Does progress really move us forward?

I was watching a Discovery Channel show, and the scientists were talking about a "group think" over-mind that they believed we were heading towards. They pointed out how our society had advanced so far since the beginning of the Renaissance Period. Naturally, I questioned that  assertion.

Most of what Western Society believes we "discovered" during the Renaissance was actually just western philosophers and "scientists" catching up to knowledge already known in the East.
The Persians (modern day Iran) with their "alchemy", during the same time as the crusades, already had much of the basis for modern chemistry.

At the same time some ancient Greeks were writing that the sun was a horse-drawn chariot with really shiny wheels, others were proving it was a sphere and measuring distance. Their scientists had the starts mapped, knew the Earth was round, had a distance to the sun and moon, a size for each, as well as Earth, and had laid the groundwork for higher math and geometry. All in 600BC, while running around in Bath Sheets Togas drinking wine and throwing parties.

We've discovered man had ice houses as far back as the 2nd Egyptian Dynasty; pharaohs really could have been drinking iced coffees, having been found with coffee in their tombs as well. The Romans were able to move water uphill, and across hundreds of miles. The ancient geeks greeks actually had a computer; granted, it wasnt a Dell running Microsoft (well, maybe it was, considering we didnt see another computer for about 2600 years) but they did have a simplistic one.

Our ancestors were rather resourceful and creative.

And now lets look at this society that the scientists were so proud of:
I wont touch the crime rates or other social ills, though that alone would make for a rather interesting contrast to his views of "advanced" society. Instead, I'll look at what that advancement has brought with it.

In America, we have the joke of the basement-dwelling forum troll; a late teen to early thirties male that has no life. If he even has a job, its something a high-schooler should be doing, because he cant find any opening for his double college major in "Me" and "booze/drugs". And yet, progress has made it possible for him to live this life of a total shut-in. He can obtain an income without labor, spend it without leaving his house, and have his purchases shipped directly to his door.

In America, this started almost 20 years ago. In Japan, it started in the 70s, and they even have a name for it, Hikikomori . Indeed, it seems that most of the 1st world nations, when the economy hits stag-flational equilibrium, that is - when there are just barely enough workers to support all the people receiving government aid and inflation is just barely even with economic growth.

The Japanese do not study mental functions well, because anything labeled a mental disease is still "shameful" in their society. And we've only barely recognized the problem. Many of these shut-ins are said to have Asperger's Syndrome or further on the Autism spectrum. Just as the Japanese deny anything might be a mental disease, we try to claim everything is a mental disease. Some of these people are indeed suffering from mental illness. Some are simply lazy; "Why go to the restaurant when you can have pizza delivered?" They ask. most are somewhere in-between. And its only because of current technology that they are able to live like this. Is technology an aid, or an enabler? The very tech that lets us reach to the other side of the planet almost instantly is keeping us from knowing our next door neighbor, according to studies.

Next is the question of how much progress really aids us. Dont get me wrong, Im rather grateful modern medicine means 40 is middle age instead of almost dead. Advances in modern medicine, even over the last decade are why Ive still got use of my right arm.But what are we losing?

In my great-grandfather's day, a man could build a house with nothing more than a tool box. (and yes, it did have electricity) It was rather common knowledge, along with gardening and other useful skills to keep a person just about anywhere, no matter what happened. Today, people pay hundreds to thousands of dollars to relearn these skills most have forgotten.

Ultimately, mankind attaches value to suffering and pain endured while achieving goals. "Paying your dues", "sweat equity", and other concepts of working hard and enduring some pain for long-term success are very common to most societies. We judge ourselves and each other by what we endure or overcome, both individually and collectively. That collectively can be attributed many ways: as a nation, as a culture, as a particular faith, ethnicity, or geographical area. These are how we judge a man; his character is explained in full, and with perfect clarity by what goals he seeks, and what he is willing to endure to achieve them. His choices tell you what he is made of; does he choose the easy path, will he submit to wrongful punishment, will he oppose just punishment, does he expect reward far above what he's earned? So many questions that are best answered by deeds.
 
