Inequality For All - A Must Watch Documentary

An amazing documentary! A must watch for all. One of the most meaningful and important ones I have seen in a long time. I have had it on my list for a while and I finally got around to watching it.
I'm sure my Republican friends wanted to go on a shooting rampage after watching it. It pretty much demolishes the Republican economic outlook (This myth of "Trickle Down Economics"). The evidence is simple and difficult to argue against. I haven't studied economics since high school, and I am handicapped when it comes to that topic. However, even with my minimal knowledge, I like to think I have constructed a mildly reasonable outlook. My point is, if someone as stupid as myself can grasp these concepts, any idiot should be able to understand how this works.
The only disappointing part about the documentary is that it only looks at how to make capitalism a better system and bypasses a larger view of the system itself. What if the system at its best is still not up to par?? We could strengthen the middle class and make things more efficient and better, but that doesn't change that capitalism is a system based off of constant consumption. Why do you need a new iPhone every year when the one you are using now works perfectly fine? What are we paying in social and environmental costs to keep this flawed system afloat? Those issues aside, it is a great look at the economic issues we face within a specific scope.

Don't Be Afraid To Be A Crazy Person

"Don't be afraid to be a crazy person".
I love that message, but it's a thin line to tap dance. You have to be a progressive crazy person, and not just a crazy crazy person. There are plenty of crazy crazy people in this world. People who want to do harm and/or believe things based off subjective belief and not off sympathy, reason, and logic. A progressive crazy is only the illusion of crazy. A progressive crazy is someone who is years beyond the current standards of thinking.
I often feel out of place and crazy, and I often fear that I am just a crazy crazy. I hope this is not the case, but there is no good way of telling. It drove me nuts that I felt so different when I was young, but I've come to embrace it as I become an adult. With the help of time and trial & error, I feel more and more that I am a progressive crazy. I am learning that I feel out of place with many of my peers because I am, in fact, different and crazy. My peers are the normal ones, but hopefully as time passes, my crazy stances will prove to be normal and mild. I really need to surround myself with more crazy people.

I hope to apply to Berkeley in the near future. I'm very glad that they changed their minds and let Maher speak. He isn't always right, but man, is he a free thinker and fearless. It would be so cool to attend a school that allows people like Maher to speak, and that has such a prestiges history.

Grab Show Show: A New Online Variety Show

I consume a lot of news and I wish there were more outlets for people to get news in a fun way. I think shows like The Colbert Report & The Daily Show are so great. They are informative, smart, and funny.
So, I've been trying to mess around with a few ideas. None of them are too refined or where I want them to be, but hey, you have to start somewhere.

This is an idea for an online variety show. Your critical feedback is appreciated.

Sam Harris & Cenk Uygur Discuss Religion

This was a lengthy, but very fun conversation to watch. I shared the video on my Facebook page, and this is my text that went along with my share:
That's what Sam Harris gets for trying to deal with and sort things out in the nuance. People want to paint with a larger brush. It's quicker, it's easier, and you get the bigger picture faster. It's not his fault he is misunderstood, it is our fault that we can't keep up with him. He is absolute behemoth of a philosopher and a genius. 
I really, really admire Cenk, and I think he made some good points. I think I even agreed with him over Sam Harris on maybe 1 or 2, but it got very annoying when it seemed like he tried to play devil's advocate just the play devil's advocate. 
That ending Sam Harris dropped was amazing. Easy to understand, but certainly a concept that only a wise mind could craft (Don't let your hindsight bias fool you). How we treat thought crimes is such a touchy subject, but his example of what we did to Bin Laden was spot on.

Anberlin's Final Minnesota Show

I am beyond stoked and a little sad to attend ANBERLIN's final show in Minnesota at the Varsity Theater. I have been listening to Anberlin for about a decade now, and they announced at the beginning of the year that this would be their last as a band. It's heartbreaking, but I'm glad they didn't fizzle out and they were able to give us a final album and a final tour. They have a sold out show at the Varsity Theater today! I hope to see some of you there!
The first Anberlin song I ever heard was "Ready Fuels". I think I came across it on Purevolume or MySpace. I used to spend hours exploring new music in junior high, and Anberlin was one of the bands I fell in love with.

