Tuesday, February 3, 2009
The Shape of My Social Philosophy
After the discussion I sat in on following 'formal' class time, I
realized that there are some thoughts and background I should provide
that explain what I call my 'double life' academically, politically,
socio-economically, and several other metaphysical and intellectual
ways. This also may help explain my choice of L.F. Ward as my theorist
to focus on. Academically is the easiest one to discuss as there is
nothing personal about it: I am both 'left and right brained' and I
need both a dose of cold, rational mathematics and analysis as well as
a dose of humanistic, social, holistic view of the world. That need for
the balance in different academic pursuits led me to co-major in
computer science and English (creative) writing as an undergraduate,
led me to the interdisciplinary major of human-computer interaction,
etc.
Religiously, while I continue to lean more and more toward atheism, part of me still feels the need for religion (it should be noted that the linked to post of mine from just over 2 years ago needs some revision--it is written very much from a control-based perspective framed as something more innocent). My socio-economic status through my family has been solid middle class with two working parents with a joint income of around $60k, lower middle class after my parents divorced with my mom working two jobs just to pay the bills, upper middle class during my mom's 2nd marriage (separated now) with a joint income at that point of $150k, and on my father's side from lower class (he usually pulls in about $25k or less a year) to poor (he's been below the poverty line before). My mom went from a low level corporate employee while working at then Amoco and rose to supervisor of her area and is currently at Fannie Mae in a mid-level management position (although she mostly interacts with their slew of consultants in charge of the various records management IT solutions). My father has never held a job for more than 2 or 3 years that I can remember, although he's always been in sales of one type or another (currently he works for a Lowes doing cabinet/kitchen design and retail sales). Neither of my parents graduated college--my father went to college on a fencing scholarship before dropping out when he failed to do well in Calculus and his dreams of becoming a medical doctor were crushed (and he had no idea what to do after that). My grandparents on both sides of my family were immigrants from Eastern Europe--although the only grandparent I have ever known is my maternal grandmother (from Poland) who helped raise me and my 3 siblings after selling her house to help my mother and fatehr buy a larger house to accommodate all the children. My older brother went to college for 2 years seeking a marketing degree before dropping out and working as an assistant manager in retail for a number of years before going back to college for a history degree (he completed it the same year I completed my Masters) and he is currently working retail (2 jobs--the 2nd one was needed to help pay back college debt), my youger sister had a baby at the age of 18 the father died due to a medical condition within a month after she kicked him out (my mom had let the both live in the house and had converted our living room into a bedroom they could use) within a year she got married to a different guy she knew for about 2 months (they eloped) they were together 2 years and had a baby (she moved out and separated from him over the summer and is currently living with my mom and her two children), my younger brother has a friend who went to rehab for dealing drugs but other than questionable choices in association and his earlier years in high school he seems to be fairly well balanced (he started this year at Carthage College to pursue a degree in psychology--he wants to become a clinical psychiatrist). So I have a 'colored' family background to say the least.
I, myself, have not had a period of unemployment for roughly 14 years now--I had my first job (a paper route) at the age of 10 (at the age of 15 I took a job at the concession stand at a movie theater, 16 I took a job at McDonald's, 17-18 I worked at Meijer--a Michigan-based all-in-one store, at college I worked IT support, built databases, etc. and during summers I took internship at an aerospace defence company, an internship at a division of LexisNexis that due to their recent acquirement was still operating as a start-up but the corporate overlords could be seen encroaching), and in grad school I've had a research assistantship for the past 2 and a half years with an internship at Google the summer after the first year of my Masters. So my work experience, while short lived in most places, has been decently diverse. My undergraduate was financed entirely on loans minus the merit scholarship (I went to a small, private college with a liberal faculty and conservative student body--although most of my friends were liberals or moderates, I had a decent number of conservative connections as well). I joined a fraternity (for 1 week--I quit because I saw greater opportunities for power elsewhere, I saw the fratnerity not as a group that would gain my network connections but as something that would limit me and try to shape me).
Politically, my mother is a Democrat and my father is a Republican, and perhaps it is natural for me to associate myself with neither party. In many ways both are the same to me, and in every Presidential election I vote for Senate members that are in the opposite party as the Presidential candidate I vote for (I had no problem voting against Harkin because I feel he has been in office far too long, plus I knew he would win no matter what my vote was). I think the House of Representatives is too large and nothing more than a partisan playground fight with votes around ideological perspectives, too much talk, and too little action. The Senate I see as generally productive although rife with corruption, but at least they seem to get things done (usually be trading favors/votes and quite possibly by less appropriate means). I'm in favor of the electoral college for the precise reason that I do not trust the 'wisdom of the masses'. I'm an elitist, and I have never denied that fact. However, I feel it is wrong to allow people to starve or otherwise flounder, and I am well aware that the reason people are homeless or jobless or otherwise tends not to be faults of their own and that our government is failing a huge mass of people. I believe in merit-based inequality but not 'natural inequality' (which is nothing more than a means of oppression)--if somebody is better at a particular task then they deserve greater rewards, if somebody is smarter than they deserve greater respect, etc. I believe everybody is BORN equal, but I do not believe everybody stays that way. I am aware that socio-economic circumstances do give individuals different advantages that allow them to rise to the higher eschelons. I believe in equal opportunity and that our school systems are not allowing for that--the current system teaches those in the lower socio-economic brackets to be followers and 'wage slaves' whereas the school systems at the upper levels teach social networking skills and other 'trust fund baby' life skills.
