I am not fighting for your rights.

I am not fighting for your rights.

I don’t care where you fall on the various spectra of gender, race, ethnicity, belief, socioeconomic class, or sexual orientation. I don’t care if you accept or reject anyone’s ability to label you with any of those things. I don’t care if you’ve lived a life with or without privilege.

It doesn’t matter to me whether you’ve been a perpetrator or a victim of oppression and assault. It doesn’t matter to me if you’ve been shamed or done the shaming. It doesn’t matter to me whether the laughter has fallen hard upon your ears or been launched like a bullet out of your mouth.

Your views on sex, drugs, and rock n’ roll are immaterial to me. As is the taxonomy of your uniqueness as a snowflake.

I am not fighting for your rights.

I am not fighting for my rights.

I am not even fighting for the rights of my children.

I am fighting for the only rights that matter.

I am fighting for our rights. Each and every goddamn one of us.

The people we hate. The people who are different. The people who hate us.

Because the moment I stop fighting for our rights and start fighting for my rights is the moment I lose.

This late night rant brought to you by seeing too much activism simply degrade into bullying and identity politics. You want to bring about change? You want equality, civil rights, and social justice? Then work to bring it about for everyone, because every case of inequality and oppression throughout history is the result of someone else getting what was theirs and then deciding that was enough.

An individual has not started living until he can rise above the narrow confines of his individualistic concerns to the broader concerns of all humanity. – Martin Luther King, Jr.

Election Night 2013 – Why this was not a great victory for Virginia Democrats *updated*

I should remind myself not to go number diving on election night, it’s depressing even on the nights we win sometimes.

Total voter turnout for Virginia’s gubernatorial races:
2001: 46.38%
2005: 44.96%
2009: 40.37%
2013: ~39% or so it looks like IMO
[from Virginia State Board of Elections]

This is a very bad trend. Democrats may have won for Governor and for Lt. Gov (and perhaps by some miracle Attorney General as well), but less than 20% of registered voters voted for them. 71.78% of Virginia voters turned out for last year’s presidential election and 1.9M of them voted for Obama – there’s a *TOTAL* of 2.2M voters this year. Now I know as well as anyone how hard it is to get people to vote in non-presidential election years, but this goes beyond “it doesn’t even look like we’re trying” to “we’re measurably getting worse at this.”

I started out in Virginia politics back at the beginning of the 1980s at the same time my parents did (the events naturally having a strong causality). Perhaps it’s just nostalgia on my part, but it seems to me that the Virginia Democratic Party of the 1980s (old-school as it was) would run circles around the Virginia Democratic Party of the 2010s with all its fundraising, social media, and complete lack of a party-wide, county-by-county, precinct-by-precinct, from-the-ground-up GOTV effort.

*UPDATE* Okay, so was about to turn in for the night when I found a table of voter turnout in Virginia since 1976 (from http://sbe.virginia.gov/VotingStatistics.html — style annotations are my own: bold = presidential election years and italics  = gubernatorial elections. And the 2013 numbers are estimates based on the results with 99.27% reporting and the Nov.1 registration stats)

What the chart below shows is that we used to have about 80% turnout for presidential elections and about 60%+ turnout for gubernatorial years. Basically starting in ’96 we start drifting down to the 70% range for presidential election turnouts and have a precipitous drop to the 40% range for governor races. Basically, the best we ever did in terms of voter turnout during a gubernatorial race in recent history was 1989 — the year we elected Douglas Wilder as the first African-American Governor of Virginia and we did it with 66.5% voter turnout. As Democrats, we know we’re strongest when turnout is high, and yet as I pointed out, that hasn’t seemed to be the focus of the party for some time now.

