On the Interview's Eve

Thinking on tomorrow
A host of possible outcomes
They settle not on my mind,
But amidst the hara

Deep breaths expel
the negative remnants of the lesser me
Like November leaves they fly,
And the clarity of fall fills my soul

One good suit in the back of my closet
hides like the doe in the oaken grove
I drape it over and imagine buckskin—
A cloak of confidence in a threatening world

An overpriced tie, all stripes and paisleys
The salesman said it was for “power”
I’m not naïve to believe all that is implied
God and I will make my own destiny

A rust bucket of a truck,
sails over the glassy sea of tarmac
I wonder if it will start
when I am to make my victorious return.

What does it matter after all
whether or not I am to succeed?
I would disappear into the shadows
of a world not confronted by the burden of achievement

Is a measure of devaluing currency
worth a lifetime of treading concrete?
Loam between bare toes appeals to
the untamed and unwashed self

When I speak to the interviewer
with words intended to persuade
I wonder if it is not society
who has in the end beguiled me?

Waging War Against the Blight of Drugs and Alcohol

About once a month I get into an argument with someone about the legalization of drugs. Partially this is because I frequent circles that are inhabited by both Republicans and Libertarians. Inevitably, my Libertarian friends will regurgitate the platitude that the government should have no control over your personal life. I am sympathetic to this viewpoint, but I must contest their logic. In the case of drugs, there are extenuating circumstances.

In today's time of Tea Party politics and Libertarian fervor the topic of freedom is trendy. Boiled down, all of politics is really about how much freedom we should have. This brings into question where I fit in the political spectrum. I've had people (and tests) tell me that I am a Republican, Conservative or a Libertarian. In truth? This matters little. For my purposes, I am going to call myself a "Sensible" Libertarian.

Why the superlative? Because I believe in the following level of liberty;

Every person should have all conceivable liberty is his or her life up until said liberty threatens the well-being of others.

It is a proven fact that drugs alter your ability to control your actions. The extent of this phenomena is wide-ranging, depending on the drug in question. While marijuana may debilitate your reflexes and decision-making ability, hard drugs may very well lead you to kill someone in order to support your habit. At this point I am certain that there are recreational drug users reading this very post and disagreeing with my last observation. Look it up! NO. Don't trust your personal experience. That is not logical. If a drug really does alter your consciousness, how would you know that it didn't by taking it? According to the Office of National Drug Control Policy (http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/publications/pdf/Marijuana.pdf), marijuana has the following effects: "distorted perceptions, impaired coordination,
difficulty in thinking and problem solving and problems with learning and memory... increased rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts, and schizophrenia". If you experience these symptoms you are undoubtedly a threat to not only yourself, but to the people around you.

What is more, ONDCP also points out that since 1998 the potency of seized marijuana has doubled. ONCP further mentions that the 2009 National Survey on Drug Use and Health found that 16.7 million people used marijuana in the month preceding the survey. Keep in mind, this is a self-reported statistic. The actual usage of this drug likely far exceeds this number. As I write this, media sources are indicating that California's Proposition 19, which would legalize marijuana in the state, has failed(http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/proposition-19-results-california-votes-reject-marijuana-measure/story?id=12037727, http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1110/44590.html).

I often encounter proponents of drug legalization that cite two defenses to my argument. The first defense is to point out that we allow personal ownership of firearms and that firearms are considerably more dangerous than drugs. This is a shallow and illogical defense. Firearms do not cause accidents, nor do they cause people to harm other people. Firearms are simply tools. The same logic that would ban firearms would also ban steak knives, sharp sticks and panes of glass. If a person picks up a firearm, he or she is not suddenly possessed by the perverse desire to wantonly commit violence and destruction. Conversely, the usage of a drug well may subvert the rational capacity of the human mind and lead to acts that directly harm other individuals. Whereas a firearm is a tool, a drug is a disabling agent. I would like to point to the fact that if I purchase and use $10,000 worth of firearms I will not necessarily harm myself or my fellow man. However, I purchase and use $10,000 worth of a given drug, I most certainly will leave a wake of harm.

The second defense brings alcohol into the dialogue. According to a recent study alcohol is in fact, the most harmful drug (http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/01/alcohol.harm/index.html?eref=rss_us&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_us+%28RSS%3A+U.S.%29&utm_content=Google+Reader). I have some faith in this decision, but I have not read the actual scientific article, nor examined in-depth the criteria by which these drugs were ranked. Regardless, the consumption of alcohol can be dangerous. So then, am I a prohibitionist? Perhaps not, but I am a teetotaller. I can find no just reason to encourage any person to drink. Drinking has never solved a personal problem and has never resulted in a positive long-term outcome in someone's life. Because of this, I am an advocate of temperance. At this point my critics will suggest that I either allow for the legalization of drugs or support the ban of alcohol. I will do no such thing. By legalizing drugs we would only encourage negative behavior and by prohibiting alcohol we would only encourage the criminal enterprise.

