Author: Karol

Before I begin, if you’re a US citizen then register to vote. Between the registration deadline and voting day you might have a change of heart. There are lots of places to check if you’re registered and they can help you if you’re not. Here’s one: https://plz.vote/r/1qfe6k

Depending on how many years you’ve been following along you may or may not know that I don’t always vote. Did I ever regret it? Let’s break it down by year.

2000: I voted for Bush. Regret. (Although I don’t think he’s a horrible person and he’s multitudes better than the current Republican choice.)

2004: I didn’t vote. Regret.

2008: I voted for Obama. Best voting decision thus far. (Although not great because I made down ballot mistakes.)

2012: I didn’t care and didn’t vote. Regret more so for the down ballot than the president. I think Mitt Romney probably would have made an alright president even if he lets his ideology make some of his decisions for him.

I can say three things based on my voting record:

1) I’m not registered to a party, I don’t vote based on party lines, and didn’t believe Democrats were inherently better or worse than Republicans.
2) I will now always vote, including mid-term elections, from here on out. Regret is a feeling I’d like to minimize in my life.
3) Not voting or voting for a third party is a wasted vote, no matter how anybody spins it.

Let’s tackle number three. The problem with third party voting is that it doesn’t change anything. If you haven’t voted locally for third parties. If you haven’t supported third parties in smaller campaigns and gotten them *elected*. Then pretending like you want to fix a broken system at the top is something you’ve sold yourself.

And I know the feeling, because it’s exactly how I felt in 2012 when I considered voting third party and ultimately decided against it. “Fuck it. This system doesn’t work. I’m opting out.”

I was wrong. I was wrong. I was wrong.

The system does work, but it’s imperfect. We’ve been fixing those imperfections for years and we’ll continue to do so for years to come. Imperfection is okay.

What I didn’t want to admit to myself, and maybe you’re in this boat, is that there is nuance to government just like there is nuance to my own life. (I’ll venture to guess that nobody thinks their lives are perfect, even if they’re great.)

If you’re for Trump (and many people I know are) well, there’s nothing I can do except to say that’s disheartening and I hope you won’t regret the vote like I’ve regretted some of my past votes.

This is for those of you thinking about sitting it out or going Johnson or Stein (or other).

I like Johnson. In any other year he would be a decent choice for Republicans. But it’s not any other year. Among other things, the Republican controlled Senate has refused to do their jobs and our Supreme Court has been short handed for longer than is acceptable. (My regret: I helped put some of those folks in office with my non-vote.) But it’s also different because Trump is the Republican nominee and you already know how terrible he is or you probably wouldn’t be thinking about voting third party.

By nearly every objective measure Clinton/Kaine is a better choice for the majority of people. Imperfect? Sure. Best choice? Definitely. If you voted for and liked Obama, well this year’s ticket is even more progressive. To be honest, as a classical liberal, I prefer things to be in the center, but there’s that nuance again. Centrism is a somewhat utopian vision that I don’t suspect will ever come to pass. So I’ll take progressiveness over regressiveness any day, even if I’m not fully on board with all of it.

And you can say what you want about Secretary Clinton, because she’s surely not without faults, but in non-voting years her Republican counterparts had a lot of great things to say about her. She has done a fine job working across party lines. More than that, even this year many well known Republicans are voting for her. It’s actually unprecedented how many folks are crossing party lines to vote for Clinton/Kaine.

I try as much as possible to be on the right side of history. Divisiveness, racism, bigotry, nationalism, and religious privilege/entitlement are the types of things I thought (hoped, anyway) that we were finally moving passed.

If you want to see what it’s like when a country’s people succumb to those feelings again you can look around at what has happened in elections and referendums around the world.

For example, in Poland just on Monday millions of women protested for abortion rights. Poland already has some of the most restrictive women’s rights in the world and it might get worse before it gets better. How many of these same women voted in an anti-abortion right wing ruling party in last year’s elections? A lot of them. I personally know a few who now regret that vote.

Your vote (and non or third party vote) has consequences. If you don’t want Trump to be our president, but you don’t vote or you vote third party, you will regret your vote just like I’ve regretted some of mine. I assure you you’ll look back in a few years and think, “god dammit why was I so young and dumb and full of rum? Why did I care so much about my own precious little feelsies and refrain from making a difficult choice so I could claim to protect my supposed conscience?”