Which bring up the real question of progress: As we make the past easier, "open the doors" or whatever flowery metaphors you prefer, and we remove the hardships, the pain and suffering, are we doing those that come after us, our descendants, any good? We remove their chances and opportunities to fight the battles we fought, to overcome the obstacles we did, to "pay their dues". In nature, the smarter animals are the ones who must work to find food and safety. In humans it is rather the same, even though our "experts" do not consider the ability to start a fire, make bread, or build houses to be tasks for "smart" people. Is "progress" helping, or is it just making life easier, and making humans more lazy and less intelligent, like we see in nature? So many people are suffering depression, feeling their life is worthless holds no meaning. Is it because progress has removed so many avenues of expression?

Lets face it, the best example is civil rights.Starting in the 1950s, Blacks fought to end segregation, government-enforced discrimination, and religion-endorsed bigotry. They fought a real problem that was wrong, and caused great suffering.

Today's "great cause" of civil rights is letting mentally ill men and pedophiles share a restroom with little girls, allowing 15 year old boys to use the girls locker room, and allowing "marriage" to be redefined as allowing any "whatever" to be married to multiple other "whatevers". People that are a joke decided to try and use the law to force others to stop laughing. 

The warrior in society

Most cultures in history have had a warrior society: Japan with its famous samurai, The Norse Skalds, both poet and warrior; The various warrior-monks of China, Shao Lin being the best known, and so on. What differentiated these societies from the soldiers and fighters around them is that they were expect to do more than fight or kill. Each member was expected to add to society, somehow., though exactly how depended on the group.

Samurai were expected to sponsor or create art. monks were expected to teach and help heal.The Skalds were the poets and historians of the Norse society. Our modern warriors would be wise to follow this example. As for what path to follow, the paths of history leave enough ways open to offer any calling a warrior could prefer. The most respected are those that study to heal just as hard as they study to hurt.


A warrior does not have to be one who fights physically. Any who will stand up for right, defend truth, protect the weak and helpless can be a warrior. But it takes more than mere words. The deed may come as delivering an argument to end hatred and bigotry; it may be standing between the bully and his victim.

As I look in our society, we could use more warriors.

Words build bridges to unexplored regions.

“Be just: the unjust never prosper. Be valiant. Keep your word, even to your enemies.”
Attributed to  Abu Bakr Al-baghdadi, one-time head of ISIS (hard to tell if he's current or not with the way those Air Force guys keep getting scoring hits with their drones. Keep it up, guys!)

It just goes to show the greatest evil in the world isnt a man bent on evil, but rather a man convinced of the righteousness of his cause. Its a shame too, because those are great words to live by. But a true warrior will hurt himself before knowingly hurting the innocent, and will seek restitution for those he has wronged.

Where the modern angry black American gets confused is he fails to understand he hasnt been wronged, and those that did harm have been dead for decades.

Name Change

I changed the name of my blog for several reasons.

Im a retired soldier from generations of military. From my great grandfather to me, we have been conservative republicans simply because conservative republicans support the military; pushing for funds for better pay (still below current federal minimum wage) and for modernizing equipment. It's just common sense, much the way public union employees support democrats for the same reasons.

But I took a look at the people I was associating with on all these forums........

On one forum, there was a thread called "The daily N****R", only they didnt bleep out letters. They linked to a site of the same title that scoured the news every day to find Black on White crime. The forum called these black criminals animals (I would too, given the level of senseless violence they perpetrated) and did their best to dehumanize all Black Americans with this small group. Then there were the talks of how to oppose the danger, what guns to get, how to use the guns, and so on; effectively, they had created a justification in their own minds for hating and preparing to kill people they most likely would never meet. I pointed out that simply having a thread for three years that had accrued 19 pages was an obvious sign of bigotry. And was told they had their own definition of the word. (and didnt understand how that showed bigotry) Then, after listing their definition by points, they couldnt see how just on that page, they had already done what they defined as "bigoted" actions. I was told I just didnt get it. And they were right. I dont understand how anyone can deny we are all humans. Then again, Im from the Army; we have no problem with killing threats to safety.

