The following is an excerpt from a paper assignment in my 3rd Year Writing Class at Belmont University in Nashville, TN:
As I first began to contemplate whether I not I qualify I as an artist, my first thoughts gravitated with this linear reasoning – I am a living and breathing human being. I am unique. At no point in the entire history of humanity has another human existed with the same genetic code as I. Simply put, my thoughts, actions, and decisions have some artistic weight in the very nature of my own uniqueness – thus making me, and every human being that has ever existed, an artist in their own respect.
Perhaps even more interesting is the idea that not only are we all artists, but in our uniqueness we are all works of art (produced in the wildly complex and “artistic” method of human reproduction) . One single human being – both a work of art and an artist with unlimited potential to express himself in ways that no other human being ever could.
I believe nothing to be quite as incredible and unifying as the feeling that comes when two people look upon a work of art, hear a song, or read a poem – and then proceed to discuss their insights into the implications of that work. There is an entire realm of our existence that exists in the “poetic,” and being able to relate to and meet others in this realm is simply gratifying.
In my own history with art, I have found that works of art tend to embody one or more of these adjectives – unifying, controversial, simple, beautiful, mysterious, unexpected, trite, lame, historical, pessimistic…the list could go on. Although the ways in which I personify an artist takes on many roles (I draw, write, read, cook…etc), I have dedicated a significant part of my life as a musician. The music and lyrics that I write never see the light of day unless I believe them to entirely represent the very idea for which I first began writing the song.
From personal experience, I could not conceive words sufficient enough to explain how much the songwriting process means to me. While sometimes it can be frustrating to reach the light at the end of the tunnel, it is the journey there that makes each roadblock worthwhile. Currently, I play acoustic guitar and contribute to the lyrics of a group called “The Solo Flight.” Having done the whole ‘being in a band’ thing in high school and growing weary from endlessly having to promote, publicize, and exploit all the art I created, The Solo Flight is great because it is simply the work of three individuals who make art simply for the sake of making art. We’re not trying to make it, get signed, and live off of monies made from our music.
Whenever I have the chance to make it to Boone, NC (they’re both students at Appalachian State), we’ll sit down and simply collaborate on ideas and go from there. To illustrate this point further, I have included with this paper the lyrics to a song we recently wrote entitled “Ride.” There is plenty of layered meaning in this song – but perhaps my favorite is the human connection in a simples stare between the rider on the train (the narrator) and the man in the field picking cotton.
One of the most beautiful things about the human experience are the ways in which we all are able to connect with one another, and I am quite thankful for art, which is both timeless and persistent, and often serves as the medium in which we discover the artist in another individual.
The Solo Flight – “Ride”
Everyday I sit alone
With my little view.
Nothing here so far from home
But endless skies, blue.
Cotton fields are gettin' high.
It must be past noon.
To a town I'm drawing nigh
For my sordid boon.
All day long, just sittin' here,
Round and round the clock.
Oh where am I going?
Where have I been?
I bought the ticket.
I took a ride.
Slowin' down, the dusty air
Gets in my eyes.
Brakes are grinding, whistle blares,
The ride gives a sigh.
Over yonder picks away
A man with such strife.
Looks at me as if to say:
"I'm tired of this life."
Movin' along without wondering where
For oh so long.
Now I know
That simply won't do.
Monday, January 14, 2008
Monday, December 24, 2007
Ron Paul for President 2008?
As promised, this second blog will be dedicated to Republican presidential hopeful, and my choice for who is needed as President during these times, Dr. Ron Paul. First though, let me quickly clue you all in on what seems to be the most exciting presidential election in quite some time.
As some of you who are reading this may have been as well, I was initially astounded by the number of candidates running for president in 2008. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Rudy Guiliani, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee...just to name a few. In fact, so many poll changes have happened in the past 2 months, one need almost check up every day on the latest polls to figure out who is edging who and in what states.
I think the bottom line with this election is that Americans are ready for CHANGE. Our current President sits at a 58% disapproval rating, and 68% of Americans feel this country is headed on the wrong track (CBS News poll). Even worse, only 28% of Americans feel that the US will ultimately achieve its aims in Iraq. Perhaps what complicates the situation even worse is simply how complicated the war itself is. On top of that, other domestic issues plague this administration - illegal immigrants, a failing healthcare system, privatization of social security (should we, shouldn't we), the economy (the USD continues to lose value), the Patriot Act, etc etc. And of course, there's the various scandals - Dick Cheney (and conflicts of interest with Halliburton), Karl Rove, Tom DeLay, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales, the destruction of CIA "Torture Tapes"...the list goes on.