What then, is the solution? Education and moderation! Very rarely are those two things not the solution to a problem! We must educate the public about the dangers of the consumption of alcohol. According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism the immoderate usage of alcohol can lead to: difficulty walking, blurred vision, slurred speech, slowed reaction times, impaired memory, brain damage, and liver disease (http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa63/aa63.htm). This does not even begin to describe the crippling psychological effects of alcohol.

One of things that bothers me most is society's view on alcohol. Too many people see it as a "social lubricant", as a personality enhancer, or as an escape mechanism. What is worse, we have structured our society in such a way that it is difficult for the teetotaler to participant in healthy social interaction. We have brought an unhealthy, disabling habit into the mainstream and made it acceptable. I find it disturbing when people tell me that alcohol makes it easier for them to be themselves. What this really tells me is that they are uncomfortable in their own skin and that their behavioral filters are such that they are incapable of expressing themselves effectively. Alcohol is not a solution to this problem. Rather, we should encourage self-confidence in our peers by listening to them and by actively engaging them in meaningful discussion. We must fundamentally change what we value in a person as a society in order to do this. Consider for a moment reality television. Based on it, what is it that society values? Lewdness? Idiocy? Repulsive behavior? We now see that the problem with drugs is not just a physical one or an economic one, but a philosophical one. We must strive for a more complex evaluation of what is good in a person. We must seek the inner light in our companions and bask in that glow, not in the distributing facade that is created by the narcotic or the liquor.


Find the true value in people by dedicating yourself to knowing their natural beauty preserved in their inner-spirit.

On Finding (and Keeping) the Kindred Spirits

It is 2:00 A.M. on a Thursday night. I don't have class tomorrow (thankfully), but there is no real reason why I should be up. I am awake largely because I have been thinking. Many college students, like myself, would be shutting down the bars about now. In recent days I've asked myself, why not do the same? Why not use that means to broaden my network of friends? You see, things change once you graduate from college. Friends that once were as thick as thieves move off, live their lives, and become pleasant memories. That, for me, is a tough pill to swallow. I suppose that it would be naive of me to think that anything else would happen, but I did regardless. Again, I am the begrudging slave to nostalgia.

Perhaps what has deprived me of sleep most is the sense that I have missed out on spectacular opportunities. I refer specifically to those opportunities to deepen and improve such bygone friendships. In looking back on my undergraduate years it is apparent that I had the blessing of being friends (sometimes only an acquaintance) with a host of truly exceptional individuals. It is an unforgivable shame that for many our friendship have withered and all but died. One must not allow such rare gifts to lay fallow in the field!

Now, having "conquered" my undergraduate goals I am in quite a different position. Freer, perhaps, but less socially capable due to my somewhat limited exposure to new social groups. All of my life I have been a proponent of quality over quantity---the Taurus, the ISTJ, the traditionalist. Yet now it seems that those quality relationships that I so gladly nurtured have been whisked away on a southernly wind. What is the thinking man to do?

I mentioned previously the consideration of taking a foray into the bar scene. I say that knowing well that such an affair would be a lost cause. My biases and my dislikes run far too deep for any real attempt at such. No, I will always dislike the drunkard, the crowded room, the coarse individual and the stench of cigarette smoke. No amount of nostalgia will ever change that.

The viable alternative is then the religious group. But, again, this poses some problems as well. While I have never felt truly unwelcomed by any Christian organization, the comfort level certainly varies. With any group (religious groups are no exception) there are always expectations to be met. Most of them are apparent, but many others are unspoken and bear the true weight of acceptance. Christians are for the most part a loving lot and one that is well-intentioned. I preface this next statement by saying that is does not apply to all such groups. They also can a be a cliquish, judging lot. I have participated in numerous such groups throughout my life and while some were indeed enjoyable and productive, many compromised the person for the sake of the Christian. What I mean by this is that one could not discern the true personality of the individuals in the group, rather, they were reflective of the group-think of the establishment.

In retrospect it appears that I have alienated both the social drinkers and the conservative Christians in this article. That certainly wasn't my intention. But the question still remains, what is the thinking man (or woman) to do? Are the days of the intellectual-social group all but gone from our society?

Having lived in a city of five years now I am well aware that my days of continual wilderness rambling have all but disappeared. There will be no more basking in the grandeur of the wilderness every day. Such a pleasantry makes solitude not only tolerable, but enjoyable. This is not the case of the city life. One may very well sit under the bows of a pine and hear the secrets of life pass o'er until the sun bids adieu, but the same person cannot do such in an apartment devoid of the beauty of nature.

Fundamentally, I feel that my problems boils down to two aspects of my personality: (1) a radically different perception of value than my peers and (2) an unwillingness to compromise on those things that I believe strongly about. Whether that makes me a philosopher or a fool I will not speculate, but it does put me in an unique situation.

One half-hour later, I still don't have the answers that I sought to find. Such answers never do come easily. Yet, the process of self-exploration through writing holds a great value to any person who observes life through the lens of self-reflection. Until next time,

Be true to your work, your word, and your friend.