Summary of Virginia Registration& Turnout Statistics
November General Elections: 1976 – Present
Year Total Registered % Change from Previous Year Total Voting Turnout(% Voting of Total Registered)
2013 5,240,452 -3.5% 2,160,068 41.2%
2012 5,428,833 6.1% 3,896,846 71.78%
2011 5,116,929 1.68% 1,463,761 28.61%
2010 5,032,144 1.54% 2,214,503 44.01%
2009 4,955,750 -1.57% 2,000,812 40.4%
2008 5,034,660 10.7% 3,752,858 74.5%
2007 4,549,864 - 0.1% 1,374,526 30.2%
2006 4,554,683 2.3% 2,398,589 52.7%
2005 4,452,225 - 1.5% 2,000,052 45.0%
2004 4,517,980 7.1% 3,223,156 71.4%
2003 4,217,227 - 0.1% 1,296,955 30.8%
2002 4,219,957 2.7% 1,331,915 39.4%
2001 4,109,127 0.9% 1,905,511 46.4%
2000 4,073,644 7.0% 2,789,808 68.5%
1999 3,808,754 2.3% 1,373,527 36.1%
1998 3,724,683 4.5% 1,229,139 33.0%
1997 3,565,697 7.3% 1,764,476 49.5%
1996* 3,322,740 9.4% 2,468,229 74.3%
1995 3,038,394 1.3% 1,585,783 52.2%
1994 3,000,560 0.9% 2,078,106 69.3%
1993 2,975,121 -2.6%** 1,817,777 61.1%
1992 3,055,486 9.4% 2,582,966 84.5%
1991 2,791,747 2.1% 1,371,940 49.1%
1990 2,735,339 -0.1% 1,252,971 45.8%
1989 2,737,340 -4.9%** 1,821,242 66.5%
1988 2,877,144 8.3% 2,231,876 77.6%
1987 2,657,412 1.8% 1,571,110 59.1%
1986 2,609,698 0.5% 1,115,179 42.7%
1985 2,597,904 -2.9%** 1,377,966 53.0%
1984 2,675,641 14.8% 2,180,515 81.5%
1983 2,330,595 4.3% 1,178,707 50.6%
1982 2,234,011 0.9% 1,454,628 65.1%
1981 2,214,926 -4.1%** 1,437,382 64.8%
1980 2,309,181 12.6% 1,881,648 81.4%
1979 2,050,499 1.2% 1,059,158 51.6%
1978 2,026,515 0.2% 1,251,471 61.7%
1977 2,022,619 -4.8%** 1,267,208 62.7%
1976 2,123,849 1,716,182 80.8%

OMG! What the hell have I been doing for the past six years?

50,000 tweets. That’s the milestone I just reached. That’s a helluva lot of abused hashtags, rants, and randomness. Also a lot of friends and even adopted family, fascinating discussions, and exploration into a world that continues to amaze me.

I’ve written before about Twitter (‘A Look Back @ Twitter‘, ‘IRL is Real Stupid‘, and ‘The History of the World (of Social Media), Part 1 – The Myth of Social Media‘ to name but a few). So rather than bore you with more pontification, I thought I’d do something different.

By the Numbers

(or quantifying the randomness that is my life on Twitter)

Using a copy of my Twitter archive, I uploaded it to this tool and got this report. What follows here are the highlights (as judged by me) with some pointless commentary.

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 1.47.49 PMET

Obviously, I peaked in 2010 and it’s all been downhill since! Sort of surprised that 2012 wasn’t the highest — obviously I needed to make more fun of the election!

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 1.50.10 PMET

Prosaicness personified. At least nothing here to embarrass me, though the appearance of “Obama” might haunt me. At least “like”, “love”, and “think” are up there :)

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 1.50.58 PMET

Certainly no surprises here! Some trolls I’ve had “free and frank discussions” with made it on here, but for the most part a great collection of people that have made my life richer and more interesting.

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 1.51.46 PMET

Okay, this one had me laughing. Includes some classics such as #JessGotBoomBoom, #MUPS, and #GeekCommune, as well as my own #LAFK (life away from keyboard — to use instead of IRL)

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 1.52.58 PMET

I am obviously a happy person — emoticons don’t lie :D

Screen Shot 2013-06-11 at 1.53.34 PMET

And despite what people might think, I don’t #hashtag #everything. Just #MostThings. And occasionally even #OutsideTwitter.