After eight years of a neoconservative administration, November 4th 2008 couldn't come any quicker. But how does one go about choosing the candidate that is best for them? Will the Christian fundamentalist right finally settle on one particular candidate such as a Mike Huckabee, or will they think outside of their moralistic box for once and perhaps choose another stronger Republican who will get the US fiscal house in order - perhaps a Romney or McCain? Will those older folks who make up the democratic base have enough pull to launch Clinton as their candidate (the first woman primary winner)? Or will the younger Generation X and Millenial Democrats who typically support Obama be able to put the Illinois senator as the Democratic candidate for 2008 (the first African-American to win the primary)? The questions and outcome possibilities here surely are endless and exciting...and quite unprecedented in US History.
Because of the sheer amount of issues wrapped around the election and thus possibilities for future blog posts, I'm going to try and limit this blog to strictly discussing Dr. Ron Paul - but look for future posts about the issues listed above.
First, allow me to explain how I got to the point of supporting Paul. I am a very open minded person, and so last summer I began to read a couple books some of the candidates had put out - "The Audacity of Hope" by Barack Obama, and "Leadership" by Rudolph Guiliani. Both books had their strong points, particularly Obama's. His charisma and ability to plainly address the issues with such poised demeanor is truly remarkable. I first heard of Ron Paul though on my college campus, as many of my friends constantly let their support of him be known. As most people who first hear about him, my initially thought was...this guy is far too radical to ever truly have any credible sway in the election run. One particular conversation I had about Paul was with a friend named Sara. Over dinner, she kept going on and on about how Paul wanted to get rid of the income tax, the IRS, the department of education. I thought she was simply crazy for supporting such a radical candidate! And then I began research of my own...
And by research, I mean that I conveniently "googled" Ron Paul - and one of the key "label words" I found with nearly every article was the word "Constitutionalist." Paul, who arguably has the most consistent voting record in Washington, has never once voted for any bill or measure that violates the Constitution. In fact, what really distinguishes Paul from the rest of the Republicans is that he is against the Iraq war, simply on the grounds that it is an ILLEGAL war. According to the Consitution, the President does not have the power without congressional approval to fight any war, and this was clearly violated with the invasion of Iraq in 2003. What a difference from the days when a declaration of war was clean and precise and accomplished by a responsible Congress and an informed people (this hasn't happened since 1941)!
One of Paul's ideas which I like the most though is the sovereignty of the STATE - no other candidate on either side will talk about this. Paul feels like issues such as abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, gun control, the war on drugs - these all should be decided on by the STATES. None of these are federal issues! If people from a fairly liberal state like Massachusetts, New York, or California, feel like they want to allow gay marriage or abortion - those states have the right to act in that matter. But if a typically conservate state such as Texas, Tennessee, or Mississippi feels like it is not in their state's best interest to support those issues, than abortion and gay marriage would be outlawed in those states. Essentially, Paul feels like the people that make up the state of Texas know best what Texans want and states like New Jersey or New Hampshire shouldn't have any say in what goes on in the deep South.
The interesting thing about this point of view is that it is completely in line with what our Founding Fathers had in mind. With regard to Iraq, Paul continues to oppose U.S. presence in Iraq, charging the government with using the War on Terror to curtail civil liberties (ex. the Patriot Act). He believes a "JUST" declaration of war after the September 11, 2001 attacks would have been enough against the actual terrorists, Al-Qaeda, rather than against Iraq, which has not been linked to the attacks.
What has surprised me the most about Ron Paul is just how SENSIBLE his ideas about the economy really are (he has written several economic policy books). Paul believes the recent crash of the housing market proves the country's economic system is at a "crises point."
"If China continues to loan us money to subsidize our account deficits, the dollar is going to collapse," he said. "They are not taking our dollars as readily, that's why the dollar is down. The measurement of the economic crises we are facing is in the value of the dollar." The self-described Libertarian has said deficit spending, maintaining troops and military bases overseas, and social entitlement programs will eventually cause a breakdown of America's economy. His administration, if elected, would be dedicated to massively cutting back on federal spending - which brings me back to where I was this past fall, when I had every intention of voting Democrat...
