Last week I turned 25 years old. Part of me says, "who cares? I"m still in my 20's, I still have my youth and a world of opportunity ahead of me." But there is another side of me that is scared shitless. My inability to reconcile these two contradictory pieces of my psyche lies in one simple fact: I'm a procrastinator. Contrary to popular belief, procrastination has very little to do with laziness. Those who practice the vice of laziness refuse to complete tasks based on the exertion of energy needed to complete said task. Adversly, those of us who suffer from the dreaded neurosis of procrastination exert vast amounts of energy constantly. There isn't a moment that goes by when we are not occupied with an endeavor - unfortunately - most of the time these endeavors serve one purpose and one purpose only: AVOIDANCE. I am not, by nature, a lazy person. I have quite a laundry list of goals: some I have acheived and others I have only imagined. I also pride myself on being an intelligent and well-informed human being. BUT, I am deathly afraid of failing - so much so that I suffer a paralysis of the mind and body at the mere thought of failure. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this may be an extremely common phenomena, especially for those of us who are fairly new to the 'outside world.' Once I left the structure and deadlines of academic life, my inclination for procrastination grew increasingly worse. In fact, I've come to see procrastination as a way of existing in the world, albeit a toxic one. Let me give you a few examples.
#1. To avoid the failure that I may have felt from pursuing an acting career I: moved to Minneapolis, MN and became a flight attendant.
#2. In avoidance of the daunting task of writing an essay for my academic advisor that would double as a writing sample for my graduate school applications I: read countless blogs, started my own blog, I've read 100 novels, I've researched a vast array of topics from nutrition to freemasonry, I even took up running!
#3. For a brief period of time I took fitness very seriously, but now I avoid going to the gym by: cleaning the house, making never-ending social obligations, and crash dieting.
And the procrastination doesn't end there. In a pathetic effort to justify my actions, I tend to take a "this better than that" approach to life. What makes "this" better than "that?" I have a list of insane criterion that I follow. If it benefits me intellectually, physically, or spiritually, it can remain at the top of the list. If it is something that may cause immediate or eventual failure, it goes to the bottom of the list. Of course, no procrastinator's list would be complete without the self-destructive column. In an effort to punish myself for my imperfection (for I find that perfectionism and procrastination go hand in hand) I incorporate a certain amount of self-destruction. This has taken many forms over the years, from damaging sexual relationships to smoking, substance abuse, and an unhealthy fondness for baked goods. Now, you may be wondering why I'm writing this in a blog instead of telling my therapist . . . but the answer is simple. I've already told my therapist, and I write this in the hope that the words on the screen will relieve some of the anxiety that accompanies my procrastination. It's all about baby steps. After all, I've written this blog haven't I? I left my job as a flight attendant . . . I was in a play . . . but why am I looking for your validation? Perhaps I'm just searching for one more reason to put it off, whatever it is, one more reason to procrastinate.
Monday, January 25, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
Transparency: The Capitalist Oxymoron
"We are condemned to be free." - Sartre
The website Capitalism.Org describes Capitalism as "a social system based on the principle of individual rights." The website goes on to categorically address the common concerns related to Capitalism as an economic and social system. The problem with the website reflects the problem with Capitalism as a whole: There is a category designated to 'morality,' but none that explore the broader issue of 'ethics.' All the jargon in the world can't change the fact that Capitalism = Exploitation, and in the midst of a political 'revolution' (not to be confused with an economic recession) that preaches the ambiguous ideal of 'transparency,' I think the American people would do well to re-examine the moral justification for upholding a Capitalist economic system. To illustrate my point, let me venture back to Capitalism.org -
Who is the poor man better off under: Mother Teresa or Bill Gates?
A Mother Teresa who hands them bowls of slop every day, so they can barely exist -- or a genius like Bill Gates who creates a fortune for himself by helping others to create fortunes for themselves, i.e., "where the first feeds them for a day, the second helps them feed themselves." Observe that it is the Bill Gates of the world who are not allowed to exist in India -- and the Mother Teresas who are.