Another forum of "conservatives" loved to thump their bibles in everyone's faces, proving how they were more pious than anyone else. But they oppose any kind of government social aid, anctually, pretty much any aid or charity; they expect you to stand or fall entirely on your own. They even quoted a few verses from the several books of the Bible written by Paul to support their beliefs. I pointed out that Paul was directly contradicting several commands of God Himself and of Jesus Christ, both ordering any and all followers to care for their fellow man like a brother, to provide food and shelter to orphans and widows, to loan money to fellow believers without interest if they are destitute; God and Jesus loudly and repeatedly call for believers to aid anyone worse off then them. I was told, in a forum professing to be christian conservatives, proud to be "Religious Right" that obeying the commandments of God Himself made me a socialist/communist, and a liberal. Well, call me what you want, but Im still going to obey The Almighty.

No, in each of the several forums I have been participating in, many for years, I found hypocrisy, bigotry, and hatred. The very things I spent my career in the Army thinking I was fighting to end/prevent. These people that hated everyone "not white", wanted to deport "all immigrants" (not remembering they were "immigrants" too) ban Islam, and so on; these were the people that expected me to stand with them.

They claimed to love the constitution and hold it dear, yet had no problem ignoring it when it was inconvenient. And few had ever bothered to put that "passion" into action by serving a stint to protect the freedoms and rights listed in that document. They claimed to be loyal dedicated Christians, but didnt feel the need to obey the teachings of Christ. They claimed to oppose "big government", but couldnt define the term, except to say more cops needed to be employed to prevent gay marriage, transgenders using the wrong bathroom, and continue to fight the war on drugs.

To quote Reagan, I didnt leave the party; it left me. But in looking at what it now means to be "conservative" or "republican", I could not in good conscience continue my association.

That doesnt mean Im going democrat though. Ive already seen the worst of that side. I suppose the best analogy I would give of the parties at this point is:
two dung beetles fighting over who has the best turd.

I see no point in aiding either side, nor any honor to be salvaged. So its time to leave the fray entirely. And so, the change of focus, and with it, a change of name.

2016, a great change

Many pundits, bloggers, and political junkies are going nuts over this election, trying to figure out what everything is so different; why the rules dont work, and their personal heroes arent winning.

Quite simply, its because we're at the generational shift.

The WWII generation were active in politics, and the two parties reflected their ideals. Those ideals didnt really start to change until the 1960s. The same time the earliest Baby Boomers came of age to vote. Its not that Im blaming the Boomers in any way, but we have to accept the changes as fact:
The entire civil rights movement, LBJ's "Great Society", the sexual revolution, he war on povery, war on drugs, and all the other massive changes that they brought about.

But now, they are retiring, and in some cases, passing on, just like their parents did. And the younger generations are taking over the powers and choosing new fights over different ideals.

The elderly democrats are still trying to push for all the same things they've been fighting for since they got in office. Sadly, some are getting so senile, they're still fighting for rights and privileges already won decades ago. But the modern country isnt interested in these causes anymore.

The old democrat position that it should be easier to get an abortion than it is to buy a pack of cigarettes or an extra-large slurpee doesnt hold with today's younger generations. Even among the liberal democrats, the position trends towards "I have no right to tell others what to do."

Second Amendment? Same thing; only the older democrats, and those they've managed to keep ignorant, fear firearms. Everyone else says"if you want on, buy it. If you dont, then dont." Of course, even the most ardent pro-gun bunnies agree that criminals and crazies shouldnt be allowed to own any.

I wont go through the entire list of positions. I will say that Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are speaking to the middle class (whats left of it) and the blue collar citizenry of America. These two are hearing and agreeing with what "We the People" say are our biggest problems. They have realized that the Baby Boomer generation, and those beliefs and ideals, is fading from control (just as the WWII generation did) and Gen X, Y, and Millennials have their own take on the old issues, totally new political issues, their own priorities, and ideas of how to fix everything.

Bernie and Donald arent doing well because their supporters are stupid, reckless, angry, or any of the other excuses used by the "talking heads" to explain why their methods of predicting election results dont work anymore. Bernie and Donald are doing so well because they realize these new generations want new solutions that actually might work to the problems.