Unless Anberlin drops one last music video on us before they ride into the sunset, "Stranger Ways" will be the last music video they ever release. It comes off of their final album "Lowborn".

Secret Album Released By I Can Make A Mess

Another secret album has been dropped, and this time by someone I actually listen to. Ace Enders is the frontman for a number of bands. He started in The Early November, he also has a project that simply goes by Ace Enders, and he has I Can Make A Mess. He recently dropped a secret album called "Growing In" and you can stream it below.

New Anchor & Braille Songs

Two new ANCHOR & BRAILLE songs have surfaced and despite both tracks sounding like material I wouldn't normally like, I have to admit I enjoy both tracks. I'm a little disappointed the Stephen Christian kind of went this non-organic route because I thought some of his more beautiful songs with Anchor & Braille were his more minimalistic organic songs. But again, these 2 new songs definitely work.
This first track "Fatal Flaw" is a shorty, but a goodie. Again, that fake hip-hop sounding high-hat isn't normally something I like, but it works with everything else in that it sort of sounds like an '80s synth vibe. It sounds like it could've been in the opening credits for "DRIVE".




This next song is called "Detroit Stab".



I should also note that I read that the label Anchor & Braille is working with typically only releases singles for artists. It could mean that there isn't a full-length or EP coming out, and that these could be one-off singles. I certainly hope that this isn't the case, because I am very much looking forward to the progression of Anchor & Braille.
Their first album, "Felt" was good and you could tell that it was Stephen Christian behind the songs, but the songs weren't "full" enough for me. It felt like most of the songs just needed 1 more thing. It's still a beautiful album and something I love to have on in the background from time to time. However, I thought Stephen Christian really flexed his song writing skills when "The Quiet Life" came out. The album is more diverse, it is fuller, and it is just plainly enjoyable.

Debate: Does Science Refute God?

This was a lively debate that I had never seen before. 
The Christians (D'Souza + Hutchinson) didn't say anything that shifted the core of my stance, but I found myself nodding yes to a couple of their points. Especially when they discussed morality. I'm glad that the Christians didn't fight the notion that Christian morals are good morals because they are not. However, my nihilistic side did agree with the Christians that we do not know why we decided kicking a dog is wrong (I am glad that we did, but dogs are amazing creatures). Morals don't intrinsically exist in the cosmos. We constructed them so that we wouldn't have to live in fear every waking and resting moment of our lives.



This is pretty cool format for debates. It's quicker and I'm glad the speakers can step on each other from time to time and address each other like they are in the same room (Because, well, they are). I prefer it over formats where someone gets 5 minutes to address an opponent as if they were in another room. It really forces a debater to to clarify and support their stance. 

Meg Myers Interview

I've been following MEG MYERS for a little while now. I really wanted to watch her perform live, and especially watch her perform "Heart Heart Head". She was also generous enough to give me a few minutes of her time for me to interview her. She's definitely a professional and a gamer as we joked around while we were setting up the equipment for the interview. Her music is serious, but you can tell that she has a really soft spot too. I asked her about her awesome music videos, and I also asked when we might see a full-length debut. Check out the full interview here.



This is probably my favorite song by Meg Myers and I absolutely love the video. It comes off her 2014 EP "Make A Shadow". I got goosebumps watching her perform it live. It's just so emotional and powerful!

The Politically Correct Vigilante

The Politically Correct Vigilante must have secretly taken and lynched the old Min Lee. I've been doing a lot of self-reflecting lately and I fear that I have become this lame, tame, bland, and ultimately a hollow version of the person I used to be. I am only a faint echo of the edgy, flamboyant, and reckless person I used to be during my latter college years and my young adult days. I used to not give a fuck, and used to speak and tell stories based on principle and fact. Now I practice the soft bigotry of low expectations as to not offend and anger people. Probably because I have become lazy, weak, and apathetic. A stronger person, a true trailblazer, would have continued on a progressive path and would have been willing to take on the burden of pulling along his peers to greener pastures. A stronger person would have pulled on his own despite being ridiculed, spit on, and resisted.

