One of the recurring challenges that I face in my efforts to organize politically is that many of the people with whom I associate are proud individualists.  I find this makes for many interesting personalities, and I respect and embrace that the idea of liberty encourages us to each seek our own path.  I enjoy meeting people who have their own reasons for doing things, but sometimes, it makes it harder to work together.

One of the big questions that we face, though we rarely phrase it as clearly as this is whether or not we should be more concerned with individual rights or collective needs.  We don't exist in either extreme in most cases, but I've learned that one reason why people on the left tend to be able to pull people together better is because they naturally accept the idea of banding together for a cause, for a mutual benefit that is not always congruent with each person involved.

I'm not a collectivist.  I understand the mentality that you need to be aware of everyone, and what is happening to them, but I cannot get past the idea that it is up to people take responsibility for themselves as much as possible.  Most of the people I know feel the same way.  The problem is that this leads to people thinking that if we just let people do their own things, situations get resolved.  It isn't like that.

Sometimes, you need organization and teamwork.  Sometimes, you need to work collectively to achieve goals.  I spend hours each day working at this question of how we get people working on the same page, people who are happy to do their own thing, realizing that unless we use our abilities in at least some common pursuits, we can work as hard or as much as we want, and we will find laws come into being that simply force policies we don't like because we were too busy being ourselves.
 
 
I get almost all of my news through the internet.  For years, I've found the standard cable television outlets almost unwatchable, and inefficient at best.  But the thing that has come to surprise me greatly is just how often I find myself reading stories from foreign journalists to learn about what is happening here in America.

For whatever reason, it seems that the media here have taken an almost sycophantic view of the administrations that are in office.  The extent to which celebrity worship goes on with the Obama Administration is almost sickening, as the reporters wanted to create a story and proceeded to do so.  That said, for as much as there is a liberal bias in some quarters, I recognize that George W. Bush also had a free pass in other areas.

Whether there is opposition or not, what I've noticed is that the depth and quality of reporting seems almost entirely governed by the biases and opinions of the people involved, and has only a passing observation of facts, trends, and the larger implications of what is happening.  To simply report events is something for which news agencies are hardly needed, and I think this is why you see blogs doing so well.  If you're only looking for someone to tell you what you want to hear, it's easy to find that in a million places all over the net.

I would like to see more articles that made people think instead of pandering to the idea that people want news entertainment.  I don't need to see Paris Hilton, Brett Favre, or hear the same story a billion times.  Once upon a time, journalism was a serious profession.  If it doesn't want to become completely obsolete, it better rediscover that in a hurry.
 
 
As a historian, one thought that both amuses and frightens me is to imagine how the founders of this nation would be seen in the eyes of today's media.  It is humbling to think that they stood up, essentially, and said no more at the threat of such impositions as taxes on stamps, sugar, and tea, declaring that they would bond together in sacred honor to prevent these unjust impositions.  Our politicians and teachers celebrate that with the reverence only given those safely dead, but can you think for just a moment for what they might say today:

They would be seen as anarchic extremists, standing up against our beloved government (which has somehow become synonymous with our nation) who was only seeking to regulate us for our own protection.  Their threat of violence would be considered sociopathic, their political views odious, and I daresay, a majority of people would accuse them of trying to steal from them what the government freely gives.  We know that it really isn't free; it is either taken from somewhere else or simply made into creation at all our expense, but this is how the story would go.

It saddens me greatly to think of this.  The wonderful and truly exceptional thing about America is that as a nation of immigrants, our one shared heritage across the generations is that we all came here because we were running from something else.  Whatever the name of the system, we left a place where government did not allow opportunities within society and came here for the opportunity to forge our own destinies.  We were the frontier, whether it be farms in the west, or the Moon in the sky.  We were the bastion, standing for liberty and hope to all people.  We were proud and we were free.

Now, I don't know.  Truthfully, I'm not sure what Americans want.  I think it is entirely possible, maybe because we have been here too long and forgotten our own history, that people are embracing the idea of a state that cares for everything from cradle to grave.  I tend to believe most people who support this view do so with the very best of intentions, wanting to see people cared for in a way that I completely sympathize with, but at the cost and with the desire of allowing our government to determine what is acceptable, required, and will be enforced.

I am not a person who thinks or desires that we roll back the clock two hundred years.  People have come to expect the state to serve certain roles, and it would simply not be practicible to go back to the frontier land where anyone could do anything.  We have too many people who have been systematized for that.  But what we need to have is a conversation about what America will be in this young century.