And that’s it. On a serious note, I just want to thank everyone who interacts with me on Twitter. Many of you I’ve come to feel I know and whether it’s cool and interesting links you post or just being yourself, I think of you all as windows on a world that at the age of almost-forty-three I feel I’m just beginning to learn about. I once wrote:

…I realized I was a member of a fluid, dynamic tribe all doing the same thing at the same time (and having very similar impressions) and I was okay with that. I mean, I’m the least likely to “join” anything – it’s just not my thing, but what Twitter allows is for you to identify yourself by what you tweet and who you follow, and a “tribe” of like-minded people organically grows out of that and it’s not at all static or limiting. There is no joining, there is just you being you, and then you start running into people with similar interests. It is, in essence, nonlinear, connected, and enriching.

I still feel that way and enjoy “belonging” on Twitter in a way I’ve never quite managed to do anywhere else. It’s brought me into contact with people I now regard the same as family and a broad and diverse circle of friends. Not bad for 140 characters!

Tucking this whole Jayne’s Hat business into its bunk…

I believe this will be the last I post on this — I just want to make a few observations after my post from yesterday. Buzzfeed posted an article late last night about the whole thing, and even featured some of my tweets about it. And ThinkGeek posted a couple of responses to all this yesterday and today. First, they disavow any involvement in the cease and desist orders sent to crafters selling their own Jayne Hats and secondly they’ve announced that 100-percent of the profit will go to the “Can’t Stop the Serenity, a Browncoat charity dear to ThinkGeek’s heart that raises funds and awareness in support of Equality Now.”

Well, that makes it all better, right? After all, ThinkGeek doesn’t even own the license, they just worked with the Firefly license owner Ripple Junction on the hat, and besides we all know what kind of assholes those guys at 20th Century Fox Television are! And now that they’re donating all the profits from the hat to a worthy, Firefly-oriented charity, all is well in the land of the geeks.

But…

You knew that was coming, right? But what about the crafters? Some of whom have been selling these hats for eight or more years? They kind of got stuck with the crappy end of the stick on this one, didn’t they? I don’t see anyone donating to a charity for them. And please don’t give me any gruff about how they shouldn’t have been selling unlicensed copies in the first place. Unless you’re willing and able to make 10,000 units of something, license owners won’t even answer your emails. And it’s a damn hat — a part of a costume from the show, so not covered by copyright. It’s not like Fox owns the design of the hat. There’s no way any court in the land would back Fox’s play here.

However, what crafter in the world could afford the time and expense AND risk of fighting it in court? Not a single one I’m aware of. So who is to blame, and more important what can be done to stop a cluster like this from happening again?

Well, Fox is clearly to blame for the cease and desist orders. Or are they? Under current law, if there is the smallest sign that the owner of intellectual property hasn’t enforced its rights to the fullest, it puts their intellectual property claims in jeopardy. So yes, Fox is still being a dick about pretty much everything Firefly-related, but not especially so in this instance. It could even be argued that they’ve willingly allowed this market in Jayne hats to exist for almost a decade without going after folks. Something obviously changed in the past few months then, huh?

What about Ripple Junction, the license owner? They’ve been strangely quiet, and some have said that if the Etsy listings were reported to them, they were required to pass that information along to Fox for action. That may or may not be the case, but in my experience, the companies that purchase these merchandise licenses are very aggressive (read “way too fucking aggressive”) about pursuing non-licensed sellers. I’ve seen nothing to dissuade me from thinking that Ripple Junction wasn’t looking to instigate action against non-licensed sellers from the very beginning. One can easily imagine that when deciding to mass produce the hat, they did their due diligence to see how much demand there was for this product and cruised by lots of those Etsy listings well before any hats were even made or agreements to manufacture signed. As one troll noted to me on Twitter yesterday (in a different context), that’s just Business 101.