Thanks for reading. If nothing else I hope I’ve made a reasonable case for registering to vote so you’re ready to go on Nov 8. (Registration deadlines are coming up fast.)

Update (Thursday Oct 6): 30 former Republican congressmen denounced Trump today in an open letter and say they will not vote for him. It just keeps coming.

Update (Friday Oct 7): Fuck Donald Trump. Deplorable, indeed.

When trying to solve a societal problem (X) I like to ask myself two questions.

1. How can I solve X in a way that will help me?
2. How can I solve X in a way that will also help everybody else?

If we’re being intellectually honest we must admit that we look out for ourselves — I would probably include immediate family here as well — first. I don’t think anybody will dispute that.

It seems it often stops there for a lot of people. I’m specifically referring to the far right and far left here but any views that are the extreme can likely be included.

The second question is a tough one. What does “everybody else” mean? Because some (most?) solutions probably can’t help everybody. So another way to look at the question is, “What won’t harm others?” or “What will do the least harm to others?”

This is why the best way to handle topics such as gay marriage, abortion rights, healthcare, welfare, GMOs, immigration, and more becomes clearer to me. It’s not that they’re black and white issues, but there is often a solution that is both best for me (“what I want”) and best for everybody else (“what they want”).

This is also why I don’t identify with so many of my friends and family on the far left or far right. Their solutions, while not objectively terrible, are often skewed to looking out only for those specifically like them. And sometimes, due to lack of knowledge but strong opinions, their solutions aren’t even what’s best for them anyway. I can’t fault them for lack of knowledge, of course. (Can I fault them for strong opinions based on lack of knowledge? Good question. I don’t know.)

Let’s take an example: healthcare.

What I want

I don’t want to worry about debt or bankruptcy if I get sick. I’m a citizen of the wealthiest nation in the world and I feel like it would be nice to be taken care of if something goes wrong. I don’t have a problem if I have to pay for insurance. I have a problem worrying that I’ll be denied “covered” treatment because my insurance company isn’t good. I have a problem being overcharged treatment because of lack of transparency. I have a problem with being denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition.

What they want

The far left: comprehensive healthcare for all, paid for by additional taxes on the wealthy (among other ways)

The far right: everybody for themselves, pay for it or don’t get it

Solution

Let the folks on the right have their private doctors, private hospitals, and private insurance. Let the folks on the left not worry about having their lives ruined because of an accident or illness.

Now, I know that’s simplistic, and it’s not yet even a solution. It’s more like the seed of a solution. I’ve written a longer essay specifically on this topic that I’ll try to post soon.

But it starts there, with two questions. Getting me what I want, and also getting others what they want.

I know it’s possible. Although the divisiveness I’m seeing in politics is going to make it difficult for these types of solutions to see the light of day any time soon. But history shows that we will move towards fairness, even if things are unfair in the present and near future.

###

A previous version of this essay stated that the left wants “free healthcare for all.” I’ve updated it because that is not technically true. Also changed the sentence, “I don’t have a problem paying for healthcare” to “I don’t have a problem if I have to pay for insurance” because it’s more to my point.

A small break from all the seriousness around here. I’ve been wanting to shoot (and learn to edit) more video, but all I have is a Nexus 5 I bought in 2013 along with a tiny tripod. I usually use that as an excuse. The biggest issue isn’t actually the camera — because it takes decent video — but the fact that I don’t have lighting. I did my best sitting next to a window and using natural light. I also have an old computer — 2010 Macbook Air — and iMovie is slow and difficult when editing. Outputting this 7 minute video in HD took over an hour. Yikes!

Educational resources from this video

Spirytus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectified_spirit

Freezing point depression: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freezing-point_depression

100ml = ~3.4 ounces

I wasn’t sure how the last e-mail and essay I wrote would go over. As you can probably imagine, when you’re writing about a dogma — specifically, religion — it can go over poorly.

But, although the unsubscribe rate to the e-mail list was double the norm, the response was overwhelmingly positive. Including from people who didn’t agree with me.

That’s how it should be.

I’m wrong all the time. If I didn’t regularly seek out people (not just friends, but books, blogs, and other media) I disagreed with I’d never know when I was wrong. And then I’d never change my mind about my own beliefs or ideas. I can’t think of a worse way to live life than pretending to never be wrong and, as a result, never changing my mind. (Aside: this is why it infuriates me that people consider politicians who “flip flop” as unworthy of office. I want my representatives to change their minds based on the evidence!)