-CAPITALISM.ORG
No, you're not crazy, the above passage is an argument for Capitalism that compares Bill Gates to Mother Teresa . . . and Bill Gates wins. First of all, that's messed up! But perhaps we should dissect the argument before we judge it too harshly. The Free-market enthusiasts say that the world of Mother Teresa is one in which the poor are kept enslaved by those around them - volunteers who would feed them "slop" and provide nothing but the very basics of clothing and shelter. The down-trodden are never afforded the opportunity or even the dream to rise up from their bondage and take hold of their potential. If taken to it's inevitable extreme, this argument advocates the abolition of all charitable programs, government and private alike. I guess that takes care of the 'ethical' aspect of Capitalism . . . just kidding. Under this 'Capitalist Ideal,' all people are created equal, because anyone can make money. In fact, making money is the only 'right' we have. All other laws and regulations must go through some democratic-majority-rules-style process. Let's look at California's highly controversial Proposition 8 as an example. Proposition 8 was a ballot proposition to amend the state of California's constitution. Basically, they voted on whether or not gays should have the constitutional 'right' to marry. Those in favor of the amendment won, needing only a simple majority. This decision had nothing to do with the sacredness of marriage, it had to do with money--because in a Capitalist country, money is the only thing that is revered. We can break this principle down theoretically in two easy steps. First, let's look at the idea that individual morality holds more weight than living in an ethical society. Capitalism assumes that each individual has the ability to take responsibility for their education and livelihood. What it DOES NOT take into account is the cultural, social, religious, and fiscal differences that exist within a large country like the United States. Going back to proposition 8, since the majority deemed homosexuality incompatible with their personal view of morality, they decided to deny them certain civil rights. Yet, when it comes to the financial sector, regulation is met with an uproar of angry white male voices. Secondly, let's break down Capitalism as a Utopian ideal. Ideally, Capitalism contains a body of people - all of whom act in their own self-interest. This self-interest creates wealth for the individual and in turn helps the economy thrive. So what is the individual moral tenet of Capitalism? GREED. Perhaps that's where Bill Gates and Mother Teresa differ. So what can we conclude from all this? Let me give you a hint - transparency is a far-away illusion for Capitalism. Oppression is a necessary part of our economy. Individual morality is a sick joke. WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!
Stay Informed:A Socialist Reading List
Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire
Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre
The Poverty of Philosophy by Karl Marx
The website Capitalism.Org describes Capitalism as "a social system based on the principle of individual rights." The website goes on to categorically address the common concerns related to Capitalism as an economic and social system. The problem with the website reflects the problem with Capitalism as a whole: There is a category designated to 'morality,' but none that explore the broader issue of 'ethics.' All the jargon in the world can't change the fact that Capitalism = Exploitation, and in the midst of a political 'revolution' (not to be confused with an economic recession) that preaches the ambiguous ideal of 'transparency,' I think the American people would do well to re-examine the moral justification for upholding a Capitalist economic system. To illustrate my point, let me venture back to Capitalism.org -
Who is the poor man better off under: Mother Teresa or Bill Gates?
A Mother Teresa who hands them bowls of slop every day, so they can barely exist -- or a genius like Bill Gates who creates a fortune for himself by helping others to create fortunes for themselves, i.e., "where the first feeds them for a day, the second helps them feed themselves." Observe that it is the Bill Gates of the world who are not allowed to exist in India -- and the Mother Teresas who are.
-CAPITALISM.ORG
No, you're not crazy, the above passage is an argument for Capitalism that compares Bill Gates to Mother Teresa . . . and Bill Gates wins. First of all, that's messed up! But perhaps we should dissect the argument before we judge it too harshly. The Free-market enthusiasts say that the world of Mother Teresa is one in which the poor are kept enslaved by those around them - volunteers who would feed them "slop" and provide nothing but the very basics of clothing and shelter. The down-trodden are never afforded the opportunity or even the dream to rise up from their bondage and take hold of their potential. If taken to it's inevitable extreme, this argument advocates the abolition of all charitable programs, government and private alike. I guess that takes care of the 'ethical' aspect of Capitalism . . . just kidding. Under this 'Capitalist Ideal,' all people are created equal, because anyone can make money. In fact, making money is the only 'right' we have. All other laws and regulations must go through some democratic-majority-rules-style process. Let's look at California's highly controversial Proposition 8 as an example. Proposition 8 was a ballot proposition to amend the state of California's constitution. Basically, they voted on whether or not gays should have the constitutional 'right' to marry. Those in favor of the amendment won, needing only a simple majority. This decision had nothing to do with the sacredness of marriage, it had to do with money--because in a Capitalist country, money is the only thing that is revered. We can break this principle down theoretically in two easy steps. First, let's look at the idea that individual morality holds more weight than living in an ethical society. Capitalism assumes that each individual has the ability to take responsibility for their education and livelihood. What it DOES NOT take into account is the cultural, social, religious, and fiscal differences that exist within a large country like the United States. Going back to proposition 8, since the majority deemed homosexuality incompatible with their personal view of morality, they decided to deny them certain civil rights. Yet, when it comes to the financial sector, regulation is met with an uproar of angry white male voices. Secondly, let's break down Capitalism as a Utopian ideal. Ideally, Capitalism contains a body of people - all of whom act in their own self-interest. This self-interest creates wealth for the individual and in turn helps the economy thrive. So what is the individual moral tenet of Capitalism? GREED. Perhaps that's where Bill Gates and Mother Teresa differ. So what can we conclude from all this? Let me give you a hint - transparency is a far-away illusion for Capitalism. Oppression is a necessary part of our economy. Individual morality is a sick joke. WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE!