And lastly we come to ThinkGeek. Again, as I stated earlier, I’ve been a customer of ThinkGeek for ten years and very much a supporter of the company. They and Valve are usually at the top of the very, very short list of companies I repeatedly point to as doing right by their community and the world in general. But being a fan, like being a friend, sometimes means you have to call someone on their shit, and in this instance I believe ThinkGeek still deserves some of the blame. The mass produced Jayne hat was, as they have said, their idea and they worked closely with Ripple Junction on the design. It is likely that had they not done so, the C&Ds would not have been sent out. Maybe not forever, but not within months of having started to sell their licensed version.

Regardless of who owns the license, who sent the cease and desist orders, or anything else – ThinkGeek decided to …well, there’s really no other word for it… bully crafters out of the business of selling Jayne hats. They claim this was due to public demand, despite the fact that any web search of “jayne hat” back in November 2012 would have led to dozens and dozens of independent crafters selling them. No, what they did was that they saw a market ripe for the taking since they’d be selling the officially licensed version.

I challenge anyone at ThinkGeek to tell me, with a straight face, that they didn’t anticipate that bringing a licensed Jayne hat to market would result in crafters getting shut down. I mean the whole point of selling “licensed” products is the ability to get non-licensed sellers shutdown. Honestly, the fact that ThinkGeek would not be licensing the product themselves and would be working with another company who did own the license was probably seen as a huge benefit — if anyone complained, they could just point their fingers at Ripple Junction and Fox and say “Sorry guys, we’re not the ones shutting you down.” — a statement that is, while superficially factual, still misleading.

That’s it for the Parade of Blame, unless you want to pull in every US citizen that has never voted for candidates interested in making intellectual property reform a priority for our government. As it stands now, the system is pretty damn broken.

While the damage in this case has been done and can’t be undone, I do have one last suggestion for ThinkGeek, and it’s one that I sincerely hope they give some thought to as I still believe the company and all of its employees are some genuinely nice, geeky people:

Please don’t compete with the community of geeky crafters. There are probably a number of other licensed, mass-produced versions of products you can start selling. That doesn’t mean you should. You aren’t Aperture Science. You don’t need to do what you must because you can. There is more than enough business for you to keep on selling (and sometimes creating) wonderful products without looking to muscle crafters of handmade products out of business — because that is exactly what will happen every time you do.

What ThinkGeek *Should* Have Done (And Still Can!)

*update at bottom of the page*

So, just to start off, I like ThinkGeek — I really do. I’ve been a customer since 2003 and have literally spent thousands of dollars on their site (helped that my company used to give out prizes and I made sure to buy them at ThinkGeek. Also helped by the fact I’m a complete nerd.). I’ve bought stuff from them for my friends, my wife, and my kids. Hell, for me, they’re even based locally and I’ve enjoyed seeing them grow.

But with growth comes change — note I did not say ‘progress.’ As highlighted with the recent Jayne Hat issue, ThinkGeek has made a conscious decision to eschew crafter created pieces (which they used to carry a smattering of), and focus on mass-produced, licensed products. One can argue if it was an intended or unintended consequence, but part of the upshot of this is that FOX is now going after crafters of fan-created art on Etsy like a pack of hybrid lawyer-dementors. Reportedly this includes other Firefly-related items, but has mostly been focused on sellers of the aforementioned Jayne hats.

Sadly, the irony of mass producing a knit hat that in the show was handmade by Jayne’s mother is lost on ThinkGeek. Evidently also lost was what the impact of cease & desist orders would be on the crafters who had been selling these items for many years. (And let’s not forget the irony of FOX “protecting” the Firefly intellectual property when they’ve repeatedly done everything in their power to screw over the show itself.)