That doesn’t mean that every time I see something I disagree with it changes my mind, of course. What it does is help me understand the other point of view. And the most important question I can ask myself then is, “is it possible I’m the one who’s wrong here?” Sometimes I am, sometimes I’m not.

One of the saddest aspects of growing up in the suburbs is that suburbs are cultural dead zones. For example, I didn’t have non-white friends growing up. Sure, I had friends from other countries or other denominations of the same religion I was being raised in, but that’s not enough. Homogeny does not build a well-rounded character or empathy or compassion.

When I finally went to University in Detroit and befriended an Indian guy, and a Muslim guy, and a black guy, and a gay guy, it had a profound impact on me. I’m sad I didn’t keep up those friendships — I’m bad at keeping in touch with people, mostly because I’m a very hands-off type friend and people read that as something other than what it is — but they all had an effect on me.

It wasn’t until I saw my friend being tailed by security at a store just because of his skin color that I realized, “oh, wow, that is a real problem, isn’t it? I’ve quite literally never been followed by security and this happens to him daily? That’s not right.”

It wasn’t until a friend couldn’t legally marry his boyfriend that I learned that we didn’t all actually have equal rights and if I’m not part of the solution then I’m part of the problem. Being quiet about injustice is about as bad as vocally supporting injustice. (Which is why some of the best voices in the church state separation cause are the religious folks who are vocal about upholding that part of the constitution.)

It wasn’t until a friend went through emotional upheaval because she got pregnant, didn’t want children, was not in a position to care for a child, and did not want anything to do with the “sperm donor” that I learned that women need more support in these situations to do whatever they feel is best. Abortion is a completely valid option in many situations and whether it’s legal or not it will often be done anyway. But if it’s legal it’s less burdensome on the individual and the community. (Example: many women in Poland get abortions, but since it’s illegal here they have to go to Czech or Germany and be secretive about it for fear of repercussions. Or they do it in a dangerous “backroom” style because they can’t afford a trip to Czech or Germany.)

And it wasn’t until a friend who worked two minimum wage jobs and went to school full time, but was on food stamps because she didn’t come from a nice family that would or could help support her, that I learned that most people on welfare are probably not lazy bums trying to take advantage of the system. Does it hurt me if a small percentage of my taxes go to a system that helps my friends and a lot of other people? I don’t see how it does.

These are all things I’d heard about, of course, but they were kind of just concepts. They weren’t real until I saw they were real. And sometimes my previous thoughts about these matters were in complete opposition to what they are now.

This is why I’m happy to be friends with people who I disagree with, even staunchly. That’s not to say I won’t be upset if I feel they’re doing something detrimental to themselves or others. And it’s not to say that we’ll ever come to agreement on certain ideas. But if we’ve done it right then in the course of our friendship I’ll learn something that will change my mind and hopefully they will, too.

I saw “war on Christmas” type things one too many times last month and it prompted me to write the following e-mail. I scheduled it to be sent on Christmas Day, but backed out and deleted it from my e-mail software a few minutes before it was to be sent. I sent myself a copy before I did that so all is not lost. And I guess it’s kind of appropriate that I am posting this on Epiphany or Three Kings’ Day, one of many religious holidays where Poland shuts down. Don’t worry, I made channa masala yesterday so we won’t go hungry.

Here is that e-mail in its entirety, text unedited. (I’d really like to edit it, because I didn’t make my point as well as I’d have liked, but here it is. Additional text afterwards.)

Start E-mail

Subject: happy xmas, war is over?

Body:

Happy holidays! haha, jk

Merry Christmas if you’re into that. And happy birthday to me.*

Too many people seem to think I hate Christmas. I actually quite enjoy the holiday season! The lights and parties and vibes are generally fun. I also like mulled wine and roasted chestnuts as much as the next bloke. What I don’t like is the trend of buying junk for the sake of buying junk and I buy into that game as little as possible. A feeling of obligation makes for the worst reason to do almost anything.

I really like Niall Doherty’s gift ideas here. (Also, big thanks to Niall for letting us stay in his Amsterdam flat while he’s away for the holidays!)

Anyway, if you watch Fox News or lots of other media in the US you’re maybe under the impression that there is a war on Christmas. (Sorry I’m so US-centric, but I’m an American and 90% of my readership is as well. So it’s what I know best and can most effectively comment on.)