Keep in mind that traditionally, Republicans have stood for small government spending and low taxes, and the Democrats have stood for large government and higher taxes. But the situation that we have now is that BOTH parties are big government and big spending - the chief difference is where the money goes. The Republicans believe American money is best spent on "nation-building," funding military bases in hundreds of countries, deficit spending, and financing a war. It is important to note that this is not the old-Reagan-Republican "conservative" view, but the Republican "neoconservative" view. (Neocons believe that big government spending is OK if it is justified by war, nation building, or protecting the country, whereas the traditional conservative does NOT).
The Democrats stand for spending American money on measures of social reform, a better funded healthcare system, and an improved educational system. In considering what party to align myself with, I saw that both parties were wanting to spend alot of money, but I felt that at the very least all the money our government spends should be put back into our OWN healthcare, educational system, social programs, etc. Until reading up on Ron Paul, I had every intention of supporting Barack Obama (and I still hope he gathers the momentum needed to top Clinton in the primaries). Still, it wasn't until I really read and studied Paul's views about how this country SHOULD be governed, that I began to lend him an ear.
"A lot of people say the economy is great, but there should be some concern because if you talk to low- or middle-income people today, they are hurting," Paul claims. "If you allow governments to print the money, then there is no restraint on government because they can always rely on inflation."
Perhaps my favorite story I've heard about Ron Paul thus yet involved a bill that was brought up for a congressional vote regarding 5 medals that the federal government wanted to fund, a total of about $20,000. The medals were to be given in memory to several humanitarian heroes, including Martin Luther King Jr. and Mother Theresa. Being the only congressman who voted against the bill (he is often referred to as Dr.No), Paul had a chance to stand up and address the house. He commented, "While I do believe that these men and women deserve these medals, I do not believe it the job of the federal government to use taxpayer dollars to do so. In fact, (he reaches into pocket) I'll put $100 of my own money on the table here, and if each one of you in this room will match me, we'll have more than enough money to fund these medals." Paul then sat down and waited, while NONE of his colleagues stood to match the money. Paul then stood back up in front of his peers and simply stated, "It's alot easier spending other people's money than it is your own."
...so what are your thoughts about Dr. Ron Paul? what about the other candidates, who do you think is best prepared to lead our country for the next four years and why? leave your thoughts for all to read!
As some of you who are reading this may have been as well, I was initially astounded by the number of candidates running for president in 2008. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Mitt Romney, Rudy Guiliani, John Edwards, Mike Huckabee...just to name a few. In fact, so many poll changes have happened in the past 2 months, one need almost check up every day on the latest polls to figure out who is edging who and in what states.
I think the bottom line with this election is that Americans are ready for CHANGE. Our current President sits at a 58% disapproval rating, and 68% of Americans feel this country is headed on the wrong track (CBS News poll). Even worse, only 28% of Americans feel that the US will ultimately achieve its aims in Iraq. Perhaps what complicates the situation even worse is simply how complicated the war itself is. On top of that, other domestic issues plague this administration - illegal immigrants, a failing healthcare system, privatization of social security (should we, shouldn't we), the economy (the USD continues to lose value), the Patriot Act, etc etc. And of course, there's the various scandals - Dick Cheney (and conflicts of interest with Halliburton), Karl Rove, Tom DeLay, John Ashcroft, Alberto Gonzales, the destruction of CIA "Torture Tapes"...the list goes on.
After eight years of a neoconservative administration, November 4th 2008 couldn't come any quicker. But how does one go about choosing the candidate that is best for them? Will the Christian fundamentalist right finally settle on one particular candidate such as a Mike Huckabee, or will they think outside of their moralistic box for once and perhaps choose another stronger Republican who will get the US fiscal house in order - perhaps a Romney or McCain? Will those older folks who make up the democratic base have enough pull to launch Clinton as their candidate (the first woman primary winner)? Or will the younger Generation X and Millenial Democrats who typically support Obama be able to put the Illinois senator as the Democratic candidate for 2008 (the first African-American to win the primary)? The questions and outcome possibilities here surely are endless and exciting...and quite unprecedented in US History.
Because of the sheer amount of issues wrapped around the election and thus possibilities for future blog posts, I'm going to try and limit this blog to strictly discussing Dr. Ron Paul - but look for future posts about the issues listed above.