To tie this back into Marx, I see the young Marx as a trust fund baby rebelling against his father but too intellectually weak to make a point (he reminds me of individuals I've met from Stanford and other liberal, top tier schools--well intentioned but no practical understanding of things). However, middle Marx (the economist Marx) has thrown off the whiney trust fund brat attitude and has a deeper understanding of the actual human condition as opposed to what he has read in books and discusses it in a fairly reasoned and well rationed manner that displays an admittedly ingenius understanding of the high level system. I disagree with Marx's view of humans wishing to collaborate and seeking equality--even if that were true for the MAJORITY of individuals, it only takes one individual with enough social power to break the system and take personal gain (or to subvert the system and sneak personal gain). I know, I personally, enjoy my luxuries and while I would not willing 'screw over' somebody I know, I have no issue 'screwing over' somebody I have never met (or somebody I dislike) to make a personal gain so long as I do not feel I am hurting their survival. Socialism works for small groups, but when it comes to large groups there are more nameless, faceless individuals that people have no qualms taking advantage of for personal gain (or people they dislike/enemies that not only they have no qualms taking advantage of but they take pleasure from crushing).
I might add more to this post later, but right now I need to finish up some work for Soc 511.
Religiously, while I continue to lean more and more toward atheism, part of me still feels the need for religion (it should be noted that the linked to post of mine from just over 2 years ago needs some revision--it is written very much from a control-based perspective framed as something more innocent). My socio-economic status through my family has been solid middle class with two working parents with a joint income of around $60k, lower middle class after my parents divorced with my mom working two jobs just to pay the bills, upper middle class during my mom's 2nd marriage (separated now) with a joint income at that point of $150k, and on my father's side from lower class (he usually pulls in about $25k or less a year) to poor (he's been below the poverty line before). My mom went from a low level corporate employee while working at then Amoco and rose to supervisor of her area and is currently at Fannie Mae in a mid-level management position (although she mostly interacts with their slew of consultants in charge of the various records management IT solutions). My father has never held a job for more than 2 or 3 years that I can remember, although he's always been in sales of one type or another (currently he works for a Lowes doing cabinet/kitchen design and retail sales). Neither of my parents graduated college--my father went to college on a fencing scholarship before dropping out when he failed to do well in Calculus and his dreams of becoming a medical doctor were crushed (and he had no idea what to do after that). My grandparents on both sides of my family were immigrants from Eastern Europe--although the only grandparent I have ever known is my maternal grandmother (from Poland) who helped raise me and my 3 siblings after selling her house to help my mother and fatehr buy a larger house to accommodate all the children. My older brother went to college for 2 years seeking a marketing degree before dropping out and working as an assistant manager in retail for a number of years before going back to college for a history degree (he completed it the same year I completed my Masters) and he is currently working retail (2 jobs--the 2nd one was needed to help pay back college debt), my youger sister had a baby at the age of 18 the father died due to a medical condition within a month after she kicked him out (my mom had let the both live in the house and had converted our living room into a bedroom they could use) within a year she got married to a different guy she knew for about 2 months (they eloped) they were together 2 years and had a baby (she moved out and separated from him over the summer and is currently living with my mom and her two children), my younger brother has a friend who went to rehab for dealing drugs but other than questionable choices in association and his earlier years in high school he seems to be fairly well balanced (he started this year at Carthage College to pursue a degree in psychology--he wants to become a clinical psychiatrist). So I have a 'colored' family background to say the least.
I, myself, have not had a period of unemployment for roughly 14 years now--I had my first job (a paper route) at the age of 10 (at the age of 15 I took a job at the concession stand at a movie theater, 16 I took a job at McDonald's, 17-18 I worked at Meijer--a Michigan-based all-in-one store, at college I worked IT support, built databases, etc. and during summers I took internship at an aerospace defence company, an internship at a division of LexisNexis that due to their recent acquirement was still operating as a start-up but the corporate overlords could be seen encroaching), and in grad school I've had a research assistantship for the past 2 and a half years with an internship at Google the summer after the first year of my Masters. So my work experience, while short lived in most places, has been decently diverse. My undergraduate was financed entirely on loans minus the merit scholarship (I went to a small, private college with a liberal faculty and conservative student body--although most of my friends were liberals or moderates, I had a decent number of conservative connections as well). I joined a fraternity (for 1 week--I quit because I saw greater opportunities for power elsewhere, I saw the fratnerity not as a group that would gain my network connections but as something that would limit me and try to shape me).
