Weekend Warriors

"Holy F balls." That's how C suggested I start this entry. I agree that this phrase sums our exasperation at our current situation. We had slept in the morning after Thanksgiving and were brainstorming all the wonderfully relaxing things we could fit in to our three extra days of holiday vacation: "Let's sleep in and wash my car windows;" "let's watch football and go shopping;" "let's clean the house." Somehow the conversation turned to dream house renovations. C asked me what I would do to change the kitchen. We then started talking about knocking out walls around the house. In an attempt to reign ourselves in, I mentioned that if we were going to do anything, we should pick a needed change--like removing this dirty carpet. A blink later and C was on her knees pulling carpet back to appraise the hardwood floors. I think she was as excited as I when we realized the floors were probably in great condition throughout. By noon we had removed all the carpet and padding in the hallway. We went to lunch and wrote down our strategy for refinishing our hardwood floors. However, our flowchart involved a lot less steps than what we've done so far. It is late on Sunday morning and we are at Panera for the third time this weekend. Our refrigerator and oven are conveniently blocked by our couch and a few bookcases. So that is why we ate Wendy's last night.

--

I'm finishing up this post Monday morning. C is at home finishing up the second coat of stain in the living room and hallway. This project has involved renting (for 24 hours) an electrical floor sander and 3 passes over approximately 900 square feet with successively finer sanding pads; scrupulous vacuuming; tack-cloth-ing; and now TWO coats of noxious wood stain (English Chestnut!). That is, not to mention dismantling our home and packing our possessions into the basement and garage. Soon we will be polyurethane-ing. Did I mention that we overlooked the fact that 40 degree temperatures and rainy weather is really slowing down our progress? Well, the floors look gorgeous so far and pictures will be up soon.

--

I want to mention that this project started on "Black Friday"--the day after Thanksgiving--the largest shopping day of the year, and also designated as "Buy Nothing Day" by radical "Jammers and Cultural Creatives" across the developed world. I'm proud to say, in the spirit of B.N.D., C and I rented a tool to work together to improve our house. We didn't have to wade through crowds of sale-hungered mall shoppers to exchange money for services, improve our quality of life, and support the economy. We also improved the value of our house, which might, in a small way, improve the value of our neighborhood. The cynic would remind us that we did buy some tools (a sanding block, a broom handle...) that will remain in our possession, that we quickly went through some inexpensive latex gloves, and that we created a lot of trash. I will remind the cynic that we saved some beautiful wood floors, original to the house (50 years old!), and that carpet should never have been put into the house in the first place. Our house will be cleaner, contain less allergens, and be easier to clean, and our knowledge and independence is increased. Remember the three R's: Reduce, Reuse, Refinish...?

(All my love to C, my beautiful wife, who was a powerhouse this weekend and this morning. She is an incredibly hard worker and inspires me constantly. She was in her element from the point of ripping out the carpet. C, I know this project has been testing your patience, and the fast food we've been fueling up on is killing us slowly, but everything looks great and I am loving you more and more every second. When this project is finished, hopefully I'll make it up to you, big time.)

Blah

It was indirectly pointed out that in my last blog I inaccurately paraphrased the underlying theme of Newt Gingrich's latest book on the environment. I reported, "[Gingrich] asserted that the only feasible way to protect the Earth is by using market-oriented and entrepreneurial incentives." Let me reveal the defining quote from Gingrich's interview in Outside magazine: "[Environmentalism's real opportunity is] to combine market-oriented, entrepreneurial incentives that work in America with the science and technology that have made us the most successful country in history." Now, allow me to direct you to the definite article "the" placed in reference to "science and technology," which could be interpreted as only the science and technology that is accepted by one because that specific S&T supports one's stance on an issue. Later in my blog I point out Gingrich's skepticism of data on climate change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says this: "Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level." But in the video (one I found after a hasty internet search), it appears that Gingrich would flaunt that "climate change," a generic term in this context, is natural and historical, and science hasn't proven otherwise. I guess it's necessary that the "Climate Change" to which I refer is of the unique/unequivocal type caused by global industrialization. I suppose my greater point is that there is a huge skepticism of science and technology that would restrict the free market. Science will never be proven, but I insist that theories are significant, and more importantly, humans must ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION.

Now let me move forward to admit that my use of a quote from an online editorial was a mistake, only so far as I accepted this phrase: "...the most innovative market based environmental strategies have come from [the Left]" (emphasis mine). Originally, I read it as (and I'm paraphrasing here): "Leftists also come up with successful and innovative market based environmental strategies." I apologize to all the innovative conservatives who felt slighted by this. Great, now that we got that out of the way, let me say: whoever the fuck can make our society more and more environmentally friendly, let'em stand up. As we move into the 2008 elections, Lefts and Rights are gonna be at each others' necks. Democrats are trying to prove they are Christian. Republicans are trying to prove they care about the environment. Whatever. In the end, hopefully the environment is saved. Newt Gingrich, from what I've seen, is a dick.

