Agent Smith, played by Hugo Weaving, is my favorite character in the "Matrix" films.  I prefer the first installment of the trilogy because it's the one where Smith gets to speak his mind.  I'm particularly intrigued by his thoughts on human nature, and there is one point he makes that I think merits consideration in these troubled times:  Is it true that humankind is more virus than mammal, foregoing the virtues of adaptation for the excesses of wanton consumption?

As I read the Iraq Study Group Report, I began to envision Iraq as a two-year-old that the US had recently taken into a candy store.

Taking the kid into the candy store seemed like a great idea at the time.  I mean, the kid was all fussy and whiney and everything.  A bit of candy seemed like just the thing to get the little punk to shut up.  But once the child saw so much candy, the bad behaviors got even worse!  Greed and indecision took over and the child screamed bloody murder when his request for ALL the candy in the store was quite reasonably refused.  I suppose the US should have known that taking the kid into the store without properly preparing him for the experience was a bad idea.  He should have been told beforehand where he was going and what he would see and what would be expected of him.  That might have helped avoid the whole infantile misunderstanding.  But nothing can be done for that now.  Now the US is standing in the middle of a candy store with a flailing toddler.  What's the parent of a fledgling democracy to do?

No? Well I'm going to tell you anyway.  See, it all started like this...

Before the premier of the third season of "Lost", I was having a conversation with a friend of mine who was gracious enough to let my best friend and me watch the show at his house.  The conversation was, of course, regarding various theories about "what's really going on" on the island.  I confessed that I found most of the ideas that people put forth to be overly complicated.  I then told him what I observed about the show.  To illustrate my observations I alluded to various concepts such as the Skinner Box and the I-Ching.  While I regarded (and still regard) my points to be simple perceptions of what the show had fairly obviously revealed, my friend insisted that my ideas reflected a unique perspective.  He was even more convinced of this when a Skinner Box actually showed up in the season premier, just moments after we'd been talking about it.  So he encouraged me to record and post my observations.

Recently I watched a documentary entitled "Why We Fight".  It was well made, demonstrating competently how the prescient warnings of President Eisenhower against corporate interests having too much influence in matters of war have not been heeded.  However, in light of recent elections, I feel compelled to comment regarding part of the film's message.
 
The filmmakers seemed to conclude that the current state of affairs in the US (where corporate interests have taken us into war) has come about due to lack of vigilance on the part of US citizens.  My more cynical observation is, however, that the vast US middle class is well aware that corporate interests direct all aspects of American life and they're perfectly fine with that.

Sociologist Carl Couch isolated nine types of human relationships.  They include:  solidary relationships, where individuals have shared pasts and anticipate shared futures; exchange relationships, where individuals interact solely for the purposes of barter, buying, or selling; and authority relationships, where individuals submit to a hierarchical framework to fulfill a shared objective.

Now, when humans interact it's rarely simply a matter of assuming a given relationship and then allowing things to unfold as they will.  Many times a given type of relatedness takes place within the context of another.  For example, a friend of mine and I share a robust solidary relationship.  When I go to his house to help him with a building project, though, we enter into an authority relationship as he dictates to me how I can best assist him.  Our authority relationship does not displace the solidary one.  Rather, authority is enveloped by solidarity.  Thus, even though we interact in an asymmetrical way (he directs and evaluates my behavior, but not vise versa) there is a civility and camaraderie about it that betrays the deeper symmetry of our friendship.

While pundits argue about whether or not the Democrats will finally reclaim control of Congress in November it seems evident to me that hardly anyone understands the dynamics behind why the party is stranded in uncertainty in the first place. Why is it that this is the first time in twelve years that the Democrats have a chance worth mentioning? Why does it seem to be such a slight chance? Why have the Democrats failed to put one of their own in the White House during the last two presidential elections? And why are conservative radio talk shows still more lucrative than liberal ones?

Please allow me to answer these questions by way of analogy.

Imagine you’re in high school during elections for student body president. There are only two candidates that you may choose from. One is the captain of the football team – “Jock” – and the other is the captain of the chess team – “Nerd”. In truth, you don’t like either one of these guys (and, yes, they’re both guys) because Jock is an arrogant ass and Nerd is… well, an arrogant ass. The former thrives on athletic performance, the latter on academic prestige. Who gets your vote?

Forgiveness.

This has been the powerful coping strategy employed by the Amish of Nickel Mines, Pa., who on October 2^nd endured the unimaginable when a stranger to their community invaded a one-room schoolhouse and executed five young girls. The Amish have reached out to the family of the gunman and, with the assistance of a deeply abiding faith, they continue to cling to the hope that in releasing their pain and anguish to God all will eventually be healed.

This heroic response on the part of the Amish community has rightfully been lauded worldwide. It should be held up by Christians everywhere as an example of how those who profess to follow the teachings of Jesus should conduct themselves in such horribly dark circumstances.

There are some people who aren’t a bit surprised by the strength in force and ferocity of the insurgencies in Afghanistan and Iraq.

No, I’m not referring to those who have been accusing the White House of lying about WMDs or Iraqi ties to al-Qaeda. Politicians in the US and UN knew fully well that the invasion of Iraq was predicated less upon a measurable threat and more upon the logic that overthrowing an anti-American regime and replacing it with a pro-American one would mean fewer violent attacks against Americans. US legislators and UN representatives who supported the invasion knew that deposing Saddam Hussein might well be all that the US would accomplish. The politicians who now claim they’d never have supported the war if they’d “had all the facts” are merely invoking a classic (and in some cases calculated) exercise in political expediency, propping President Bush up as a scapegoat while they oppose the war only on grounds of politics and personality, not principle.

A University of Michigan study in 2004 found that the amount of time US kids spend on homework has increased 51 percent since 1981. But Duke University's Harris Cooper claims that more homework does not translate into better academic performance, and that 1 – 2 hours per night (depending on the age of the kid) might actually translate into lower test scores on standardized tests.

Both of these sources support my life-long thesis: Homework is stupid.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I’m not ignorant of the value of homework. It can help instill a good work ethic, teach time and other resource management skills, and it can give parents and children a constructive activity around which to spend quality time.

Imagine that you are a middle-class, well-educated person from a strong family background living in an economically and civically stable environment. Because you are so blessed and knowledgeable, you are keenly aware that your lot is considerably better than the majority of the rest of the world. In fact, some who are not as well off as you are your kin, living in the homelands of your ancestors. Naturally, you perceive your prosperity is, in large measure, a product of the sophisticated culture within which you live. However, you wonder why your kin do not also prosper.

As you ponder this, you begin to notice that "the younger generation" is losing touch with the values that you’re certain are crucial to maintaining the stability you currently enjoy and love. You perceive that the forces demoralizing them and tempting them with ignoble aspirations also have a hand in adversely impacting the fortunes of the countries wherein your impoverished kin reside. These forces are administered, of course, by a body of people who seem bent on making the entire world follow their rules, rules which appear to accomplish nothing but the oppression of the many for the benefit of the few. So you realize that preserving your way of life and rescuing your old-world kin both demand the same action: to oppose the spreading tyrannical force.