Friday, June 10, 2011

Stephen Hates Blogging (apparently)

Sorry gang. I haven't posted on here in a while. Maybe I should rephrase that. I've only posted on here twice. Ever. For all intents and purposes this isn't even a blog. This is a very brief collection of notes I compiled two months ago. I don't even remember why I started this anymore. Doesn't matter. That's water under the bridge. Monkey off the back. Salt over the shoulder. No skin off my person. Another shrimp on the Barbie. Et cetera. And/or. Ad infinitum.

The title of this blog post should be something about Ron Paul, because that's what I feel I need to write about. However, it would be disingenuous for me to jump in and start trying to post serious political commentary when I have not established any credibility, and I need to do a lot of convincing before anyone is going to believe that I am going to update this blog regularly. I'm probably the most skeptical.

I don't want to get people all excited about "Stephen the Intellectually Stimulating Blogger with a Penchant for Controversy, Honesty, and Ambivalence" and then disappear into the night. I should be dignified, and show you what it is to cry. I know and care what my heart is for. I want to change illusion into something real.

Regarding Ron Paul, I find myself unwittingly falling in line as a supporter again this time around, even though I have not been very involved in politics since 2008. I've started occasionally watching C-SPAN again, but I don't read the news, watch the news, and I've barely even been listening to NPR. A few years ago I would have been able to list off all the important topics of the day and tell you where I stand, and maybe even persuade your thinking. Now I'm vaguely aware that there's some underwear scandal, the Congress is probably in session, Obama is still the president, someone killed Osama Bin Laden a while back, and there are 10 to 15 Republicans running for president.

I discovered Ron Paul was one of those candidates from accidentally watching his announcement on C-SPAN in the break room at work. Up to that point, I thought Rand Paul was supposed to be the member of the Paul family that was running, or that maybe Ron Paul was endorsing Gary Johnson. Oh, look. I know the name Gary Johnson. He used to be Governor of New Mexico (I think). Libertarians like him. And he's running for president. So yeah. I know a couple of things.

Going into this, I see no way I could be as enthusiastic as I was in 2007. I'm old, jaded, work a 9-to-5 job, have a son, and I've become something of a realist. With that said, my problem with Ron Paul is still that he's generally too moderate, and I lean more anarchist than anything. If I've toned down my ideology at all, it should make me more inclined to like Ron Paul. But I don't know if that's the case yet. I hope he has grown in the past couple of years, with the birth of the "Tea Party" movement and with the changes that have taken place in the economy and across the political landscape. I will be more critical of him than I was way back in my naive early 20's.

That's all I have for now, since I still don't read the news. I'll let you know if and when I learn anything new. In general, not just on this topic.


Sunday, April 10, 2011

"Thank you all for being a threat."

I attended the Will Potter lecture at MonkeyWrench Books tonight, and am very glad I did. It had been a while since I had been to one of these sorts of events, and I always find them inspiring. The last thing I recall attending there was a discussion on the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act a while back, and I was not nearly as impressed. The discussion tonight, like the AETA discussion I went to over a year ago, was hosted by an animal rights activist, but in this case the speaker was also a well-spoken journalist.

To provide a little bit of background, Will Potter is a former Austinite who recently had a book published on the animal and earth liberation movements called Green is the New Red: An Insider's Account of a Social Movement Under Siege. In it, Will follows various members of the movement who have been victims of government surveillance, prosecution, and imprisonment (somewhat analogous to the "red scare" in the early to mid-20th Century that targeted suspected communists) and also provides analysis of the situation and ideas for the future.

After opening by reading a couple of excerpts from the book, Will spoke about the "green scare" in more general terms. He began by defining terrorism as “non-state violence,” and showed examples of the collusion between the federal government and large corporations in targeting "eco-terrorism." He painted a convincing picture of why this so-called “terrorism” has been so fiercely maligned. Unlike most that I've read and seen in the past on this subject, Will argued that the fear of animal and environmental rights activists is so strong not because of irrational fears of the left, but because of very rational, well-reasoned fears of the economic impact these activists are having. In other words, they fear us because we are winning.

Although Will did not mention this specifically, it got me thinking about how the public has often been supportive of animal liberation actions in the past, even among those who do not otherwise support the animal rights agenda. Tying this in with Will's examples of anti-green marketing in the media, I think it helps explain all the money put into large-scale campaigns against the animal rights movement. There has been a concerted effort to convince persons sympathetic to attacks on corporate profits to realign their thinking and view these actions as on par with violent forms of terrorism.

As an aside, I found myself somewhat distracted by Will's belt and shoes, which looked convincingly like leather. However, I decided to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume they were faux, based on his otherwise consistent animal rights knowledge, although he did not speak specifically to his veganism.

Because I bought a copy of the book, I hope to write in more detail my thoughts on his writing and the movement in the near future. Ideally, I will also be inspired to take a more active role in fighting for animal rights, but we'll see how that goes.

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Stephen Hates America

Dear Person,

So, I was telling a friend today that there's not a credible, mainstream news blog with an American focus and a left-wing anarchist slant. I forget what chide she offered for my ignorant and mostly facetious declaration, but now that I think about it, it might have been more of a chortle than a chide...

Chortles and chides aside, "Hi, I'm Stephen. This is a blog." Why am I writing this, you ask. Well, vanity for one. I like myself a lot and want everyone to like me too. Two, I want to eventually make money as a writer, and I feel that this topic is one I can write on infinitely and effortlessly, in a way that is informative, engaging, and entertaining.

This is the part where I describe what I intend to write and why I chose an inflammatory title for these textual musings. As I have established, I am vain, so I wanted a title with my name in it. I have decided that I came up with the statement unwittingly as an homage to Mike Wilson's 2004 documentary Michael Moore Hates America and the Westboro Baptist Church's well-known "God Hates America" slogan. However, in my case, I am adhering the label to myself. It is also different in my case because the statement is not true.

So, Stephen doesn't hate America? What is "America" anyway? Is it the culture? The government? The people? The terrain, climate, habitat, or unique details of the physical landscape? I do not hate any of these things on the whole, not overtly anyway. I may hate some aspects of some of these things some of the time (if I can really be said to "hate" anything), but for the most part I'm a lovable, likable, friendly guy.

In the days, weeks, months, and/or years that follow, prepare to be treated to pieces of literature that will make you laugh, cry, and think. Prepare to see heroes vilified and villains defended. I will attack power on principle, not necessarily out of carefully contrived merit. I may occasionally say things primarily to garner attention or make a larger point. I may disguise my own opinions to various ends.

If these things bother you, please read everything I write and comment with as much vitriol as possible. If you like what I have to say and tend to agree, you probably aren't reading enough books.

Thank you for your time,