How did we learn to stop worrying?

Last night we watched the film "Dr. Strangelove OR How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb." It was directed by Stanley Kubrick, who I believe to be one of the greatest filmakers ever. The discussion afterwards ranged all over the place, covering several topics briefly. I'd like you all to feel free now to explore things more in depth.

There were so many good topics that came up last night (Nazi's. Communists, whether Evan is anti-American or not, whether human beings can be perfected, passifism, fear, security, paranoia, American History) that it's hard to pick one to start with. But my favorite thing about last night is that we sat there and watched a movie that is 43 years old which accomplished its purpose in us still today. That happened because of 2 reasons. 1. The art itself was great 2. We were willing to access it Now, a notion exists within all of us young people that this movie is the exception to the rule. That most older films don't actually have that number 1 quality to them, and therefore we don't have the 2nd quality when approaching them.

This kind of thinking puts us into a downward spiral that never fully appreciates the past, always just wants the latest and greatest thing. Learning from yesterday seems boring and almost impossible at times. Let's think about it. They were trying to do very similar things, which is to get their thoughts/ideas/stories across through a motion picture. Most of us believe that we do it much better now, so we'd rather browse the new release wall than to scan the older sections. Frankly (sorry Dan) I don't agree that we always do it better now. Especially since most films I see are simply re-creations of older ones who had a lot more original ideas.

Once again, we see that great art requires discipline on our part in order to engage with it. If it's spoon fed, it's nothing great.

If Uncle Walter was President

I want to talk for a bit about Presidential elections. Especially since there isn't one currently happening, we can talk about it a little differently (hopefully). Two candidates run, and the American people all have the power to choose one or the other. How do we decide who to cast a vote for? Or how do we decide if we're even to vote at all?

We don't know the candidates personally (most likely). We don't know anybody who does know them personally (most likely). So the information that we have about them is directly (or indirectly) passed to us from different forms of media. There are also certain issues which seem more important to the average American, so debates and interviews seem geared on prying into a candidates views on certain issues. The thinking is, "If we can't know them, we want to know what they think about what I think is important." Is there a better way to make our decisions? If not, then what's important to us?

Ever since I was a kid, most of the people that I've known who voted were very drawn to the issue of abortion. I've seen many people cast their vote almost purely based on this issue, or certainly it was heavily weighted. I would like to understand this kind of thinking a little bit better. I am in no way trying to say that abortion is an issue that doesn't matter, or that it's not important. But I've never seen a President actually play a major role in this issue. No President has single-handedly made abortion legal, and no President has ever over-turned legalized abortion. I know that they could somehow be connected in a loose way by electing a Supreme Court Justices who shares their views on this issue. But, since Pro-Life people are still holding their breath on that miracle snowball effect to take place... maybe the issues that are dealt with most directly by our Presidents during their terms should be the ones that we care the most about when placing our votes.

Then for those who don't vote at all... nobody needs to defend themselves, but since all we hear all our life is how people died to give you the right to do it and all that jazz, what are some reasons not to?

Abortion is something that people (on both sides) are extremely passionate about, and I'd say for good reason. But is the President the best avenue for getting your side of that issue upheld? At times it seems like we're voting on which plumber we want working on our pipes based on which of the 2 local dentists he supports. It might be important for a plumber to pick which dentist he wants to go to, but it has very little outcome on how your pipes are going to work after he leaves your house.

Soggy Conservatives

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/books_entertainment/be_columns/ErikLokkesmoe/2006/02/07/185351.html

Please read this short article and give me any comments you have. Thanks for pointing me to it Benjie!