Politically, my mother is a Democrat and my father is a Republican, and perhaps it is natural for me to associate myself with neither party. In many ways both are the same to me, and in every Presidential election I vote for Senate members that are in the opposite party as the Presidential candidate I vote for (I had no problem voting against Harkin because I feel he has been in office far too long, plus I knew he would win no matter what my vote was). I think the House of Representatives is too large and nothing more than a partisan playground fight with votes around ideological perspectives, too much talk, and too little action. The Senate I see as generally productive although rife with corruption, but at least they seem to get things done (usually be trading favors/votes and quite possibly by less appropriate means). I'm in favor of the electoral college for the precise reason that I do not trust the 'wisdom of the masses'. I'm an elitist, and I have never denied that fact. However, I feel it is wrong to allow people to starve or otherwise flounder, and I am well aware that the reason people are homeless or jobless or otherwise tends not to be faults of their own and that our government is failing a huge mass of people. I believe in merit-based inequality but not 'natural inequality' (which is nothing more than a means of oppression)--if somebody is better at a particular task then they deserve greater rewards, if somebody is smarter than they deserve greater respect, etc. I believe everybody is BORN equal, but I do not believe everybody stays that way. I am aware that socio-economic circumstances do give individuals different advantages that allow them to rise to the higher eschelons. I believe in equal opportunity and that our school systems are not allowing for that--the current system teaches those in the lower socio-economic brackets to be followers and 'wage slaves' whereas the school systems at the upper levels teach social networking skills and other 'trust fund baby' life skills.
To tie this back into Marx, I see the young Marx as a trust fund baby rebelling against his father but too intellectually weak to make a point (he reminds me of individuals I've met from Stanford and other liberal, top tier schools--well intentioned but no practical understanding of things). However, middle Marx (the economist Marx) has thrown off the whiney trust fund brat attitude and has a deeper understanding of the actual human condition as opposed to what he has read in books and discusses it in a fairly reasoned and well rationed manner that displays an admittedly ingenius understanding of the high level system. I disagree with Marx's view of humans wishing to collaborate and seeking equality--even if that were true for the MAJORITY of individuals, it only takes one individual with enough social power to break the system and take personal gain (or to subvert the system and sneak personal gain). I know, I personally, enjoy my luxuries and while I would not willing 'screw over' somebody I know, I have no issue 'screwing over' somebody I have never met (or somebody I dislike) to make a personal gain so long as I do not feel I am hurting their survival. Socialism works for small groups, but when it comes to large groups there are more nameless, faceless individuals that people have no qualms taking advantage of for personal gain (or people they dislike/enemies that not only they have no qualms taking advantage of but they take pleasure from crushing).
I might add more to this post later, but right now I need to finish up some work for Soc 511.
4 February 2009
After spending the evening pondering this post, I had
debated editing parts of it out or adding 'explanations'. I realized I
felt the need to 'apologize' for some more 'culture of
dominance'/capitalist statements, but I also realized that making such
apologies would be a denial of part of who I am and the purpose of this
post was to reflect on what I will refer to as my 'dual (or dueling)
social consciousness'. I am the type of person that is sickened by the
contrast of huge amounts of wealth concentrated in Beverley Hills and
the abject poverty surrounding the area, a person who will give
leftovers to a homeless person I pass on the street, but at the same
time I am the type of person who seeks to move ahead and works to
control the world around me to meet my objectives. I do not feel a need
to apologize for seeking success in the current system, nor do I feel
the need to overthrow a system that I have found a way of working
within--although I would not prevent others from doing so and would
provide indirect support because I am aware of the issues that exist. I
am not the type to defend my property or other forms of capital I have
collected if a more balanced order presents itself as the dominant
paradigm, but I do not seek a balanced order myself--I seek an order
where the top does not consume beyond the point of being 'full' and
where the bottom are at least able to be satiated in their needs. The
animal kingdom has hierarchal division, and maybe we're better than
that (maybe), but in the current system I admit we are worse than that
because while a the leader of a wolf pack will stop consuming the kill
when it becomes full, humans continue to needlessly consume resources
well beyond the state of being full. Being full and being 'sustained'
are 2 different things--full means one has more than one needs to
survive (some additional luxuries, earned by merit--not by inheritance;
inheritance should be done away with) and satiated means one has enough
to survive and reproduce (the 'living wage', so to speak).
Again, these ideas are not fully formed, they are the
products of the struggle between my 'good' side of wanting to end
suffering and the 'evil' side that I do not try to hide in my desire
for power and a degree of luxury (excessive luxury disgusts me, but
having some entertainment products that aren't cheap, while admittedly
allowing my wardrobe budget to suffer is nice). I recently asked a
friend why people trust me when I make no attempt to hide the fact that
I have intentions that are in my own best interest and not necessarily
that of others and she told me that it was because I admit my evil side
and do not try to hide my intentions (that, let's face it, everybody
has to a degree--although they may deny themselves the pleasure) that
it was this openness of my dual nature that earned her trust. So I am
hoping that this very public admission of my multiplicity of dual
natures that rather than offending any individuals who may see my
opinions as different than their own that they understand that I am
aware of their view (I might not fully see all the details--that's the
problem with the middle, you get the big picture but certain low level
details are sometimes missed) but I also see the other side and can
just as easily argue either one and be equally convicted to the
argument.
posted by Mike Oren # 8:21 PM
Post a Comment