I do not know when the PC Vigilante stole and silenced the stronger me. People should be more offended by my soft bigotry, and less offended of the times of when I used to tell it like it is. I used to ask questions and present ideas firmly and with conviction (and often sprinkled with vulgarities), and expected reasonable and formidable responses with an open mind and heart. When the responses were under-qualified, illogical, unreasonable, and just plain weak and stupid, I squashed them with emphasis and vigor. Not to be rude, not to be condescending, but because none of us have time to toy with those ideas, nor should we nurture those soft ideas. That should be the course of action that is respected and expected. However, soft bigotry is cushy, it is comfortable, but it is not helpful. We should expect more from each other.

 I think my job has a lot to do with what I've become. The PC Vigilante in my case is not an external pressure. No, it is not a gang of people with pitchforks and torches, but rather an internal struggle. A yearning to be liked by the masses, when I should be seeking the approval of the correct and intelligent minority. I could use your help as I am hoping to light a flame. A flame that is bright, enlightening, fearless, unwavering, but most of all helpful to everyone. It is a flame that I hope stays strong for many years to come, and one we can all share to guide us in the darkness. I love you all.

Let us progress.
(TFL; DFR). :)

Alone In White - A Reoccurring Dream

I have this reoccurring dream that I will detail below, but I think I finally caught on to when it comes back. I don't remember the first time I had the dream, but I realized this time it always happens when I'm going through an existential crisis. When I have questions about what I am doing, where I am going, what I should be doing, what I have done, and so on. I seem to always go through these cycles. I always get to a point where I ponder a lot, I ask a lot of questions, and then act on what I gathered. It usually results in me being pleased about working toward something, but then I get semi-complacent. I casually ride the steady waves for a bit, and then I find that I need to re-organize and re-boot. I always need to improve myself. I worry that I am going to waste my life. This reoccurring dream isn't set in reality. I am on an island with my friends and family. The island doesn't sit in the middle of a body of water. Instead, it is surrounded by nothing. If you sit on the edge of this island and look out, it appears like a giant white wall is in front of you. However, there is no telling where the wall starts and ends. Try imagining a horizon of "nothing", or at least the closest we can imagine "nothing". What I mean by that is, even if you imagine "nothing" you are imagining something. It is impossible for us to imagine nothing, but that is a different blog. The island isn't as depressing as it sounds. I am there with my friends and family and the island is self sufficient. There is clean water, the climate is comfortable and great for producing plenty of food. The island isn't big and a lot of times we have to plot out the area carefully, but it's just enough to live comfortably and happily. Everyone on the island is happy, however, we are planning to leave. There is a promise that a ship will come and take us from this island. When you take a step off the edge of the island, you don't fall into water like a normal island. You just fall. And you probably fall forever because there seems to be no floor. Everyone is diligent about never flirting with the edge of this island. The day the ship is supposed to arrive comes up. We pack and prepare the day before. Things get hectic, but we know just a single day of meticulous planning and work and we will be set free. Night comes and everyone is asleep, but I'm unable to do so because of the anticipation. I get up to check everything over one last time. All our belongings are near the edge of the island because we wanted to load the incoming ship as quickly and efficiently as possible. As I am checking over everything a piece of the island crumbles and I lose my footing. I slip, but I'm able to grab on to the edge of the island. I need assistance, but I can't produce a sound. I don't worry too much because I know everyone will be up soon and will come to where I am because they will need to board the ship. Eventually the time comes and everyone works quickly to load everything we organized the day before and hop on the ship. As I hang on the edge with my forearms burning, I watch the ship leave. I try mightily to yell, but still nothing. I justify in my head that someone will eventually recognize that I am not there with them. After all, they are my closest friends and family. I tell myself to focus on gripping the island and that I should see the ship returning in no time. Days pass and I feel my grip becoming weak. My forearms are on fire and my knuckles are ready to burst. I don't know how much longer I can hold and there is still no ship in sight. I haven't heard a single sound produced by this universe of nothingness. Then I wake up. I always feel uneasy, and I don't know what to think of this dream (maybe nightmare). I usually shrug it off until I have it again. There is probably a lot of symbolism in there and something I'm trying to tell myself. Maybe I should pay attention more.

Predestined To Go To Hell?