Now ThinkGeek could have done a number of things differently. They could have gone with an unlicensed hat and just called it something else — FOX doesn’t own the intellectual property of the style of hat (though I’d love to see them try and establish prior art for it!), just the association with Firefly and the character Jayne. Or they could have even said “Hey, we COULD mass produce this hat, but really part of the whole phenomenon of this is that they’re handmade, so maybe we just shouldn’t bother.” However, if they really felt there needed to be more Jayne hats in the world, as they told me in a tweet earlier today, why not think a little more boldly?

What I’m about to suggest is something I’ve tossed around as a business idea of my own for awhile and discussed with a number of friends — but let’s face it, I’m middle-aged, married, with kids and a mortgage — my days of startups are probably behind me. Instead, I’ll gift this idea to ThinkGeek in the hopes that they really do want to do the right thing (unless they want to hire me to help run it, in which case, let’s talk):

Imagine, if you will, the force for geeky goodness that ThinkGeek could be if they decided to create their own online storefront for geeky crafters? Instead of having to wade through billions of potential Regretsy items to find the real quality stuff, imagine going to thinkgeek.com and in addition to seeing Portal gun replicas and Annoy-a-trons, you could find handmade hats of an especially cunning design, handmade Chell costumes, and handmade hobbit pipes. That would be pretty fricking cool, wouldn’t?

Imagine the benefit to those geeky crafters, having their wares brought to the attention of folks already actively looking for geeky products? ThinkGeek wins, crafters win, and more importantly all the rest of us win. There is assistance and advice ThinkGeek is especially well suited to offer these small scale crafters, especially on shipping and possibly even on avoiding the traps of intellectual property infringement. Basically the only loser would be Etsy, and you know what? Screw Etsy.

For me, part of being a geek is tied into the maker culture — geeks tend to really like making things themselves or they have a lot of love and respect for those who can and do. If ThinkGeek followed my suggestion they could in essence offer the best of the entire geek world while remaining true to the spirit of what, at least to me, it means to be a geek.

Otherwise, they’ll continue to move to be a part of everything that runs counter to that spirit, and hurt crafters — the very ones who embrace that ethos with their time, energy, and hard work.

Finally, to be absolutely clear, FOX is the main bad guy here – but ThinkGeek can’t license from them without acknowledging that said license obligates FOX to pursue non-licensed sellers. That is part of the basis of a licensing agreement, part of which usually says something to the effect of “Hey, we’re going to pay you a bunch of money to be the official seller of this item representing intellectual property you own, and to protect that investment, you’re obligated to go after anyone else who tries.” That’s just what licensing is, so ThinkGeek’s fingerpointing at FOX and trying to act the innocent is disingenuous at best.

I wrote a post some years ago titled “Why I <3 Crafters (and Other Artists) And You Should Too” in which I explained why I have so much respect and admiration for them. Towards the end of it, I wrote “…surround yourself with those who are creative and bring a little more beauty into existence, and you will find it easier to do the same.” I still very much believe that and it is advice I’d like to see ThinkGeek take to heart.

*Update April 9, 2013* So ThinkGeek has corrected themselves and now state that the manufacturer they worked with on the hats is actually the license holder. However, I still stand by what I said — the best that ThinkGeek can claim is that they decided to bring a mass-produced and inferior product to market that directly competes with what was offered by the geek crafting community. And they did so with a company that makes all of it’s money off of licenses, Ripple Junction — and I believe there is still information to be had about that company’s role in the cease and desist letters that went out. It’s extremely common for license holders to push to have C&Ds sent out to products they view as infringing on their license.

*Update April 10, 2013* See here

 

The History of the World (of Social Media), Part 1 – The Myth of Social Media

Focus can be a dangerous thing.

Have you ever played golf? I do on occasion. It’s generally not pretty. Whenever I get a golf club in my hands, even if it’s just at a driving range, I face a battle. The battle is between trying to be mindful of how to swing a thin stick made of carbon fiber composite with this funny little bend at the end at a ball in such a way as to make the ball go straight and far…and completely forgetting I’m doing any of that. Usually  what happens are one or two good shots and then some wicked hooks and slices.

…and then that’s when I knocked over Doc Ock’s mailbox.