We can choose to be a nation of liberty, of equality under law, of opportunity without undue intervention, and where rights and responsibilities come in equal measure; or we can choose to be a nation of security, where government protects us from ourselves and our neighbors, where we force economic equality, have set social goals, and where we have an ever expanding list of rights that become prescriptions to be followed.  My language is stark but warranted because as the founders well understood once you cede the authority to make decisions to the state, that is a power that will never be returned to the citizens.

Within those two very different frames, there is always room for discussion about policy about how we can realize those goals.  I am not someone who believes government is always bad; sometimes it helps people greatly.  But, I think we should always focus on the idea that we don't want people relying upon government, and we don't want government telling us what to do, what to think, or how to act.  We have it as a necessity to manage our relations with other nations, and with each other.  I would rather choose to trust we can find solutions to our problems together than have some governmental authority make those choices.

I have friends tell me I am an unrealistic idealist.  They may be right; but I guess it comes down to how you view human nature.  I know too many people who accept the idea that the only way we can successfully co-exist is through taking care of people who have chosen not to take care of themselves and who simply will not be able to do so.  Recognizing there are a few exceptions, I choose to believe that our nature is such that when given the chance to make more of ourselves, that is when we reveal the human genius and when we find a way to overcome, to build something stronger, and to work with one another.  Our nation could not exist if this was false, and it is in that view of humanity that I find hope.
 
 
Rules allow us to make sense of our world so that when we don't know what we are doing, we can follow the rule and make what should be a better informed decision than we might through ignorance alone.  A sound principle, but one that begins to get tested as rules turn into laws, mandates that remove sensible action and replace that thoughtful deliberation with formal procedure.  Politics, and parties in particular, are rife with this foolishness.

The City of Pittsburgh is having a mayoral race this year.  The heavily favored incumbent Democrat, also, through the artifice of a write-in campaign, is on the Republican ticket.  Even though his policies run counter to all that the GOP theoretically supports, the committee people seem unwilling to stand in opposition because he followed the rules.  This is absurdity, and is one of the continuing reasons why people rightfully don't trust parties.  When bylaws replace sense, and laws replace judgment, then our process is truly broken.

For all the reservations that it sometimes brings me, I continue to work within the party for the moment because I take a flexible view of our relationship.  I will not support anyone whose views I do not like.  I will support, regardless of party, ideas and people moving in the right direction.  I have no intention of ever smiling when I see crap and saying that I am simply a "party guy".  But, we need organization, and we need people who will come forward with new ideas and vision for the future that is compelling.  Parties can help with that.

We need a party that represents conscience over protocol.  Republicans have lost their own base because the conservatives and fiscally responsible people out there are tired of being force fed this crap about what is necessary according to the rules of some other.  Vote your mind, show your heart, and give people something to believe.
 
 
I woke up today to some disappointing but entirely unsurprising news.  One thing that I have been following closely is the qucikly accelerating decline of the US Dollar.  With new suggestions from the UN that we should abandon our currency as the global reserve currency and the hints that the Gulf States are looking to move away from accepting American money for oil, our economy is in for a substantial setback.

The saddest thing is that I cannot even blame these nations and institutions for wanting to move away from this basis.  With debt now surpassing 10 trillion dollars, a series of administrations that continue to spend without even the pretense of accounting for those expenditures, it makes perfect sense to me why others would not want to be taken along for this wild ride.  Sadly, I think things are going to get worse long before they get better.

For the pragmatists out there, gold will continue to rise as the dollar continues to plummet.  If you have your assets or investments in dollar based securities, I'd strongly recommend a re-evaluation of your portfolio.
 
 
As usual, there are entirely too many things to do and far too little time to complete them all.  I've been enjoying a brief vacation from my usual busy political calendar, but I think that is coming to an end.

I'm excited about the next project:  a group of people and I are working to build a local newsletter/blog to help strengthen the grassroots, build connections with the party, reach new readership, and help our own people become more skilled at expressing their thoughts for people to read.  Our central emphases will be these three themes:  personal responsibility, individual liberty, and limited government.

The particularly interesting thing about this project is that we are inviting people who share a host of opinions, which should lead to healthy discussion and debate.  I'm hoping to bring others to become aware of what is happening, and the important issues ahead.  As this progresses, I'll be sure to share more information.