First, allow me to explain how I got to the point of supporting Paul. I am a very open minded person, and so last summer I began to read a couple books some of the candidates had put out - "The Audacity of Hope" by Barack Obama, and "Leadership" by Rudolph Guiliani. Both books had their strong points, particularly Obama's. His charisma and ability to plainly address the issues with such poised demeanor is truly remarkable. I first heard of Ron Paul though on my college campus, as many of my friends constantly let their support of him be known. As most people who first hear about him, my initially thought was...this guy is far too radical to ever truly have any credible sway in the election run. One particular conversation I had about Paul was with a friend named Sara. Over dinner, she kept going on and on about how Paul wanted to get rid of the income tax, the IRS, the department of education. I thought she was simply crazy for supporting such a radical candidate! And then I began research of my own...
And by research, I mean that I conveniently "googled" Ron Paul - and one of the key "label words" I found with nearly every article was the word "Constitutionalist." Paul, who arguably has the most consistent voting record in Washington, has never once voted for any bill or measure that violates the Constitution. In fact, what really distinguishes Paul from the rest of the Republicans is that he is against the Iraq war, simply on the grounds that it is an ILLEGAL war. According to the Consitution, the President does not have the power without congressional approval to fight any war, and this was clearly violated with the invasion of Iraq in 2003. What a difference from the days when a declaration of war was clean and precise and accomplished by a responsible Congress and an informed people (this hasn't happened since 1941)!
One of Paul's ideas which I like the most though is the sovereignty of the STATE - no other candidate on either side will talk about this. Paul feels like issues such as abortion, stem cell research, gay marriage, gun control, the war on drugs - these all should be decided on by the STATES. None of these are federal issues! If people from a fairly liberal state like Massachusetts, New York, or California, feel like they want to allow gay marriage or abortion - those states have the right to act in that matter. But if a typically conservate state such as Texas, Tennessee, or Mississippi feels like it is not in their state's best interest to support those issues, than abortion and gay marriage would be outlawed in those states. Essentially, Paul feels like the people that make up the state of Texas know best what Texans want and states like New Jersey or New Hampshire shouldn't have any say in what goes on in the deep South.
The interesting thing about this point of view is that it is completely in line with what our Founding Fathers had in mind. With regard to Iraq, Paul continues to oppose U.S. presence in Iraq, charging the government with using the War on Terror to curtail civil liberties (ex. the Patriot Act). He believes a "JUST" declaration of war after the September 11, 2001 attacks would have been enough against the actual terrorists, Al-Qaeda, rather than against Iraq, which has not been linked to the attacks.
What has surprised me the most about Ron Paul is just how SENSIBLE his ideas about the economy really are (he has written several economic policy books). Paul believes the recent crash of the housing market proves the country's economic system is at a "crises point."
"If China continues to loan us money to subsidize our account deficits, the dollar is going to collapse," he said. "They are not taking our dollars as readily, that's why the dollar is down. The measurement of the economic crises we are facing is in the value of the dollar." The self-described Libertarian has said deficit spending, maintaining troops and military bases overseas, and social entitlement programs will eventually cause a breakdown of America's economy. His administration, if elected, would be dedicated to massively cutting back on federal spending - which brings me back to where I was this past fall, when I had every intention of voting Democrat...
Keep in mind that traditionally, Republicans have stood for small government spending and low taxes, and the Democrats have stood for large government and higher taxes. But the situation that we have now is that BOTH parties are big government and big spending - the chief difference is where the money goes. The Republicans believe American money is best spent on "nation-building," funding military bases in hundreds of countries, deficit spending, and financing a war. It is important to note that this is not the old-Reagan-Republican "conservative" view, but the Republican "neoconservative" view. (Neocons believe that big government spending is OK if it is justified by war, nation building, or protecting the country, whereas the traditional conservative does NOT).
The Democrats stand for spending American money on measures of social reform, a better funded healthcare system, and an improved educational system. In considering what party to align myself with, I saw that both parties were wanting to spend alot of money, but I felt that at the very least all the money our government spends should be put back into our OWN healthcare, educational system, social programs, etc. Until reading up on Ron Paul, I had every intention of supporting Barack Obama (and I still hope he gathers the momentum needed to top Clinton in the primaries). Still, it wasn't until I really read and studied Paul's views about how this country SHOULD be governed, that I began to lend him an ear.