The alleged war on Christmas, to people who don’t live in the US and progressive people who do live in the US, is simply silly.

Let’s look at this pragmatically. According to Pew 70% of the US population is Christian. That means 30% (~95 million people) don’t share the Christian worldview.

But more than 90% of the US Congress is made up of Christians. These are the people who make and pass the laws of the land. They are a large majority no matter the political party. Comparitively, non-christians have essentially no say and governmental Christians are trusted to do what’s best for everybody in the US (if it wasn’t clear that includes the 95 million people who don’t share their views), no matter color, gender, faith, or lack of faith. (They regularly don’t do what’s best if it doesn’t fit their belief system, in case that wasn’t obvious.)

Where is the war?

Objectively, rationally, speaking there is absolutely no war on Christmas. There is a David vs Goliath (wink wink!) style battle on Christian privilege, though. And I’m on the frontlines with my proverbial slingshot. You’re allowed to believe what you want, of course, but you can’t use your beliefs to negatively — particularly un-Constitutionally — affect other people’s lives. If you think and act like you can you’re just not a nice person, are you? (Many would say you’re not Christ-like at all.)

The issue for me isn’t about being insensitive or that “people are too quick to be offended” like the majority privileged class tells themselves in their echo chambers. Ironically, that is mostly stated by people who are offended when their own beliefs and privileges are questioned.

And so, the war on Christmas is really just people getting upset that they’re barely — just barely — starting to lose their unwarranted privileges.

Let’s look at some other ways the war on Christmas is made up and “Happy Holidays” is the correct way to be:

1) Do you wish anybody a happy birthday for weeks leading up to their birthday? Probably not. Because it would be silly. So you wish them a happy birthday on their … wait for it … birthday! Since Christmas is exactly one day (or two, if you’d like) isn’t it silly to say Merry Christmas on days that are not Christmas? Rhetorical question, but the answer is yes, yes it is silly.

2) There are other holidays other than Christmas in late November and through December. Hannukkah lasts eight times longer than Christmas. Shouldn’t you be telling everybody you see Happy Hannukkah instead? I mean, that holiday is actually happening during those 8 days, and Christmas is absolutely not happening during those 8 days. There’s a war on Hannukkah, I tell ya.

Or …

Isn’t it easier to lump all these ideas together during the long December holiday season and just say, “Happy Holidays!”

Isn’t it more kind to be inclusive instead of divisive?

Isn’t it more fun to make people feel good and wanted and respected instead of reminding them that you’re the majority and they’re the minority and your life enjoys extra privileges?

We’re appalled by the sad parts of history (e.g. slavery) and the incorrect parts of history (e.g. geocentrism) and it’s a good exercise to think about what people hundreds or thousands of years from now will think was sad or wrong about us.

As information spreads, as education evolves, and as technology advances I prefer to be on the correct side of history as best I can. What about you?

###

My Favorites of 2015 post is almost ready for Monday (Dec 28) so watch for that.

Happy Holidays from Amsterdam!

Love,

–Karol

P.S. I’ve been reading the Qur’an this month. I felt it was time to study something other than Christianity for a while. Muslims and Christians worship the same god so I guess it’s not a huge stretch, though.

*Just kidding. Christmas Day is not my birthday. And you know who else wasn’t born on Christmas Day? ;)

End E-mail

I probably should have defined “war on Christmas” in that e-mail. In traditional and social media it’s presented as both a war on the word “Christmas” and also a war against Christianity. But no matter how you define this alleged war it’s not the reality we live in.

So why didn’t I send it?

First, I didn’t want to deal with the possible backlash while my wife and I were on vacation. I did a good job of not being angry or attacking, and using the facts and reality, but it’s easy to misrepresent words when they’re not what you want to see or hear. Especially if you feel you’re being put on ideological defensive. Which I also tried to make sure I didn’t do. Although, on further reflection, the David vs Goliath and birthday parts possibly fail that.

Second, there’s the issue of most of my friends and family — dozens of whom read my site and e-mails (hi, y’all) — being some denomination of Christian and I didn’t want to put even a small damper in their Christmas Day festivities. I was actually thinking, “nah, they won’t be checking e-mail on Christmas Day, will they?” Then I remembered the times we live in. So, while an e-mail — now a blog post — like this isn’t as effective when it’s sent in January, I think it’s still effective enough.