There are many pursuits which are similar — learning a musical instrument, playing video games, and for me — driving a stick shift. Everything goes along swimmingly until that moment you realize what the hell you are doing and then it precedes to all go sideways (which if you’re driving a car is usually the wrong way to go about any sort of forward progress). However, when it’s right, you forget what you’re trying to do, the world falls away and you just do it.

What is usually referred to as “social media” is like that. The best examples of social media gone wrong are usually the result of someone over-thinking and trying too hard. It feels false to anyone who sees it and thus whatever effect was intended is lost. (See the recent Applebee’s fiasco for an excellent example)

Almost three years ago, I wrote a piece titled “A Look Back @ Twitter.” It was, by far, the most successful, most read piece of writing I’ve posted here and continues to be found and read (more than 2,000 views out of the more than 10,000 I’ve received on this blog). At the time I wrote it, I’d been on Twitter for almost 3 years but only seriously using it for about a year. I have now been on Twitter for more than 5 years (it will be 6 next July) – which is like a millennium in web timescales. If you’re interested, I think the post is still pretty true and has held up relatively well, so it may be worth your time if you haven’t read it. I only bring it up to point out that since I wrote it, Twitter has changed — as well it should.

When the modern Internet developed (not back in the ARPA days, but more recently in the boom times of the 90s when the idea of it went mainstream), it was a tool in search of a problem. A number of people and companies came forward, sure in the knowledge they had figured out the secret, and they tried to make the Internet and the World Wide Web (that term sounds so freaking archaic now!) fit that vision: commerce, communication, whatever. Most of them failed. Some had some success and everyone kept trying because it was just this huge, wondrous thing that everyone knew would be vital…somehow.

Then came “Web 2.0″ — a defunct marketing term if ever there was one — and after that “social media.” While there was much corporate verbiage thrown about related to leveraging communication, targeting consumers, engaging audiences, and other such nonsense, what it all basically boiled down to was a bunch of people throwing stuff up on the wall and seeing what stuck and never being quite sure why it did.

But what sticks is this: LIFE.

Zen on the Beach

“And we’ll be saying a big hello to all intelligent life forms everywhere. And to everyone else out there, the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys.” – Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, Douglas Adams

People want to do what they’ve been doing since we started banging rocks together: find and acquire things (food, love, a good place to find the right kind of rocks), talk to other people about the things that interest them (food, love, what kinds of rocks are best to bang together), and knit themselves into a supportive social web of people that will make it a little easier to bear all the times when you can’t find food or love, or when you bang your thumb with a rock.

Where a lot of people (and companies spending obscene amounts of money) went wrong was in thinking that the “technology revolution” would change society. Instead what it has meant is that technology has changed. If you’re as old as I am, you remember what technology used to be: centralized, top-down, and hierarchical. Think mainframes. Think Ma Bell. Think broadcast network television. It was all still based on being pushy with electrons, but now it is more often (but by no means always) crowd-sourced, bottom-up, and nonlinear.

And that brings us back to Twitter (and Facebook, Tumblr, Reddit, Google+ and anything else ever referred to under the umbrella term of ‘social media’). Some of the people I met online during that my Twitter early days have bemoaned, as I have on occasion, that Twitter back then was more fun. No one knew what the hell we were doing and it worked. Most of my strongest relationships with people I’ve met online were started during that time period, with many having become close friends in my life-away-from-keyboard (aka #LAFK).

Outside the Twitter bubble, I always surprised to still encounter a lot of antagonistic feelings about Twitter and other social media services, often expressed as: “Why would I want to post everything I do online?” “No one really cares to hear that I am having coffee and a bagel!” and so on.

What I think almost everyone missed (even the folks working at Twitter) was that the reason it works is not that it’s some genius piece of technology, people are incredibly narcissistic, or that it’s a revolutionary communication tool — no, the reason it works is that it’s Life with a capital letter. Life is full of messy conflicts, vacillating between order and chaos, between breathtakingly mundane and prosaically entrancing. But when Life is presented concisely and with most of the uninteresting bits edited out, it’s pretty damn riveting.