"A lot of people say the economy is great, but there should be some concern because if you talk to low- or middle-income people today, they are hurting," Paul claims. "If you allow governments to print the money, then there is no restraint on government because they can always rely on inflation."
Perhaps my favorite story I've heard about Ron Paul thus yet involved a bill that was brought up for a congressional vote regarding 5 medals that the federal government wanted to fund, a total of about $20,000. The medals were to be given in memory to several humanitarian heroes, including Martin Luther King Jr. and Mother Theresa. Being the only congressman who voted against the bill (he is often referred to as Dr.No), Paul had a chance to stand up and address the house. He commented, "While I do believe that these men and women deserve these medals, I do not believe it the job of the federal government to use taxpayer dollars to do so. In fact, (he reaches into pocket) I'll put $100 of my own money on the table here, and if each one of you in this room will match me, we'll have more than enough money to fund these medals." Paul then sat down and waited, while NONE of his colleagues stood to match the money. Paul then stood back up in front of his peers and simply stated, "It's alot easier spending other people's money than it is your own."
...so what are your thoughts about Dr. Ron Paul? what about the other candidates, who do you think is best prepared to lead our country for the next four years and why? leave your thoughts for all to read!
Friday, December 21, 2007
So it begins...
After deciding to take on the daunting yet quite rewarding task of keeping up a weekly blog, I began to contemplate different possibilities for the subject of its very first post. Of course, something BIG and POLITICAL (such as the destruction of certain CIA tapes) could be substantial, entertaining, and perhaps even strike up conversation - one of the ultimate goals of "An Educated Mind Drifts." Following much thought however, I took into consideration the very nature of this blog, where events and their consequences will be reported with a certain regularity.
To distinguish this particular post, I needed something different. With that in mind, I am dedicating this entire first post to a little background information on me - specifically with regard to the series of events that led to the creation of this very blog you're reading. For those of you who know me relatively well, you know that I was constantly writing during my sophomore year of college, but I eventually burnt out on writing endless album reviews and getting the same mechanical interviews from the same-minded, money focused musicians. But now I am back and hopefully, I will shed some light here on why I feel a calling, more so than ever, to record my own thoughts and insights into the events of today that are undoubtedly shaping (and perhaps homogenizing) the world of tomorrow...
I suppose it's fairly simple really - it all started with a guitar. I found the 1962 Gibson Acoustic in my parent's closet one day, and refused to part with it for three days straight. Not long after, I started high school, and some friends of mine and I got together and started a band. Soaked in southern baptist Christianity and simple Praise and worship music at the time, I contributed the limited chords I knew and somehow we made it...work. As progress began to kick in though, the band, we as musicians, got good - really good (that is to say - we started writing our own music).
One afternoon in the fall of my junior year, I had this idea, a revelation really, that immediately lead to a shift in the way I thought about the world. Perhaps that sounds far too grand and pompous, but the point is - I stumbled upon the power, the importance, the sure effectiveness... of targeted marketing! It was fairly simple really, just consider my circumstances: I was playing guitar in a Christian band with my best friends called "Carry The Cross." Even the very name of our band itself surely indicated that our music and image was safe and friendly...for the entire family - and I knew I had to exhaust this to every person I publicized to (we'll get to the ethics of "monopolizing on morals" perhaps in another posting.) Regardless, at this point of time (roughly 2002), churches all across the country were finally capitalizing their entities by joining the online rush to get a website for themselves (a "short" 3 years behind the secular world and its dot com bubble).
To make a long story short, I began to research and then mass email youth pastors from churches all over North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia - literally. If any given church in these states had a website, an email was sure to be sent to its respective youth pastor about my band. It was so simple and EFFECTIVE - I honestly couldn't believe it. Within any particular day, I'd have 7-10 emails in my inbox from youth pastors wanting to book us for their next event, and willing to pay us upwards of $500 - and here I am, a 16 year old finally understanding the effectiveness of internet advertising. During those last two years of high school, the band played well over 100 shows, was on a Christian international television channel and had recorded several demos. In a roundabout way, it was at this point that I fell in love with the music industry. One particular recording engineer we worked with happened to clue me in about a university called BELMONT in Nashville that was known for its College of Music Business. Immediately, I knew it would be a perfect fit.