Interesting, isn’t it? That I feel the need to censor myself and hold back? Even right now I’m nervous about publishing this publicly. If you’re religious do you hold back from sharing your views with anybody and everybody in your day-to-day and via blog, facebook, twitter, instagram, pinterest, or whatever else? From my point of view, my various feeds, TV and other media, politics, and being out and about in everyday life the religious are quite loud and open with their religion.

Maybe that’s a small insight into how privileged you are that you don’t have to think about holding back. You’re protected from being labeled as “angry” or “immoral” or “satan worshipper” or “annoying” or “insufferable” or “hateful” or “a know-it-all” (all things I’ve had directed towards me) simply because you were taught to believe something that man made up a few thousand years ago.

But it brings me to today’s Bible study. Matthew 6:

Verse 1: Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

Verse 5: And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.

Verse 6: But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you.

It often pains me when I have to share Bible verses to followers of the Bible because of how it comes across, but there it is. Some will try to point out that I’m cherry-picking. It’s a bad argument anyway, but specifically in this case since Matthew 6 also includes the ever-popular Lord’s Prayer (Verses 9-13). So if that’s on your prayer list — it was repeated every time I went to church as a youngster and we had to repeat it multiple times after confessional — you’re cherry-picking as well, and from the same chapter as me. So is the whole chapter useless or just the part that is inconvenient in your life?

So, again, is this a war on Christmas or a battle against Christian privilege (and hypocrisy)?

There are currently Christian churches on nearly every street corner in America. To be less vague: according to the National Congregations Study by Mark Chaves at the University of Arizona there were an estimated 331,000 Christian churches (all denominations) in the US in the year 2000.

There is a lot of power (and tax savings) in those churches. Far more power than any other religion and far more power than non-believers hold. And that’s a lot of choice as to where to congregate. You can literally plop down in any town in America and find a place to “talk” to your god with others. Is that a war on Christmas? The fact that you can go into any town in America and practice your religion with others who share your views? Absolutely any way you define freedom you’ve got it. If you’ve got freedom like that it’s intellectually dishonest to also claim you’re in the midst of some kind of war.

What would happen if there were 331,000 “Centers for Atheism” (there’s no such thing, of course) in America? How would that make you feel? Would it feel aggressive to you that “atheists have to be so loud and open about it”? That’s a common complaint when we do anything — usually simply call out your privilege — in public.

One of the somewhat infuriating aspects of this is that I will fight for your rights to be who you are no matter what you believe even if I don’t get that in return.

If you want to pray in public and you want to go against your god and the Bible (remember Matthew 6?), cool, do it. If you want to shout from the rooftops that “GOD IS GRRRREEEEEAAATTT!!” then I support your right to do so. If you want your child(ren) to follow their specific religion while at a public school, on their own or with friends, that’s all fine. If you want to go on TV and lie about a war on Christmas you’re an idiot, but I’m still going to fight for your right to be able to do so. Or if you want to protest abortion because your ancient text written by men (always men, never women) who are less intelligent than today’s 15 year olds allegedly told you so or because you don’t understand 7th grade biology (fine, 9th grade biology) then please continue. You are allowed to be wrong in public if it doesn’t take other’s rights away. This could go on for days so that’s a whole different essay. (Thesis: you’re causing more harm than good. For another day.)

Nobody is trying to take any of these rights away from you, no matter what you tell yourself and no matter what you hear from talking heads on TV and elsewhere.

The problems stem from using your religious beliefs to influence public policy, and therefore the rights of others who aren’t specifically like you.

• No, there can’t be be creationism (also known as “intelligent” design) taught in public schools.
• No, tax-payer funded public property may not be used for your specific religion’s display.
• No, if you’re appointed to public office you may not use your on-the-clock time to further your religious causes. This includes public school teachers and guest speakers. There are religious private schools for a reason.
• No, you may not use your religion as the basis for laws that all people must follow.

Sadly, all of these currently do happen with regularity, even though they are inherently wrong and specifically un-Constitutional.

We’re at 2,000+ words and I think I’ve expounded on that original e-mail enough for now. But I’d truly like to know, do you still think there is a war on Christmas or Christianity?

I’ll probably continue most of this discussion via the e-mail list. Subscribe via the bar at the top of this page if you’re not already on the list.

Comments are disabled on this post. Have a response? Post it to your blog. Am I missing something that makes me look like an idiot? Have I been factually incorrect somewhere? E-mail me and I will edit. (I’ll make note of edits, if any, below.)