Okay, so I'm feeling a little bureaucratic.
Back when I was stumbling through college, I earnestly tried to change the world with ideas. It was an idealistic time, sort of. On the one hand, I often felt like
Langdon Smith's cave man, whose crudely drawn encounter with a mammoth was meant to speak to others and make them understand why things were the way they were.
On the other, a major memory of freshman year was observing how the concept of "No finals!" trumped any other - and presumably more noble - reasons for shutting down the school in response to the shootings at Kent State and the invasion of Cambodia.
Maybe it wasn't so idealistic, after all.
In any event, I was fortunate in that my course load, while full, was not crushing (though I was an engineering major) and so I spent many early, late, and in-between hours reading Rand, Rothbard, Bastiat, von Mises, and others. Arguments for the cause of Liberty were pursued in pretty much the same time frames, mostly to deaf ears. For no matter how fervently I argued, no matter how avidly I wrote op-ed pieces for the college paper, I never could get away from the One Great Truth: Reasons rarely sway people; if anything, their reaction is to "dig in" even deeper into their intellectual foxholes, sandbagged with rock-hard premises.
"Check your premises." Isn't that what Ayn Rand kept repeating in
Atlas Shrugged? So very few people do that nowadays, mostly because the idea of a "premise" escapes them, but also because any relationship between premises, on the one hand, and thoughts and actions, on the other, is axiomatic and bears little, if any, relationship to reality and Rand's famous "A" (which, you will recall, is "A").
(No, this is not anywhere near the same thing as trying to parse a sentence to figure out what the meaning of "is" is. Shame on you. Go read the book! :^)And so, soon after graduation, I withdrew from the debate and lived my life quietly, avoiding idiotarians whose one sole mission in life was to spread their words to anyone with eardrums, and to make up in vitriol and ardor what their arguments lacked in sense and logic.
Though withdrawn, I could not escape the role of spectator to all that happened (and didn't) in the world. I felt sorrow as I took in the fall of Saigon. I held my breath when one man in a white shirt stood in front of a column of armor in Tienanmen Square. I cheered when the Berlin Wall came down and I've walked in Red Square with the Russian tricolor waving over the Kremlin.
In the course of all of this, it occurred to me that the level of public discourse had deteriorated over the past few decades. The idiotarians have gotten louder. Indeed, had the global environment followed the intellectual climate, we'd be living - if at all - on a barren, inhospitable planet where Life would sputter a quiet defiance of the long sleep in the occasional hidden oasis.
But the Internet is a wonderful thing.
(Thank you, Albert.) Should it survive the predations of commercial interests eager to hijack the medium and turn it into a fancy form of television (with all of the concomitant bennies... for them), it may represent yet another "great equalizer" (the first one was due to Sam Colt, remember?).
So, having reached that stage in life where, with the kids mostly gone and the warranty beginning to expire on various body parts, I am again reminded of a line from
The Bridge on the River Kwai, which I posted in this LiveJournal
a long time ago on the occasion of the passing of Alec Guiness, who played the part of Col. Nicholson in the film, but which is worth reposting now.
In the scene I'm recalling, the senior British prisoner of war, Col. Nicholson, stands with his captor Saito on the completed bridge and says:
But there are times when suddenly, you realize you're nearer the end than the beginning... and you wonder - you ask yourself - what the sum total of your life represents... what difference your being there at any time made to anything... or if it made any difference at all, really... particularly in comparison with other men's careers. I don't know whether that kind of thing's very healthy, but I must admit I have some thoughts on those lines from time to time.
I, too, now entertain such thoughts from time to time and, like Johnnie Rico's father in Robert Heinlein's
Starship Troopers, "I [have] at last found out what was wrong with me."
It's been a certain diffidence in engaging people in debate, as I stuck to producing and consuming and playing the role of economic animal, just as Rico's father did before he scratched his itch.
There's more to life, and there are things that must be said.
So, with regard to the resolution that reads, "I avoid ... useless political discussions," please note that my definition of "useless" has been refurbished.
Cheers...