Being inquisitive in nature, making the move from a progressive, diverse, banking culture in my hometown of Charlotte to the much more industrial, southern, and incredibly segregated town of Nashville led me to initially resent the city. Recent reports from the Economic Policy Institute even indicate that Tennessee is the 3rd worst in the country when it comes to income inequality. This point becomes almost laughable considering the racial contrast near my residence in Belmont, where one street over you'll find the elitist, yuppie based, and white Hillsboro Village - yet go one street the other way and you're in the epicenter of public housing on 12th Avenue. Regardless, it was soon after the move to Belmont that I fell in love with music - and I don't mean this lightly. I had become obsessed with music, obsessed. With any given artist of almost any genre, I could tell you the artist's past discography and any future albums on the way, the city where that artist got their start, and other similar artists who relied on the same demographic.
During this same fall of 2006, I realized that I still had a deep passion for the written word. In the bigger picture, I always have been fascinated by the art of communication, especially with regard to the ways in which technology has shaped and molded its delivery, even in the past ten years. (I write this at a Starbucks in Charlotte, and many of you will read it at your own computers in cities all across the country - that alone is remarkable.) I decided to unite three passions of mine that fall - music, journalism, and my determined spirit to get published in as many outlets as possible. Indeed, that was the case, as my freelance writings were sold and published by the Tennessean, the Country Music Association, Lifeway, The Vanderbilt Hustler, The Belmont VISION, and InsideVandy.com - and by the end of that sophomore year, I was burnt out.
This past summer and fall, I'd put down the pen for several reasons. Mostly, I was fed up. In my studying of media conglomerates and their practices in this country, I began to realize how beauracratic and monopolistic control was becoming over media outlets. This puzzled me - within any given week, any given multi-national corporation, we'll say NewsCorp, could "freely" prance around and purchase companies in film, television, newspapers, magazines, etc. A logical person looks at this situation and says - WAIT! If only ONE company has so much control over what we see and hear and consequentially know, does that not extremely limit the diversity of the news reported and hurt the credibility of these respective news sources? And even further yet, are there not LAWS or some sort of Federal agency that should be REGULATING the practices of such powerful companies?
Well the answer to all the above questions is a matter of fact yes! In fact, there is even an agency originally designed to check such blatant corporatlistic power - the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC. (It is at this point that I could go on a lengthy rabbit trail of criticism towards the completely useless FCC, but I'll restrain myself for future posts.) Either way, it was in the course of my journalistic efforts that I became fascinated on the TIES between BUSINESS and LAW. The two affect every aspect of life so much that we often don't even take them into consideration.
For example, right now I sit in a Starbucks and according to law, if on my walk to the bathroom I slip and fall and break my wrist, Starbucks is liable for expenses related to the wrist (given that it wasn't my gross negligence that led to the fall). This is simply the (LAW). The company risks this liability because ultimately it needs business (customers). In response though, many businesses will purchase a commercial liability insurance policy to protect them in the case that a customer does fall and needs medical attention. This leads to the (BUSINESS) of insurance companies, who gladly issue as many policies as possible to maximize their own profits.
So that leads to me the place where I am now, two weeks before beginning the 1st of 3 semesters left in my college career. The more I inquire into the corporations that are homogenizing this country by lining every street in America (and most of the world) with McDonald's, Burger Kings, Wendy's, Taco Bells, Starbucks, and Subways, the more fascinated I become by those millions of Americans who are employed by the "McJobs" these companies provide. The term "McJob," which was controversially just added to Webster's dictionary, refers to any job that: pays low wages, requires little to no skill, and provides little or no advancement opportunity. This phenomenon of the rapid expansion of the service industry sector of our economy leads to many other questions on the minds of Americans today: the employment of illegal immigrants, the ever increasing gap between the rich and poor, and the rapidly dissipating middle class. With each passing generation, Bob Dylan's famous line never seems to lose its relevance, "Oh the times, they are a changin'."
With three semesters left in my college career, and a somewhat newly found passion for constantly increasing my knowledge about laws, business, the free-market, and how the three intersect, I have decided to pursue law school post graduation. At this point, I have just begun to crack open one of the many LSAT prep books, with hopes particularly of conquering the dreaded analytical reasoning or "logic games" section. More importantly though with 2008 near in sight, I have begun to roll up my sleeves and really embrace the daunting task of analyzing our country's government and to the many politicians and public officials who are supposed to be representing me, the citizen - the TAXPAYER.