Yep, pretty much.

So for all the self-described social media gurus, experts, wizards (and all the other inflated, meaningless titles) out there — stop it. Just stop it. Quit trying to con people into thinking that good technology requires an elite priesthood to understand or use it when the exact opposite is true. The better the technology becomes, the less separation there is between it and us. That’s the whole point really.

I guess this is my roundabout way of revisiting that “A Look Back @ Twitter” piece I wrote ages ago. Twitter has grown since then, and the ways we all use it have changed, but it continues to be a part of my life because it is inseparable from my life – I don’t mean I couldn’t live without it…just that there is no part of my life that hasn’t always had a place in how I use Twitter. As my wife knows better than anyone, my Twitter posts are a pretty damn accurate representation of who I am — random interesting bits I want to share, snarky commentary on things I don’t like, and keeping in touch with the people who are important to me. And the people I follow on Twitter reflect what I look for in the world around me – humor, intelligence, beauty, new ideas, and people basically not being dicks. For better or worse (and it’s probably both), it’s authentically me.

This is why the idea of “social media” is a myth. It’s not new; it’s the same thing humans have always been doing. We get too hung up on the details of the mode of communication and spend too little time focusing on what we’re communicating. This does not require a digital priesthood of gurus showing us the way, it does not require us to engage in the “right” way – it merely requires that we communicate in a meaningful fashion. This is true for corporations just as it is true for people.

Having a “social media strategy” is like what having a “telephonic device strategy” would’ve been like at the beginning of the 20th century. If you have to compartmentalize a method of communication that thoroughly, chances are you’re doing it wrong. Technology and buzzwords change too quickly for that ever to work. Just be who you are and, as I wrote in my earlier piece, “a ‘tribe’ of like-minded people organically grows out of that.”

The more any technology allows that to happen, the more successful it will be and the more ubiquitous it will become. The further from that a technology or service strays from that by attempting to subvert, control, or manipulate (*ahem* Facebook), the less successful it will be.

Communication is older than humans. Older than mammals. Bees doing a dance to show the way to a food source, ants identifying others from their own colony — even these aren’t as far back as it goes. Think single-celled organisms releasing and receiving chemical signals. But for the past 100,000 years humans have communicated better than any other lifeform on the planet, and we’re still not that great at it a lot of the time. We’re getting better at it though and technology is the only real way it’s going to continue to improve.

What has been called “social media” is part of that improvement I think, and at the moment, I still think Twitter does it better than any other similar technology. But identifying it all as something separate from “communication” is a pointless exercise – it’s like picking one fork of a river and saying “This is separate and distinct from everything else! I declare this water behaves differently than that water over there!”  I’m pretty sure that would come as a surprise to a fish swimming downstream.

I’ll conclude here with my not-so-secret secret for social media success, if that kind of thing is important to you: Just stop thinking about what you’re doing and be who you are — and if you don’t like the results of that, trying becoming who you want to be. If you can do that, I promise you will never need a social media guru. If you can’t do that, the problem isn’t how you use social media, it’s you.

Yes, the title of this piece is a reference to the Mel Brooks movie, and like the movie, I’m not sure there will ever be a part 2.

Fear, Truth, and Consequences

I’m tired of senseless death. It will always exist, but after this past year I don’t think I’m alone in feeling a bit overwhelmed by it. After the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, I had felt the grip of cold fear as I thought about my own children. Every parent knows fear — it’s part of having children. Afraid for their safety, afraid you could somehow fail them…the list goes on. And as parents, we all know that no matter what happens, we have to get beyond the fear and just do the best we can and hope for the best.

Because in the end, the truth about parenthood is that you are not in control. When it comes to your child, you can guide, inform, punish, and influence — but you can’t be in control of another person. No matter how much your child is a chip off the ol’ block – they are their own person and as a parent you need to come to terms with that sooner or later. And most of all, we can’t completely control what the world does to our kids. So we try our best to prepare them for whatever the world throws at them and hope with all our heart that it’s enough.