Vote for Barack Obama (a champion representative of the average person who reaches across political boundaries), learn about the Tragedy of the Commons, and don't forget to celebrate Buy Nothing Day (November 23, 2008).

Did you know the average Thanksgiving Day meal contains 5,000 calories?

"To show you how stupid the Left is..."

I ran across an Outside magazine interview with Newt Gingrich the other day about his new book, A Contract with the Earth, and "green conservatism." In it he asserted that the only feasible way to protect the Earth is by using market-oriented and entrepreneurial incentives. To follow this more closely, I searched for available videos on youtube.com. There is one video featuring Gingrich talking about "green conservatism." In it he starts, "The environment is not inherently a liberal issue. Virtually every American would like to see biodiversity... clean air... would like to make sure that we do not have unnecessary climate change," quickly adding "recognizing that the climate changes all the time" and describing climate change as "a natural geological rhythm." Minus this last ignorant part of his statement, you'd expect that maybe Newt is trying to reach across political boundaries and reaching for a bi-partisan, free-market solution to environmental problems. However, moments later, the video transitions to Gingrich starting a new thought with "To show you how stupid the Left is..." Wow! We're back to partisan politics and mudslinging. In his magazine interview, Gingrich writes "The left focuses on punishing people, and we need a strategy that rewards people." We're pushing the environment into the economic realm, and along with the benefits exist some negative implications. (Note: I originally wrote "frightening implications" but was reminded by Newt that the stereotypical radical Leftists and Al Gore are hysterical and use scare-tactics; I don't want to be associated with that if I can use facts and accepted theories to make a point.) If natural resources are simplified as commodities, they are then substitutable--the opposite of "sustainable." It is true that market forces are pretty powerful, and consumers ideally have the ability to influence how the market operates. But truthfully, most products available on market shelves do not reflect all costs (i.e. pollution, waste, etc.). As far as I understand it, gasoline and food are extremely and unfairly cheap for Americans. In the interview, Gingrich says, "We believe that markets work, and have historically created more choices, of higher quality, lower cost, and greater convenience." It is true and it is amazing.

Determined not to be discouraged by Gingrich's derailment of leftist idealism, I found another article by David Roberts that critiques A Contract with the Earth. Let me jump to Roberts' rebuttal to Gingrich's belittling of the liberal approach: "For many years now, the most innovative market-based environmental strategies have come from greens [liberal environmentalists]... The difference is not that greens oppose tax shifting and market mechanisms -- the difference is that greens also support legislative, regulatory, and legal strategies. Their primary concern is solving the problems, not with the mechanisms for doing so. After all, why fight with one hand tied behind your back?"
This lifted my spirits. I consider myself an environmentalist more than a liberal, and find reason behind both strategies. I think all corporations and businesses should convert to environmentally friendly technologies and products, but that doesn't make materialism and over-consumption acceptable. Furthermore, we can't expect the Market to shift as quickly as recommended by many scientists. And I think a precautionary approach is responsible. This is a value issue, and when money is the end-all/be-all, the environment will not be valued for its beauty and importance. If we turn to history, we will not only see the Market has provided wealth and opportunity, but it has also led to crippling of countries and people and has historically provided class systems and inequality. Social responsibility needs to be a goal at the same time--and competition works against that. So Gingrich needs to stop trying to bottle environmentalism for Conservatives and turning the tables against environmentalists that are irritating his paranoia. Let's make this a bi-partisan issue, involving market-based incentives and regulations.

Outside magazine interview Link

David Roberts editorial Link

Youtube video "Green Conservatism" Link

Death to NASCAR

The energy crisis is here, if it hasn't been here for 100 years. Although our leaders are beginning to reluctantly admit this truth, they are asking the wrong questions in an attempt to fix the symptoms. The question should not be: "What energy source can we turn to next?" (That is, to keep living and consuming at the same or an increasing rate). Agricultural sources of energy will not prove to be sustainable. (Nutrients of the product are burned resulting in the need for fertilizers to grow more energy--a new source of pollution). Instead we must ask: "How can we live well and use less energy?" What are society's needs? How can those needs be met in a sustainable way? This will involve regionalization, reviving local economies and local utility. This could result in new regional identities, culture, and tradition.

We need to revise our need for energy and reconsider how our society operates. The problems facing us will not be solved by substituting solar, wind, hydro-, or geothermal power. We need to move toward restructuring our mode of living (i.e. stop sprawling development; turn to "revitalization" of urban centers; make existing neighborhoods walk/bike-friendly with corner groceries and locally produced goods). Lost jobs can be replaced with the creation of new services that benefit "quality of life" issues.

