Perette

There are more important things than me.
350.org

Work

Reference

On modern society, current events, and how The Machine runs our lives.

Contents

1. About This Document

1.1. Document status

Work on this document was started 26 August, 2001.

Some editing was done on 7 December, 2003 and the document released. Some sections aren't done, but I've been feeling like I won't write anymore so I'm just releasing it as-is.

1.2. Getting Inside My Head

There is a lot of data passing around us every day. Daily news, new technologies to learn, new people to meet. For me, and I think for anyone, it's impossible to keep up with everything. It's okay. We much each decide where to apply our attention, and how much of it 1 . The rest of it, much as we might be interested, must go by the wayside. I find it useful to accept this as a reality of life, because otherwise I feel like I'm not keeping up, or not doing enough, etc.

In addition to the things to which we consciously direct our attention, there is a great deal of data that pours into us from the world around and can't be avoided. This is constantly presented around us because someone - usually advertisers - want something from us. Consider these few scenarios:

Lie Explained
Two out of three prefer... You wouldn't want to feel like the oddball, so you should like our product too.
Free! For a limited time, then we hope you won't want to screw around canceling whatever we've sold you.
Free! As long as you buy a few at a really inflated mark-up.
This is gonna be the storm of the century... so it's real exciting! Stay tuned and watch some advertisements, and we'll be back soon without any new information.

Consider things you are told, and what ulterior motive the source has for telling them to you.

2. Balance & how most spectrums are a loop

In today's society, most of us behave as if most things in life are a spectrum. We choose a side, and stay on that side. If one stays in the middle, one may be accused of waffling and indecisiveness.

In some ways, these are indeed spectrums. However, if one is adequately either right- or left-wing, one becomes a dangerous nut-case. If one is committed to ideas exactly along political party lines, then one is probably being unreasonable (both parties have some good ideas, both have some dumb ideas). If one is excessively masculine or feminine, one is missing traits and knowledge which make us whole. One who is completely responsible has little fun because of the responsibilities, but one completely irresponsible would have little material wealth to allow him/her to be irresponsible with. One who is perfectly lawful would carry out a tyranny if the laws were written so, just as one who is chaotic may carry out a tyranny to satisfy their own purposes.

In poor nations, recycling and reuse is necessary because items are so valuable. In rich nations, recycling is necessary because it's too expensive to get rid of the stuff other ways, or we're running out of space to put it.

Instead of thinking along this motif, I propose a different concept: balance. Balance is definitely a lot trickier to figure out than just choosing a side, because it's hard to figure out exactly where to draw lines. Sometimes, like with political issues, one must keep one leg on each side of the line because both sides have truth that is not found in the middle ground. I'm pretty sure, though, that it's what we should be going for.

With balance, we figure out how best to achieve goals while considering both sides, rather than choosing a side and bulldozing as fast as possible to that end.

Instead of choosing Democrats versus Republicans, decide on each issue they raise. Don't be afraid to try things or express feelings that have been deemed as belonging to the other gender. Be responsible for the things you need to be responsible for, consider battles we are offered for the public good, but be unwilling to offer oneself as a slave at a company's altar.

Instead of trying to constantly grow the economy, or creating a panic that the world will end if it doesn't grow, we should figure out how to balance our population with it. For example, adjusting laws to encourage reuse of existing structures rather than perpetually building new offices and housing in undeveloped areas.

2.1. Transactional thinking

I find that part of achieving balance is using what I've deemed transactional thinking. I think this tends to be of most use to those who tend to be perpetually responsible, and end up getting caught in the net of the responsibilities we take on. Consider what you want to do, and the outcomes and side-effects of doing or not doing it:

If I take the time to maintain my driveway every year
  Then
    I will spend a few hours doing it every year.
    It will cost me $70 per year.
    It will last longer.
    It will delay a big expenditure by several years.
  Or I could have someone do it for me, in which case
    I spend no time but more money with same benefits.
  Otherwise
    It will cost me $0 per year, and no time investment.
    In which case, I don't have the skill to repave it myself, so I could:
      Ignore it and let it break, but it's harder to shovel in winter.
      Pay up a good chunk of money to have it repaved.

Then just figure out what is of most value to you. If getting the driveway paved is not a big deal, don't bother with yearly maintenance. If you want to avoid the big expense, maintain it. If you hate maintaining it, pay for the maintenance.