Fear is not a terribly useful emotion in the modern world. It can be great to help you anticipate and react if you’re in a life-threatening situation, but in a (hopefully) rational, civilized society it’s often counterproductive. It short-circuits our reason and makes us respond on an emotional, sub-rational level, so in essence, it makes us give up all the advantages of evolution and civilization and turns us into small, quivering creatures hiding from a Great Big Bad Thing and wanting more than anything for it to all go away.

It’s even worse when that fear is felt by a group or society, as fear is possibly the worst possible basis for public policy. Look at any bad law, policy, or government action, and at its core you will find fear. Fear of people who look and act differently, fear of change, fear of a lack of control, fear of what we don’t understand.

The events in Newtown brought this into sharp relief for me. What I felt, what I saw, and what I read all boiled down to fear: fear for the safety of loved ones; fear that the government will take away guns…and fear that they won’t; fear of the unknowable and unexplainable.

Hell, TV news folks interviewing elementary age school kids who were present in the school when the shooting happened was driven by fear of ‘losing the story’ to someone else and fear of losing ratings. And why do we need news interviews from those personally involved in a tragedy? I think it’s driven by the public’s fear that those in power won’t tell us the whole story, so we want the news channels to do those interviews so we have the “real” story.

And what does all that fear give us? Besides the rush of adrenaline and the worry, not a whole lot. After September 11th, 2001, what did it get us? Two wars, the deaths of countless more innocents, the Patriot Act, a huge increase in debt and a national malaise because I think at some level we all understand nothing we’d done made any real, meaningful change.

So is fear bad? Not in and of itself, nor could we in any healthy way stop feeling the emotion. What’s bad is letting a 200-million year old part of our brain trump the human neocortex (which is only about 195,000 years old).

What we can do is reclaim the birthright of our forebrains and the fruits of thousands of years of civilization and try to actually make the world a better place…not with our emotions, but with our brains. (Yes, at heart, I’m a hippie — deal with it)

Do guns need to be banned? I don’t know – generally speaking I would prefer most people didn’t have them. I certainly think we need to put a bit more emphasis on the “well-regulated” part of the Second Amendment. Certain types of guns clearly have no place in a sane, civilized world. For those that do have guns, the requirements for their ownership and use should be at least as stringent as other dangerous items. Currently there seems to be more sophisticated and onerous controls over decongestants than guns (at least in my state) and that does strike me as out of balance. But again, I don’t know what the solution is, as too often both sides argue out of (and to incite) fear. Guns are not “special” — they are merely another method for producing destruction. If we can regulate bombs, tasers, knives, and yes, even cars, we can and should regulate guns.

I also know that this country needs a much, much better mental health system. No one can tell me that a 24-year old shooting up an elementary school is the act of a sane, well-balanced individual. The issue of him having a rifle and two handguns should be secondary to why he was unbalanced in the first place. No, of course, we can’t stop everyone from snapping and going on a rampage – but shouldn’t the general mental welfare of everyone be one of the most important things we should aim for? Isn’t that a worthwhile goal by itself?

But more than anything, we need an answer as a species, as a country, and as individuals to learn to deal with the reptilian part of our brain and the fear it injects in our thinking. We need to be mindful of when we are letting it drive our decisions and work to overcome it with the only thing we have going — our intelligence and reason. In essence, we all need to apply the same type of thinking a good parent does — we need to remember that no matter what happens, we have to get beyond the fear and just do the best we can and hope for the best. And realize that any control we think we have is likely a not-terribly-helpful illusion.

Not much of an answer, I know. But what we’re doing is obviously not working, and repeating the same mistakes over and over again is not very likely to change anything for the better.

Which of course brings us to the truest and best thing Frank Herbert (or perhaps anyone really) ever wrote:

The Litany Against Fear

I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.