Stay Informed:A Socialist Reading List
Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire
Being and Nothingness by Jean-Paul Sartre
The Poverty of Philosophy by Karl Marx
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
The Feast of La Befana
Today is the Feast of the Epiphany. This is a very important holy day in the Christian Tradition because it marks the unveiling of baby Jesus to the world. Yet, this is one of the many places in Biblical lore where things get a little sticky for Christianity (depending on your level of spiritual flexibility). You see, the Magi of Persia (AKA: the three wise men) were notorious Pagan mystics known for their knowledge of occult philosophy, astrology, and sorcery. The Bible does little to debunk their metaphysical abilities, rather it discusses the possibility of the infiltration of Jewish prophetic ideology into the Zoroastrian culture that was prevalent in the Middle East at the time. For a religion that put millions of people to death for the supposed practice of witchcraft, it seems a little hypocritical to blatantly glorify astrology and the deliverance of gifts that perfectly coincide with the Pagan festival of Saturnalia. But let's move on to another festival that takes place on January 6th, and that's the Feast of La Befana (celebrated primarily in Italy). We have a tradition in my family that on Christas Eve before the presents are opened, a story is read. This year I read the tale of La Befana. The story begins with an old woman who prizes cleanliness above all things, always keeping her broom close by her side. One night, three men knock on her door in search of food and shelter. They explain that the townspeople had sent them, telling them that Befana keeps the cleanest house in all the village. Beaming with pride, she lets them in, feeds them, and allows them to stay in her cottage for the night. The three men, dressed in strange robes, tell La Befana that they are in search of an infant, prophesied to be the saviour of the world. They even go so far as to invite her on their journey . . . but Befana fears that while away, her house will gather dust, and panics at the idea that she won't be there to clean it up. Upon their departure, Befana has a change of heart and sets off on the road with her broomstick. Alas, she searches far and low for the three men and the infant, but finds nothing. Legend has it that Befana continues to wander the European countryside in search of a child, and that is why she creeps in the night with her broom, bringing gifts to all the children on January 6th: The Feast of La Befana. While I enjoy this version of the Italian folktale, there is a variant to the story that interests me far more. It tells of an old woman stricken with grief by the death of her infant son. She secludes herself in her home, her only comfort being a rickety broomstick that she uses to sweep up the remnants of her painful memories. One day a bright star appears in the sky, and Befana hears whispers of an infant born in a faraway land. Delusional, Befana sets off with her broomstick madly searching for the child, thinking he is her own dead infant son. After weeks of wandering, Befana finds the child, bestowing upon him a loaf of bread that she herself had baked. The infant, delighted at receiving the first gift of his short life, gives her a gift in return, making her the mother of all the children in Italy. Hence, on the night of January 6, all italian children can expect to find a present from none other than La Befana.
I view the story of La Befana as a metaphor for the human search for meaning. We have all lost something, whether it be our innocence or an apparatus much more concrete, and in our maddness and delusion we wander aimlessly, looking for a saviour. Perhaps, like Befana, it is only through giving of ourselves that we can find true fulfillment . . . or maybe we find an illusion that brings us peace and comfort and we allow it to envelope us, concealing our miserable existence within the confines of myth and legend. Either way, Befana tells us something about the world. That's why this story fascinates me. Whether she's an old witch or a grief-stricken mother, Befana gives us hope that there is something at the end of the tunnel - perhaps not an infant saviour - but a gift from above or below that seems to say, "yes, there is a meaning to this life . . . don't give up hope." And in that moment, we receive our gift. Not a loaf of bread, something much less substantial. It's the Holy Communion of the unknown, and we accept it only inasmuch as we believe in it. So tonight, while you get ready for bed and take time to reflect on your day, think of Befana . . . think of what you've lost, and hopefully - your search will be a fruitful one.
I view the story of La Befana as a metaphor for the human search for meaning. We have all lost something, whether it be our innocence or an apparatus much more concrete, and in our maddness and delusion we wander aimlessly, looking for a saviour. Perhaps, like Befana, it is only through giving of ourselves that we can find true fulfillment . . . or maybe we find an illusion that brings us peace and comfort and we allow it to envelope us, concealing our miserable existence within the confines of myth and legend. Either way, Befana tells us something about the world. That's why this story fascinates me. Whether she's an old witch or a grief-stricken mother, Befana gives us hope that there is something at the end of the tunnel - perhaps not an infant saviour - but a gift from above or below that seems to say, "yes, there is a meaning to this life . . . don't give up hope." And in that moment, we receive our gift. Not a loaf of bread, something much less substantial. It's the Holy Communion of the unknown, and we accept it only inasmuch as we believe in it. So tonight, while you get ready for bed and take time to reflect on your day, think of Befana . . . think of what you've lost, and hopefully - your search will be a fruitful one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