Above all, though, think of all the choices. You don't have to maintain the driveway, just because it's the responsible thing to do.

3. Analyzing ourselves

In today's society, going to a counselor for analysis and help has become an accepted need.

Going to a counselor is sometimes unnecessary. The counselor often is just there as a medium for you to recognize your own problems. Even if the counselor is useful or necessary, you will still need to do the footwork of identifying and describing the problems, and the faster and better you can do that more advantageous to you. If you're expecting that you'll just go to the counselor, they'll tell you some wisdom (math majors: insert and then a miracle occurs here) that makes everything better, then you're being completely unrealistic about therapeutic expectations.

To do this, you must decide not to feel guilty about what you find in yourself. You will not want to identify aspects if they will make you feel guilty or otherwise bad about yourself.

Begin to think about your choices, and why you make them. Realize when you are consciously acting (carefully choosing your actions and presentation to maximize chances of getting what you want— like wearing a mask, some say), when you are just reacting (you may still have a mask, but it's a protective habit and not well thought out), and when you are not wearing any masks. (I think we all do these things, but few admit it because they feel they are being untrue with the people around them.)

As you do this, you will probably find more and more ways you must learn to be honest with yourself. Improve on this, as it will allow you to improve your analysis.

As you learn things about your true self, you will want to change some of them. Decide which to change, and when you catch yourself doing them (after a while, this will occur in real-time), stop yourself. Implement the correction you desire, and continue. A word of advice: it's okay to stop yourself and say, No, wait. I think that's what I should feel, but in reality I feel like...

Lather, rinse, repeat.

4. The current state of things

4.1. The Status-Quo

The status-quo is held in balance by the many forces pulling on it. It has become unwieldy because so many forces are acting on it. No matter which way the quo moves, someone perceives they will be injured by the movement. Consequently, every group keeps pulling harder and harder, inspiring others to join in the fight. Few take time to understand the opposite force, and so things escalate indefinitely.

status-quo diagram Figure: A rough 2-dimensional representation of the status-quo. This should really be poly-dimensional, but since there are only 2 dimensions to work with in this media, so it must be represented. If you want 3-d, add a Libertarian viewpoint sticking up directly at you, and probably police protection on the other side where you can't see it because it's hidden by the Quo.

At the moment, the status-quo doesn't change because, though much effort is being exerted trying to move it, all the forces balance out (the sum of the various vectors is 0). It would also remain where it is if nobody tried to move it (the sum of all 0 vectors is 0, or the sum of N vectors of 0 is 0).

4.2. Rules we obey, but I don't know why

4.2.1. Gender stuff

Some clothing is indeed gender-specific. Men don't need braziers, and jeans are fitted for the differing curves of differing genders.

On the other hand, a lot of stuff is the same. For example, hiking boots. Go to a sporting goods store and compare the men's and women's hiking boots. The sizing numbers are off by one (women's x = men's x-1), but other than that, they are the same.

Another example I ran into was rain ponchos. I compared a men's versus a women's rain poncho that were on a display, separated into halves by gender. The two were identical, except for the marketing on the packaging. The women's were described as stylish, whereas the men's were described as durable.

4.2.2. Fashion

There are seasonal colors, which I can not fault. If the changing colors of nature are better accompanied by certain colors of clothes, that seems fair.

What doesn't make sense is fashion that lasts only one year. Why does a particular cut or color of blouse become popular this season, but fall from favor next? The garment would be the same this year as last or next. The fashion and clothing industries provide us with an image of fashion via television (so-and-so's wardrobe provided by...), movies, magazines, newspaper, and the internet. They want us to believe that we desire to be happy, we must be hip and trendy; to be hip and trendy, we must buy their current products - giving them our money.

5. Money

Money is a funny thing— sometimes it seems so simple, other times it makes no sense.

In a simple sense, money is a token for exchange. It allows us to to exchange and buffer our labor (or goods we produce by that labor) for others' goods or products, without doing so immediately and directly. If I make something, I can sell it and keep the money until I need to buy something. Alternately, I can buy something from someone when they don't immediately need my product or services. In this way, money acts as a buffering system for barter.

Money at one point had value: it was made of rare, valuable metal. Then it was replaced with paper representing valuable metal stored somewhere, then it was decoupled from the metal altogether. Now, money is numbers stored in a computer somewhere. That's where money begins to break down: why do numbers in a database have such a direct impact on people's life? What if something happened to the computers? What if the people in charge of the money change the rules?