This past week, I took advantage of an opportunity to travel to Davenport, Iowa, and campaign for presidential hopeful Dr. Ron Paul. In the next post, I will breakdown some of Dr. Paul's views and the many many reasons why I feel he is the only sensible and fiscal conservative congressman in Washington. Perhaps even a bigger issue, I will discuss the current conditions of the Federal Reserve Bank and how it's leadership is dragging the value of the American dollar farther and farther down the tubes.
That basically sums up the events that have led me here, to starting this blog. My hope is that this blog will only be seen as a starting point, a guide, towards more conversation and thinking regarding the issues affecting America today (particularly my generation, the Millennials). As a side note, feel free to leave any comments, questions, or concerns about posts you would like to see. Express your opinion!
To distinguish this particular post, I needed something different. With that in mind, I am dedicating this entire first post to a little background information on me - specifically with regard to the series of events that led to the creation of this very blog you're reading. For those of you who know me relatively well, you know that I was constantly writing during my sophomore year of college, but I eventually burnt out on writing endless album reviews and getting the same mechanical interviews from the same-minded, money focused musicians. But now I am back and hopefully, I will shed some light here on why I feel a calling, more so than ever, to record my own thoughts and insights into the events of today that are undoubtedly shaping (and perhaps homogenizing) the world of tomorrow...
I suppose it's fairly simple really - it all started with a guitar. I found the 1962 Gibson Acoustic in my parent's closet one day, and refused to part with it for three days straight. Not long after, I started high school, and some friends of mine and I got together and started a band. Soaked in southern baptist Christianity and simple Praise and worship music at the time, I contributed the limited chords I knew and somehow we made it...work. As progress began to kick in though, the band, we as musicians, got good - really good (that is to say - we started writing our own music).
One afternoon in the fall of my junior year, I had this idea, a revelation really, that immediately lead to a shift in the way I thought about the world. Perhaps that sounds far too grand and pompous, but the point is - I stumbled upon the power, the importance, the sure effectiveness... of targeted marketing! It was fairly simple really, just consider my circumstances: I was playing guitar in a Christian band with my best friends called "Carry The Cross." Even the very name of our band itself surely indicated that our music and image was safe and friendly...for the entire family - and I knew I had to exhaust this to every person I publicized to (we'll get to the ethics of "monopolizing on morals" perhaps in another posting.) Regardless, at this point of time (roughly 2002), churches all across the country were finally capitalizing their entities by joining the online rush to get a website for themselves (a "short" 3 years behind the secular world and its dot com bubble).
To make a long story short, I began to research and then mass email youth pastors from churches all over North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia - literally. If any given church in these states had a website, an email was sure to be sent to its respective youth pastor about my band. It was so simple and EFFECTIVE - I honestly couldn't believe it. Within any particular day, I'd have 7-10 emails in my inbox from youth pastors wanting to book us for their next event, and willing to pay us upwards of $500 - and here I am, a 16 year old finally understanding the effectiveness of internet advertising. During those last two years of high school, the band played well over 100 shows, was on a Christian international television channel and had recorded several demos. In a roundabout way, it was at this point that I fell in love with the music industry. One particular recording engineer we worked with happened to clue me in about a university called BELMONT in Nashville that was known for its College of Music Business. Immediately, I knew it would be a perfect fit.
Being inquisitive in nature, making the move from a progressive, diverse, banking culture in my hometown of Charlotte to the much more industrial, southern, and incredibly segregated town of Nashville led me to initially resent the city. Recent reports from the Economic Policy Institute even indicate that Tennessee is the 3rd worst in the country when it comes to income inequality. This point becomes almost laughable considering the racial contrast near my residence in Belmont, where one street over you'll find the elitist, yuppie based, and white Hillsboro Village - yet go one street the other way and you're in the epicenter of public housing on 12th Avenue. Regardless, it was soon after the move to Belmont that I fell in love with music - and I don't mean this lightly. I had become obsessed with music, obsessed. With any given artist of almost any genre, I could tell you the artist's past discography and any future albums on the way, the city where that artist got their start, and other similar artists who relied on the same demographic.