It is impossible for many to imagine a society in which they don't need a car on a daily basis. Have you ever tried walking or biking to a store from a typical suburban house? Chances are the route would involve travelling down a high-traffic road that doesn't have a sidewalk. In other words, suburban residences are clumped and isolated from commercial centers, and the only mode of access between neighborhoods and markets are via personal automobiles. Our society is so deeply engrained to cater to the personal automobile. [Take a moment to let the rage sink in.]

...

These changes won't happen quickly, but we must soon start asking different questions and pursuing responsible solutions, not trying to move straight ahead, faster and faster, toward self-destruction.

Good Life, Go!

"A change we can believe in"

I'm getting pretty amped about Barack Obama's run for Democratic nominee. I've taken a couple opportunities to donate small amounts of money to his campaign, especially since he has allegedly been refusing money from big lobbyists. Has there ever been a candidate to whom you could relate? More than Obama, that is. I think he can offer change that none before him could. To say the least, America has been in the hands of two families for 19 years: the Bush's and Clinton's. If Hillary is nominated and elected (I'm positive Democrats will get this one), we'll be pushing that figure to at least 23 years. Four years ago I got swept up in the negative campaign pitted against the re-election of Bush. I'm getting excited because the push for Obama is so positive. I'll be expanding this post soon...

Barack's website Link

ontheissues.org: Barack Obama Link

raison d'etre

"Where should we go in search of the good life? We were not seeking to escape. Quite the contrary, we wanted to find a way in which we could put more into life and get more out of it. We were... looking for an opportunity to take on more worth-while responsibilities. The chance to help, improve and rebuild was more than an opportunity...
"We were seeking an affirmation,--a way of conducting ourselves, of looking at the world and taking part in its activities that would provide at least a minimum of those values which we considered a part of the good life. As we saw it, such values must include: simplicity, freedom from anxiety or tension [serenity], an opportunity to be useful [utility] and to live harmoniously..." (Helen and Scott Nearing, Living the Good Life)

I read this autobiography near the end of high school at a time when I was forced to make a decision about my future for which I wasn't ready. That is to say I didn't understand what college would have in store for me, if anything, and I was learning profound things about life that I understood wouldn't be learned in an expensive classroom. Digging a little deeper here I'll share that my life, at this point, was reformed through my exposure to music of subcultures pitted against mainstream American society. I had turned to "punk rock" to satisfy my need to be noticed, get loud (figuratively and literally), assert my independence, and most importantly have fun. Over time, I listened intensely to new bands of subgenres of the broader "punk" label. Apathy, cynicism, and mindless anthems of rebellion were replaced by political, social, and economic tirades fueled by wordly injustices including ones environmental. I was being inspired by a very real "peace punk" movement that was underground (i.e. remote from the eyes of the mainstream media), and it really captured and fired up my heart.
To make a longer story short, I was being exposed to some ideas that are so far removed from what I was being fed by my school, mainly--the political, social, and environmental impacts of food, diet, work, and the interrelated values that connect them. (Vegetarianism and veganism are HUGE movements connected to underground punk.) Some bands and other punk literature were highlighting bigger ideas like gardening, reflecting on land ownership and "farming" (in an alternative or non-conventional sense), and communal social living. My mind was being blown away. I started using school projects as an opportunity to learn about these ideas. Junior year I did an "author report" on Wendell Berry--I'll never remember how or why I stumbled on to this hugely inspirational and eloquent writer. I do credit him largely with inspiring the love, understanding, and respect for farming and gardening that I now have. He also helped to reconcile my confusion and growing concerns about the conflict between agriculture and nature. At some point within the following year I picked up Helen and Scott Nearing's book "Living the Good Life"--a sort of handbook/manifesto about moving from New York City to Vermont to live a completely self-sufficient and satisfying life. Moving on, I connected my fascination with this book with my new desire to live at Denison University's Homestead, of which I knew nothing but it's premise of communal living in the woods, where cabins were heated and food was cooked with wood chopped by its residents, bonfires and music were abundant, and farm animals were periodically kept. This was an opportunity to attend a college and, more importantly, learn about a lifestyle I was beginning to idealize. (Note: I came to learn there are hundreds of successful intentional communities around the 'States, welcoming to new residents; fortunatley, this was realized after I was established in college.)
Ok, that covers a lot of my journey to this point: recently deployed from college, working a very good job, now married, and settling into a house we own (Thanks to the tremendous support from our family). My motivation to move into a house was the opportunity to start establishing, or expanding my "good life." This includes the chance to grow vegetables, to landscape in an ecologically-sound way, to have spaces that would permit and inspire art (and music and literature) production and to prepare good and wholesome food. Also, this is to provide a space to host family and friends--something I/we have never had an opportunity to do...
The term "Good Life" has become loaded with all the values and principles that I, at any one time, believe are essential to living well and being happy. I suppose the values and principles will always be in flux, but at the end of the day, one's happiness is the measuring device. If you're not happy about something, what does that say about the way you are living? What can you change or do to solve your problem?