Money has no backing value other than belief in it.

As long as we all have faith in the money, everything works fine— well, sort of. The economy runs, while the rich keep piling up more and more assets. With their money, they set the rules in their own favor by buying congress's votes through lobbying and donations, etc.

The middle class, possessing some savings, is also invested with faith in money. Their savings represent stashed up labor for which they will eventually get gains. Loosing their savings represents all that time being stolen from them.

People with little money and savings have no reason to have faith in the monetary system, but like most people, really don't think about it.

As the rich keep getting richer and the number of poor increases, there is less and less reason for the populace to be invested in the monetary system. To the poor, money is just a tool rich people use to claim ownership of things like housing and businesses, then demand the poor pay money to use the houses while they pay them as little as possible for working in the businesses.

The poor only need to pay for their houses because enough people are invested in the monetary system to keep society running. As long as enough of us believe, we can enforce our faith on others. Even if we don't live there, we can say we have a deed that shows ownership of some property, and with our money we can hire lawyers and file actions with a court and get orders to evict people from a property, and eventually get the police to go throw them out.

What if everyone lost faith in money? What if, overnight, we all lost our belief that money was worth anything? The economy would stall, as transactions couldn't complete because there would be nothing buffering transactions. Supply lines would get all screwed up, and those not in farming areas might be in trouble. On the other hand, ownership of many things would change. Police and courts, without any way to be paid, would have no reason to enforce ownership. People in rental property could just take ownership, and stop paying rent. What could a landlord do, really?

Well, there's the catch of why this would never happen. Even if this started to occur, those with the most interest would hire people to enforce money. Paying people enough makes them become invested in the monetary system again, preventing an all-out replacement of money.

What about a gradual replacement though? Unfortunately, the rules often prevent competing forms of money. In the US, you can't make your own currency. (Although credit cards behave to a degree like an alternate currency, where the banks get to skim a percentage off the top of every transaction.) I don't think we could print up currency and have it work anyway: if we were to loose faith in the current system, why have faith in new printed money?

We could barter good or services, although you are supposed to report the value of trade on taxes. Nevertheless, given the difficulty of tracking such a deal, it's near impossible for the government to do anything about barter.

We might be able to go back to trading some sort of valuables. Having some sort of standard, tangible items of value to exchange would provide a meaningful new system of buffering between locals. If the new system could gradually replace the old, the old currency falling into meaninglessness, then that would equalize things by taking away savings from the rich. Except that it wouldn't reset things either, because before money was entirely meaningless the rich could invest their money in stocking up on valuable tangibles which would retain value.

It's therefore unclear to me how we could get out from under the pressure of the rich already owning everything. Although I have some savings, I really have doubts in it meaning anything because of stock market volatility: if the market crashes, my 401(k) plans loose their value. But it could grow just fine, too, in which case I'll have enough when I'm in old age. If things get unregulated, high inflation could render my money near valueless; changes in tax laws could have unknown impact; if one of my impossible situations happened my money would be meaningless.

Since I don't have any control over these possible futures, I see no point in saving more than modestly. What I have will either be enough, or it won't; the outcome isn't in my hands any more. Considering unknown changes to my health, the environment, and other unknowns, it seems better to spend more time living now. The only thing that seems I have control over is to not blow my savings.

6. The Machine

The Machine is a metaphor for the mechanical way in which society increasingly operates.

Of course, I do not know for sure that everything really is more mechanical. I am told by older folk that things were different, but maybe it is just their imagination. (Coincidentally with forming these ideas to be written, Beldandi has decided to play Things Ain't What They Used to Be. Or was that pre-destined?) I believe, however, that things are different. I believe that life's demands are trying to increase on each of us, and will continue to do so unless we resist it.

6.1. People are monitored more

We need money to survive. So, we get jobs.

Companies would rather pay us less. The less we cost, the more the stockholders can keep for profit.

The goal then, at least from the a corporate perspective, is to make labor a commodity market. The more unspecialized the worker you can put into a job, the less they can be paid. The more specialized the worker, the more difficult they are to find, and the more they cost.