I don't understand why my brain is this way, but I'm constantly thinking about the future. I have these really heavy and often depressing existential discussions with myself about my personal future and the future of the world. Obviously my own personal interest makes sense, and why I care so much about my neighbors and the world is another premise (But really, why wouldn't you?). Maybe because I was raised Christian (Seventh Day Adventists to be more specific), but religion always enters the discussion (Obviously if you follow me on Facebook, right?). Religion is a topic that brings me great entertainment. It gives me something to always talk about. It's a lot of fun to talk about and ponder in a serious setting and really easy to joke about in a light setting. Religion is also a topic that brings me great frustration and often makes me depressed. It makes very little objective sense and some of the evil that if produces breaks my heart. There is a sect of the Christian community that believes in predestination. This idea that their god has an infallible "Grand-Plan" or "Master-Plan". It is objectively impossible to believe in a grand-plan when the recipe also includes an omnipotent and all loving god because there is way too much suffering and pain in this world for that to pass any test of logic (or reason, I will add). However, I sometimes wonder what if Christians are right and there is a master-plan. I attend a Presbyterian Bible study class. I explained to others a couple of times recently that I don't attend churches and expect people to throw away their beliefs just for my visit. The members of my Bible study group know fully that I am agnostic and know that I don't believe in the idea of a master-plan. It would be incredibly stupid of me and rude if I went to a Presbyterian church and expected people to not believe in a master-plan just because I was there. Recently I started thinking that if predestination is true, I have been chosen by the Christian god to go the hell since the beginning. He knew from the get go that at the age of 21, I would start to question my faith and go on a spiritual journey, and that 2 years later with the help of the Bible (I consider the Bible the quickest way to become atheist), many discussions and sleepless nights, educators, and books, that I would become an atheist, then an anti-theist, and then that I would go through a state of apathy and then eventually settle on agnostic. If predestination is true, I was chosen by god to go the hell from the start. Maybe I really was predestined to be this way. I remember around 4th grade in Bible study class, we were discussing what heaven might be like. My youth group leader at the time told me that heaven would be happy and beautiful. Even at that young age that was too general for me. Really, what does happy and beautiful even mean in that context? That didn't help me assemble my image of heaven in the slightest. I asked him to specify and he went on to tell me everything is the cleanest of white, that everyone would have mansions and plenty to eat, and that the streets were paved with gold. Sounds nice, doesn't it? Well, even in the 4th grade that sounded like a waste of resources. I asked him what is the purpose of paving the streets with gold? It doesn't really give us any advantage, it's arrogant and again, a complete waste of gold. At that time, I was 110% a god fearing Christian boy. I knew that if I didn't do what the Bible told me, that I would go to hell. I prayed when I woke up, I prayed before breakfast, I prayed before lunch, I prayed before dinner, I gave quick prayers before snacks, I prayed when I was bored, I prayed when I was lonely, I prayed when I was worried, and I prayed before bed. And these weren't your scripted and recited prayers. Each prayer was genuine and original. How could such a dedicated, god fearing Christian boy question what heaven looked like? Fast forward to 7th grade. I was told in Bible study class that every man on this earth had one less rib than every woman on this earth because woman was created from the rib of man. I was a 7th grade boy carrying around with me an immense misunderstanding of the human body. They had raped my mind and ruined my view of the world. When I learned in my (secular and awful public school) health class that my understanding of the human body was incorrect I was embarrassed. Looking back as a grown man I am infuriated. Why would the church do that to a young boy? Why would they disadvantage and fuck a little boy so hard that his understanding of the world could be so off? So, I went back to church and I needed answers. So, what if I was born an atheist/agnostic? What if I am predestined to be this way? I can see instances where I have always questioned the church even as a little boy. Why would an all loving god sentence me to a life in hell from the very beginning?

My Deconstruction Of The Bill Nye and Ken Ham Debate

(The spacing is a bit different than my Word document and I do apologize). It has taken me a while, but I finally found the time to finish the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham. I have the benefit of watching a recorded version so I am able to pause and take notes when something interesting is said. I am very excited to hear both perspectives and I hope that I walk away having learned a lot. I, however, am disadvantaged as I was forced to watch the entire 2 hour 45 minute debate between several dates. Hopefully the notes I took along the way prevent me from disconnecting any major points of the debate. A lot of us know Bill Nye regardless of religious beliefs or lack of. If you had any sort of normal childhood in the '90s and a television, you probably saw his show. When I was young, I thought Bill Nye was just an actor but it turns out he is an actual scientist, engineer, and genius. Not only that, but he had the privilege of learning from Carl Sagan (Another personal hero of mine). During the Superbowl, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Seth MacFarlane's teaser for The Cosmos aired. A re-make of the brilliant series by Carl Sagan that aired in 1980 and I am very much looking forward to it. I did learn that some people don't take Nye seriously because of his Emmy winning background, a position I disagree with. I cannot make the connection as to why being a successful Emmy winning producer, writer, and host should take away from your credibility as an engineer and scientist. As Nye explains in his closing statement, when you're in love, you want the world to know. Ken Ham is probably not a household name, but that doesn't mean he should be discredited (The same way I don't think Nye should be discredited because he is known). I have only gotten snippets of Ham so I don't know too much about him. I know he is one of those people that believe that dinosaurs and humans once roamed the earth together. I do feel a bit sorry for him because he wants so badly for science and religion to co-exist. Perhaps that is possible, most likely unreasonable, but no one is here to tell him that it's impossible. I've seen interviews with plenty of Catholics leaders that believe in science and religion and do a good job of separating the two. Mr. Ham (At least in the material I have seen him in) fails to separate religion and science when it is necessary and is willing to suspend facts to support his own belief. (And now that I have completed the debate, I believe in this position even more). I felt like the opening statements portion was the most bearable and "reasonable". Reasonable in the sense that both sides made their points, interests were raised, and you wanted to hear more. The second half increasingly became frustrating because of Ham's inability to answer any of the questions or address any of the challenges that went his way. I'm so glad Mr. Nye addressed this strange idea of "observational" science and "historical" science. It's difficult to understand why the scientific method applies to one, but not the other. He did a great job handling a strange idea that he was exposed to for the very first time. It's very difficult to break down a new idea on the stop. It's much more fair to have an idea, to sit and examine it, and to pull it apart and put it back together before you can explain it in full. Nye wasn't afforded this luxury and was still impressive enough to dispel this kooky and random method of operating. But not all my frustrations in the opening statement were directed at Mr. Ham. I was already growing impatient with Nye's call to scientific support. I absolutely support this idea that we need to inspire the next generation of scientists and I absolutely believe that humans will only thrive as far as reason, intellect, and scientific advancement will allow us to. But stop taking this "patriotic" angle and just debate Ham. Win the debate, and inspiration will generate itself because no one will want to go down the path of Ham. I am glad that Mr. Ham was able to address something a lot of Christians are afraid to address these days. It's no longer dangerous to be in support of equal rights when it comes to the LGBT community. Many of us know this line of thinking doesn't quite jive with the Christian way of thinking. Mr. Ham claims that humanists, secularists, and scientists have hijacked the word "Science". He also claims that those groups of people also are out to indoctrinate children. They aren't. Quite the contrary actually because science asks them to be open minded, to question, and to progress. But I will side with Ham on a position and if any idea has been hijacked it is "Christian Morality". These Christian apologists have blurred, mashed together, and made confusing what Christian morality is and the morality of those that want a fairer, safer, more consistent, and loving world. Do not get me wrong, Jesus preached great things and I am a fan of Jesus Christ. It's more the Christian god that I am upset with. The point I am getting to here is, I am glad that Ham has the backbone to stand up and say that "marriage" is between a man and a woman. A lot of Christians these days don't have the courage to stand up for the book they live by. For that, I will applaud Mr. Ham for his strength and criticize his stance on morality. It's only when the rapid fire rebuttals and the Q&A begins that the debate begins to unravel a bit and we see Nye separate himself and take the lead in the debate. Ham refused to answer any of the proposed questions. And by refuse I don't mean that he choose to not speak, but he kept reciting the same practiced answers as if this were a Sarah Palin interview. Or, he ignored major portions of the question entirely. Nye had a different, and thoroughly supported responses for all the questions and then on top of that expanded on the questions and asked Ham to elaborate. I actually learned about physics, about biology, about chemistry, about the cosmos, about ship making, about evolution, and so many other sects of knowledge because Nye explained his answers in detail. Nye also tried to come in with his point again about the future of America and STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, & Math) being the key to a flourishing future. We get it, Bill Nye The Science Guy. I also did not expect that the two would dissect the topic and story of Noah's ark so much. I agree with Christian apologists on this one that the story of Noah's ark so be taken as...well, story. To believe this as an actual and literal story would be akin to believing Lord Of The Rings, Spiderman, Harry Potter, Batman, Superman, Thor, or any other fictional story or character as non-fictional. When you're a child, you do have license to let your imagination run wild. If your child wants to believe in the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, or Santa Clause, that is totally fine. But when you become an adult and you need to make decisions off facts, and based on reasonable ideas and intuition, you need to harness that imagination a bit. This is what a lot of Christians fail to do. With all that in mind, if you were still somehow on the fence about the story of Noah's ark, then Nye's explanation about Noah's ark should have tipped the scales. Not only did he present an argument with reason (much like the way I outlined above), then be brought logic into it, and then lastly he brought history and physics into it. The story about the ship bending and taking in water is something I never would have thought of or have heard of. For many reasons, but for one I don't work on boats. I also don't know the physical properties of wood well enough to be able to understand that's what happens. This should have been the last we heard about the story of Noah's ark, but it continues as the debate does. Also, it makes difficult the point Ham made about "observational" science and "historical" science. There is a large disconnect and major inconsistency. Mr. Ham claims that Mr. Nye cannot know or project to know what happened, let's say, 4000 years ago because Nye was not there to observe what happened. This is the case Ham was making against Nye when they were talking about the age of the earth, the atmospheric bubbles trapped inside ice, the fossils that are excavated, the rings in trees, and so on. Since Nye did not witness those things happen, he cannot claim to know any of those things. However, the same can be said about Ham not witnessing the Christian God hand down any of the laws he desires, nor the creation of the world as explained in genesis, or Noah's ark, or how the Bible was written and the credibility of the Bible because he simply was not there. Ham cannot have it both ways. Ham also continued to sidestep every question and rebuttal that came his way and it became increasingly frustrating. Not the most exciting speaker as it is, it almost became unbearable when he continued to waste our time by not addressing anything. He continuously played a game of semantics to avoid supplying us with anything substantial. At one point, he asked us what "literally" meant. Oh, I don't know...maybe what we all mean when we use the word "literally"? Mr. Ham also went on to say incredibly stupid things like, "It's not survival of the fittest, it's the survival of those who survived," and "It's true, that's why it's true". What does that mean? That's like if you looked up the word "bread" in the dictionary and the definition read, "bread". It explains nothing! It doesn't even attempt to. It's lazy, and when you're engaged in a debate, it's cowardly. Also, before I wrap this up, I have a historical question. Mr. Ham credits the invention of logic as a Christian invention. Obviously Ham's credibility is pretty low after this debate, but it's worth trying to figure out. Historically speaking, is logic a Christian creation? I think it was a mistake for Bill Nye to debate Ken Ham. There was very little upside for him to debate Mr. Ham, while the upside for Ham was exponentially greater. The trouble with a debate is that the point isn't actually to find the correct answer. It is to win by either showcasing your position and ideas, or by bringing down the other person's idea enough to make your stance the more viable position. Even with that, Bill Nye was able to win the debate and hopefully he generated inspiration and momentum for the reasonable, and scientific community. There is a poll that was taken shortly after the debate and even Christians overwhelmingly thought Nye won the debate. It was probably a mixture of his charisma, his tone (Ham's tone almost seemed indifferent), smiling (Ham looked like death!), and the fact that he brought information with him. Congratulations and thank you to Mr. Bill Nye for allowing reason to prevail. Before I end all this, I do have to reference Christopher Hitchens. One of the most articulate, knowledgeable, and greatest debaters I know. Ken Ham at one point brings up that without Yahweh and the Bible, that the world would be without morals because there would be no origin. I would pay money to watch Christopher Hitchens take down Mr. Ham on this point. No one demolished Christian morals the way Hitchens did. For that, we are forever in his debt and I miss him greatly. Simply read Leviticus and Deuteronomy (you could look elsewhere too and find shocking material, but those are easy places to start) to know that if we lived in a world of Christian morals, it would be a horrific place to live. Be opening minded, love, and progress. (No proof reading was done. I hope this makes at least a little sense).