heard that phrase? Well, that's what i like. But not in the blood-and-guts prisoners of war sense. But in the economic sense. I've been playing acouple strategy games on the computer. I love history. So i propose that i know a thing or two about how the world works. Here is where i tell it not like it is, but how its gonna be.

Chillin out. . . see the light halo? not an effect. 

The New Black Revolution?

"Get money", heralded as a theme of gnagsta hip-hop seems to be the theme of the middle-upper class black people also. The "get rich or die trying" that we see and complain about as prevelant in poo, impoverished r and working-class Blacks is just as prevalent in the middle and upper class. However there are two main differences i see. Though both are remarkably materialistic, and both aim at gaining power, these two differences create a wide disparity.

The first difference is that the working-class 'get mone'y ethic stems from a nihilism and reaction against poverty, while in the middle-upper class the 'get money' ethic flows from a recognition that though the rights and opportunities fought for in the sixities (actually, since landing in this country) didn't correspond with a commanding power. Though while in the university halls and a few conglomerate boardrooms the black educated class (educlass) has a sense that the 'struggle' ain't over until they have control for and of themselves. At the same time, the hungry desparation of residents of the ghettoes (urban, suburban and rural) of America chant the same song out of a desparation for some way from the shakles of the ghettoes.

The second difference is in the nature of the power weilded for the rich and hood rich. The relative scope of power to which these communities aspire split too. The hood rich afficianados with kitted-up cars and platinum chains see wealth as and end in itself while the rich see it as a means to an end. We can simplify this contrast between 'power over' and 'power to do'. The 'power to do' operates with a sense of hard struggle and greuling aspirations where middle-upper class blacks understand that their money is a tool to enhance their personal and communal cohesion and control over what they can and cannot do. This may take the form of outings with like-minded people, trips to fanciful places where they can wash away the pain of racism at in-pool bars in foreign countries. The 'power over' hood rich folk are caught up in a vicious cirlce of ever smaller decisions to both keep and further control over their centers of influence.

This contrast between 'power over' and 'power to do' camps can be explained by referring to the difference between a hierarchy and a network. In a hierarchy, there is only on god. In a network, there are many gods. Of course, the social scene really floats back and forth between these two poles, but the stabilizing point in each social scene tends to either side. The 'power over', of course in the hierarchy camp while the power to do sits in the 'power to do' camp.

The overt and subtle power-struggles and nuanced king-of-the-hill-games of who has what plays out differently in each camp. In the 'power over' camp hierarchy riegns supreme. So the king of the power games more-or-less dictates what happens in and around the lower levels of his or her minions. In the 'power to do' networks, there is no single leader. What exists is a more subtle group of dominant figures who influence but do not dictate what happens in the rest of the group.

So what? We have nihilism vs not-enoughism and 'power over' vs 'power to do'. What next? I don't know. i just thought this was a good way to analyze a couple people.

B

who am i to write a blog?

Nobody. To put it simply. But everyone else is doing it. And i've always wanted a place to store my thoughts for others to see, edit, attack, steal, give away and whatever else they want to do. Bill Clinton said that everyone over the age of 50 should write their autobiography. Thomas Jefferson said that nobody should write a biography within 50 years of a person's death. Who's right? neither, both. Whatever the case, why should 'journalists' get to be the ones hogging the spotlight? Now its our turn.