So, the goal is to centralize all the complex parts of running a business, and dumb down the repetitive parts as much as possible. The corporates want to hire a couple of knowledgeable folk to run things, then get the lowest-pay workers that can be found to do the bulk of the work. The more dumbed-down a job can be made, the more profit for the executives and stockholders.

This is particularly noticeable in many businesses' 800-hotlines. They provide a pool of operators who have varying degrees of usefulness. These folk are monitored by the next grade of operators, who monitor the lower-level workers. The lower-level workers are paid barely subsistence (if they're lucky), so despite their poor income they behave out of fear of loosing their job.

Some (I suspect most) operators are also tracked by all kinds of time statistics. They have to keep their average call time within some range. Being helpful slows them down, so their objective is to give you the minimal amount of help they can, then move on. Of course, folks that manage to be particularly good get moved up into the next grade, and are replaced with another unskilled operator.

Because of this pooling of low-skilled labor, things end up being less personal. The capitalists behind them are pushing them to work faster, but the goal is only to work good-enough to keep most customers, not to provide the best service possible. There is, after all, a point at which providing the quality of service necessary to satisfy the more demanding customers is just too costly to justify the expense of upgrading a lot of workers.

6.2. Things are less personal

6.3. Things are faster

6.4. Instantiated

A physical manifestation of The Machine is the way in which those in power try make to computers dominate and control the rest of our lives.

How often today are we told that things are computer errors? If a price is wrong when checking out at a supermarket, the cashier isn't considered at fault; the computer is.

6.5. Humans as machine components

Jobs today often treat the workers as machine components. I suppose this has been true for a long time in assembly lines, but now in offices with companies trying to meet ISO and CMM standards, companies set up rules which employees are expected to follow much in the manner a computer executes a program.

This is a conflict: ISO and CMM are good ideas. They are trying to set up ways to assure quality is generated. At the same time, though, as they are instilled on an office population, people feel a loss of control. Often the rules impose restrictions to prevent workers from making repairs and improvements that should be made.

In software, this appears in the form of change control: developers aren't supposed to make changes unless they're approved by some committee. If a programmer finds a bug, s/he can't just fix it. S/he must bring it to committee, track it in a database, etc. This leads to job dissatisfaction.

6.6. Humans as slaves to material wealth and credit

The Machine wants us to spend all of our income. If we can be convinced we want to live at a certain standard, then we must make a certain amount of money to maintain that standard. To make that amount of money, we have to work a full week most of the time 2 . We then end up in a cycle where we must work to pay for things we want, but can't enjoy because we are working.

Consider purchases, and whether they will really make your life better. When buying things, think about what they will cost in terms of the time you must work. If you make $30,000 a year, then a new CD (~$15) is worth about one hour of work. A new computer ($~900) is worth a week and a half of work. If you don't spend the money, you don't need to work, and can take unpaid vacation. Would you rather have a week and a half of vacation or a new computer? (Remember: neither answer is right or wrong. You get to make the choice for you.)

The Machine wants us to get into debt. If we owe a creditor money, they hold it over our head 3 . The ideal scenario they want to get you in is this:

The way out of this is to not be in debt. If you have some money tucked away where it can be accessed if needed (savings account, shorter term CDs), and your necessary expenses are low, then you aren't a slave to the system. You can do your work, your way, on your time. If you hate your job, you can quit. Alternately, if you just hate doing things the way they tell you to, you can do it your way. If they don't like it, they can fire you; this is amenable because you don't want to do it the other way anyway. You can do it at your own pace, too. If they don't like it, they can fire you.

6.7. More is expected

Paradoxically, we are the ones creating this problem ourselves. As the machine has driven us each harder, it's provided us with things we don't want to give up. These things we want form tighter expectations made on others, and therefore they too are enslaved by the machine.

For example, at one point we were all used to taking a few days to order things via mail order. As times have changed, we have become more and more accustomed to quick turnaround. People that will pay the extra for overnight shipment, and if a company can not provide this, the company will not get the business.

Another example: Cell and PCS phones are becoming increasingly popular. Years ago, when business-folk had to travel to client sites, they had some downtime. A chance to just think about their work or life or daydreams as they drove, or maybe listen to some tunes. No longer. These days, when one leaves a client site, one has a phone out and is checking voice mail before getting to the car. The drive to the next site is occupied by returning calls and gathering status on other goings-on.

