When somebody presses me for a religious affiliation, these days I tend to say, “The closest thing to what I believe is Buddhism, but I’m not a Buddhist.“ I put it in quotes here because it really has become a canned answer. Since most people who press me for a religious affiliation tend to be some flavor of Christian and expect some flavor of Christian as a response, I usually get blank, confused stares and then a shrug of the shoulders and a change of conversation. Which, happily, is the response I’m generally going for.
I love so many things about the Buddhist philosophy, and think Siddartha got so much stuff right that it kinda blows my mind sometimes. But I can’t get fully onboard because of the insane layers of dogma and the lack of respect for human imagination. Particularly music.
Lots of people get around this stuff, take what works and call themselves Buddhists anyway. I have no problem with that. But for me, the distrust of dogma runs pretty deep.
Back many years ago during an election cycle, a friend of mine was proposing a personal project where he dug into the planks of all parties to find out where he truly stands politically. I sent him this and occasionally like to revisit it to see if my opinions have changed:
Remember, my friend, that saying and doing are two entirely different things. I don't care which color in the political kaleidoscope you land on, just make sure in your research you remember to consider what people who call themselves republicans, democrats, libertarians, etc. do in the real world.
I strongly believe that government has overreached itself and needs to be pruned back to an acceptable level. This was something the republicans were preaching from Alaska to Florida - yet once in office, republicans have pursued the exact opposite direction. I don't mean to pick on them, every political group has these inconsistencies. I'm a registered democrat, but the Clinton years blew that out of the water for me (don't get me wrong - I'd take Billy over any Bush any day).
I'm for gay marriage, legalizing drugs and the death penalty in certain cases. I'm for birth control, sex ed and multi-cultural religious education in schools. I'm against teaching intelligent design in a Science class, but see no reason why you shouldn't mention it in a Political Science class. I have deep concerns about abortion and think we have a decent compromise allowing legal abortions in the first trimester. I'm for stem cell research and against circumcision of children (let 'em get it done as adults if they want it). I want alternative fuels and vehicles that run them NOW, but I think, since we're over there, we should find a way to win this Iraq thing. (Can't really call it a war somehow) I like capitalism, but I don't understand how a nation can consider itself civilized without making basic food, shelter, education and healthcare available to everyone (they don't have to avail themselves, but the safety net should be in place). We have the resources to do it - why isn't it getting done? I don't think illegal immigrants should have licenses, and I'd be all for gun control, except I refuse to mess with the Bill of Rights. If you take one of those rights away, the rest will fall just as quickly. I have the right to free speech until I yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. Other people have the right to have guns until they SHOOT SOMEBODY...and we already have laws on the books about that. We don't need more.
I have no idea where I fall on the political spectrum these days. I'm not a hypocritical bully (most of the time) so I can't call myself republican and I have a spine, so democrat doesn't really fit either.
So, what do I believe now?
I believe I’m a bad writer who can’t focus well for long periods of time. Beyond that, I’d add that I believe from what I’m reading that yes, Global Warming or Climate Change or whatever we’re calling it these days, is real. I don’t believe humans are the root cause, but I do believe we are accelerating and exacerbating the problem. On the other hand, although I cannot remember the name of the person (I think a woman) who countered Malthus, I think she was somewhat right. Humans are adaptable. It’s one of our best traits and we maintain this adaptability with technology. The technology to solve a population problem is almost always available, for example de-salination plants, but it may not be cost-effective at the beginning stages. Once the problem becomes pressing enough, or the technology improves, the cost-benefit analysis changes and we sail merrily along into the next big issue.
Of course, to a certain extent Malthus was right, too. And anyone who passed third grade earth science should know that every organism has limits. Overpopulation will always lead to either running out of resources (starvation), breeding of disease (plague), or drowning in it’s own output. Humans are just another species on the planet and we are responsive to the same environmental pressures as any other critters. I grew up in Michigan, where they have a deer hunting season every year. One of the explanations they give to tender young children who are sobbing their eyes out over daddy heading off to kill Bambi’s mom is that without hunting season the deer will overpopulate the woods and starve. It’s kinder to thin the herd and give the survivors a better chance.
Still don’t know if I buy that reasoning. Partially because it’s my standard emotional response to identify with the underdog or in this case victim. Thinning the herd makes logical sense, until it’s you or someone you love that doesn’t make the cut. Then it’s barbaric and unfair.
In fact (yes I’m heading out on another tangent), I’ve found that any logical idea taken to an extreme is bound to end up at best as ludicrous, at worst as genocide. The secret of making things work, whether it’s political systems or baking, is always in the balance. Capitalism is not the great satan, but allowed to run riot without regulation it really does discount people in favor of cash. Actually, given the basic greedy nature of us funny, talking apes, almost any economic or political system gets overrun by greed sooner or later. It seems to be a fundamental characteristic of the species.
But build in some checks and balances that allow for the flawed nature of individuals, and almost any political or economic system can work – until someone finds a way around the rules. And someone is always looking for a way around the rules. Always. Hell, I’ve rolled through a couple of stop signs myself occasionally, and I fully believe in the traffic laws.
Anyway, this rambling post brought to you by a woman stuck at home waiting for a server to crash. Expect another pointless diatribe right around Christmas when I will once again be at home and on-call for days. Oh the joy.