During this same fall of 2006, I realized that I still had a deep passion for the written word. In the bigger picture, I always have been fascinated by the art of communication, especially with regard to the ways in which technology has shaped and molded its delivery, even in the past ten years. (I write this at a Starbucks in Charlotte, and many of you will read it at your own computers in cities all across the country - that alone is remarkable.) I decided to unite three passions of mine that fall - music, journalism, and my determined spirit to get published in as many outlets as possible. Indeed, that was the case, as my freelance writings were sold and published by the Tennessean, the Country Music Association, Lifeway, The Vanderbilt Hustler, The Belmont VISION, and InsideVandy.com - and by the end of that sophomore year, I was burnt out.
This past summer and fall, I'd put down the pen for several reasons. Mostly, I was fed up. In my studying of media conglomerates and their practices in this country, I began to realize how beauracratic and monopolistic control was becoming over media outlets. This puzzled me - within any given week, any given multi-national corporation, we'll say NewsCorp, could "freely" prance around and purchase companies in film, television, newspapers, magazines, etc. A logical person looks at this situation and says - WAIT! If only ONE company has so much control over what we see and hear and consequentially know, does that not extremely limit the diversity of the news reported and hurt the credibility of these respective news sources? And even further yet, are there not LAWS or some sort of Federal agency that should be REGULATING the practices of such powerful companies?
Well the answer to all the above questions is a matter of fact yes! In fact, there is even an agency originally designed to check such blatant corporatlistic power - the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC. (It is at this point that I could go on a lengthy rabbit trail of criticism towards the completely useless FCC, but I'll restrain myself for future posts.) Either way, it was in the course of my journalistic efforts that I became fascinated on the TIES between BUSINESS and LAW. The two affect every aspect of life so much that we often don't even take them into consideration.
For example, right now I sit in a Starbucks and according to law, if on my walk to the bathroom I slip and fall and break my wrist, Starbucks is liable for expenses related to the wrist (given that it wasn't my gross negligence that led to the fall). This is simply the (LAW). The company risks this liability because ultimately it needs business (customers). In response though, many businesses will purchase a commercial liability insurance policy to protect them in the case that a customer does fall and needs medical attention. This leads to the (BUSINESS) of insurance companies, who gladly issue as many policies as possible to maximize their own profits.
So that leads to me the place where I am now, two weeks before beginning the 1st of 3 semesters left in my college career. The more I inquire into the corporations that are homogenizing this country by lining every street in America (and most of the world) with McDonald's, Burger Kings, Wendy's, Taco Bells, Starbucks, and Subways, the more fascinated I become by those millions of Americans who are employed by the "McJobs" these companies provide. The term "McJob," which was controversially just added to Webster's dictionary, refers to any job that: pays low wages, requires little to no skill, and provides little or no advancement opportunity. This phenomenon of the rapid expansion of the service industry sector of our economy leads to many other questions on the minds of Americans today: the employment of illegal immigrants, the ever increasing gap between the rich and poor, and the rapidly dissipating middle class. With each passing generation, Bob Dylan's famous line never seems to lose its relevance, "Oh the times, they are a changin'."
With three semesters left in my college career, and a somewhat newly found passion for constantly increasing my knowledge about laws, business, the free-market, and how the three intersect, I have decided to pursue law school post graduation. At this point, I have just begun to crack open one of the many LSAT prep books, with hopes particularly of conquering the dreaded analytical reasoning or "logic games" section. More importantly though with 2008 near in sight, I have begun to roll up my sleeves and really embrace the daunting task of analyzing our country's government and to the many politicians and public officials who are supposed to be representing me, the citizen - the TAXPAYER.
This past week, I took advantage of an opportunity to travel to Davenport, Iowa, and campaign for presidential hopeful Dr. Ron Paul. In the next post, I will breakdown some of Dr. Paul's views and the many many reasons why I feel he is the only sensible and fiscal conservative congressman in Washington. Perhaps even a bigger issue, I will discuss the current conditions of the Federal Reserve Bank and how it's leadership is dragging the value of the American dollar farther and farther down the tubes.
That basically sums up the events that have led me here, to starting this blog. My hope is that this blog will only be seen as a starting point, a guide, towards more conversation and thinking regarding the issues affecting America today (particularly my generation, the Millennials). As a side note, feel free to leave any comments, questions, or concerns about posts you would like to see. Express your opinion!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)