If we go back father, we find the car did the same thing. At one point, public transport was much more popular. Population was centered more closely to cities, without sprawling suburbs, and people traveled within the city by streetcars and light rail. Cars, however, became more popular. Streetcars are all but gone, and light rail and subways exist only in the largest cities. As the transition occurred, people adapted to dealing with heavy traffic and perpetual road construction and expansion. We have replaced a ride on public transport, where one could talk with neighbors and acquaintances, read the paper or a good book, with what is often the frustration of dealing with rush-hour traffic. In the past, people got to know the faces in the neighborhood on the walk to and from the trolley line or rail station. Today, most folk instead ignore the other folks in the neighborhood as they drive to and from their houses.

6.8. Breaking free

One step in breaking free is to stop listening to all the prejudices we have. Reality is distorted by these, and we each think there are things we can't, shouldn't, or won't do because of them. When we realize we are just restricting ourself and stop listening to the prejudices, we find we have more choices in our lives. Here's one I went through:

Prejudice Really
Working downtown sucks because parking is hard. So take the bus.
The homeless people downtown sometimes ask for a handout. I can say no when I want to.
Only poor people ride the bus. Nonsense.
People will look down on me for riding the bus. Somebody is always going to look down on me no matter what I do. (If I don't take the bus, somebody will look down on me for being an anti-environmental yuppie bitch or something like that.)
There are creepy people on the bus. Occasionally, but most of the people are nice.
What if they're dangerous? What if the insanity slowly building from my existing job is dangerous?
The bus is slow. The bus is slow, but I can read while I ride on it instead of fighting with traffic.

The first thing is to identify the choices. For years, I refused to work downtown. I could work downtown, but I believed it would have been too difficult dealing with parking. Finally, I took a 3-month contract there during a summer because I figured I could bike in, and suffer the bus on rainy days. This forced me to find out the bus routes, and I found out they didn't suck as bad as I thought.

I forced myself to overcome my fear of the bus, and took it to work. I don't know what I expected, it's one of those stupid irrational fears we have programmed into us. It was kind of boring, so I started bringing books. After a bit, I noticed I was making a dent in the several years worth of reading that had queued up. I saved money on gas, and I found I was starting to enjoy driving again when I had to, instead of feeling like it was a chore to be suffered. Additionally, I found a whole variety of food choices for lunch including a yummy Chinese place at Sibley Tower food court, and that hole-in-the-wall pizza joint at State & Main with the guy who looks like Bruce Willis.

Then the contract ended, and I got a new job. It wasn't downtown. I drove for 2 months, and was hating it again. So I decided to bus to work. I got schedules, and initially thought it would suck. So I forced myself to alter my mind again:

Prejudice Really
The bus is slow. The bus is slow, but I can read while I ride on it instead of fighting with traffic.
It's unpleasant standing in the cold waiting for the bus. Dress warmly. Besides, isn't it unpleasant scraping off a car windscreen twice a day?
The bus is inconvenient. If I learn all the routes, not really. Maybe there isn't always a convenient bus to the end of the street, but there are other nearby routes that come at those times. A little walking is good for me, anyway.
What if my bus is late and I miss my layover? Take the prior bus and grab breakfast at one of the food vendors in the mall downtown. And, I can also grab stuff for lunch at the grocery store there, avoiding the need to deal with the Marriott bastards at work.
What if I hate it? I already hate fighting with traffic every day, but I could change my mind and drive again if I really don't like it.

The bus worked great for 2 years, until the RTS went downhill and schedule accuracy went to hell. Then I went back to driving. For the duration I did take the bus, it worked much better than driving. To express it as a transaction, I traded 5 hours of unpleasant driving for 10 hours of riding the bus and enjoyable reading each week at the cost of about an additional $5 (looking at just up-front costs; looking at the more complete picture of car ownership costs, it was probably a big savings).

The point, though, is not that the bus is good, it's that taking control of the situation and realizing I had choices other than driving to work allowed me the opportunity to change my environment rather than being a victim of it.

*sigh*, so much to write...

6.9. Rules & Agreements

There are no rules, only agreements. Rules are obeyed by agreement to obey them.

7. References

Footnotes:

Page URL: http://perette.barella.org/Writings/treatise.html
Valid HTML 4.01 Strict Any Browser Free Speech Online
© 2001 - 2008 Perette Barella. All rights reserved.
Revision information: