Crap-TA

It seems CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) was passed recently. It was a bit of a stretch to pass, from what I've heard. The voting session had to be prolonged and holdout voters bribed to pass the bill.

I don't see how any good will come of this. Allegedly, it would help boost industry and agriculture by forbidding tarriffs. However, if NAFTA and Mexico have taught us anything, CAFTA will just be a means for rich corporations to outsource their plants to Central America and exploit the poor and desperate for their labor. The small farms in the area will likely be driven out of business or forced to lower their prices below a level that will make for a sustainable living. The farmers CAFTA is alleged to help will end up being the victims.

sports and culture

There's something wrong with our sports culture when a T-Ball coach pays one of his players to injure a retarded kid so he won't have to play him in the game.

I mean, these kids are like 8. Now, there's nothing wrong with being a little competitive to teach the kids hard work and dedication, but what's more important for these kids is to be learning how to work together. Teamwork and compassion are things at least as important as ambition. No wonder so many people are cheating and using steroids these days. There isn't an emphasis on hardwork and self-sacrifice. The emphasis is on winning at all cost.

What's also sad is how this translates into other aspects of our culture, like business and the economy. Running a business isn't about offering a great product that benefits society so naturally it sells well. No, it's about running everyone down and hoarding all the resources. Let's stomp on the little guy. We might as well just buy out those small, family-run businesses. All we need is a wal-mart, gas stations, and shopping malls. Let's forget about culture; the small businesses that support families and bring life into the community. Let's tromp on the little guy so he doesn't hold us back. That doesn't sound much different from hitting a retard in the face with a baseball.

I'm back after a pretty long hiatus. Here's something I started last night, a work in progress.


I'm not a bad looking guy, but I'm definitely a writer.

Sure, I mighy have my moments where my charm shines through, but most of the time I fail my words. I'm a pretty intelligent guy and I can think of plenty insightful, interesting things to say. But maybe I have too much to say. I never know where to start.

Here's my chance. A girl invites me to eat lunch at her table. She looks legendary. Confident and gorgeous, but sweet and intelligent. I decide that I'd be delighted to eat with her. Definitely, I'd say. Only that's not what I say.

"Delefinitely, I'd really like to eat lunch at door yable. Your table." This all rushes out of my mouth like the world was going to end in three seconds. I think it came through in time.

Man, why do I have to rush these things?
Damnit, I always smell like Chlorine.
While I'm thinking this, awkward silence.

So I follow her to her table and sit next to some of her friends. Some I've never seen before. Others that I've seen around. Two are people I've met before and have forgotten their names. They greet me, "Hey Kyle, good to see you." They use my name in every other sentence, as if to rub it in that I don't know their names. I'm horrible with names.

This is why I write. In a book, you can always go back if you happen to miss a few details the first time around. And to a book, it's never rude to ask a third or a fourth time. A book would understand your hearing loss and you wouldn't have to explain yourself so you won't come off as a prick.

Back at the table, she introduces me to one of her friends.
"Hey, this is my good friend..." Shit, I can never hear in this cafeteria.
"Hey, nice to meet you." I shake his hand.
"Nice to meet you, too. What did you say your name was?"
"Uh... Kyle... Umm..." It takes me a few moments to piece together what he said. A few moments of awkward silence.
"Akylum? That's a cool name. Is that African or something?" He's not being sarcastic.
"No, my name is Kyle." I feel like an idiot.

This is why I write.

So I start to eat with them pretty regularly. Between awkward periods of silence, I learn things about these people. Childhood stories. Details about their families. Their goals. Their girlfriends and boyfriends. They're great people.

I'm a good listener.
A focused eater.
And I still don't know that one guy's name.

This is why I write.

I also tend to have a hard time connecting with some people. You know those people. They always seem to be wearing a mask, some kind of disguise. They pretend to be fearles. They try to look pretty, as if it were the only thing that mattered. They mistreat the misfits so they look cool or rebellious. They act happy or depressed. Or they try to look dramatic. Whatever will make them feel like they stand out or fit in. Or feel invisible.

Sometimes we are those people. We all have some front to hide our feelings and never have to face rejection.

You never fail if you don't try.

She'll never be able to reject me if she never really gets to know me.

But then, she'll never really love you if you never let her get to know you.

It's a defense mechanism. You can try to reach out and connect with them. Find out who they really are. But these people don't want to be reached.

The worst thing in their minds is to be rejected for who they really are.

At least we have our own little world that we can fall back on. That's why I write.

As much as I enjoy writing in this blog, I don't know if I have time for it anymore with school and swimming. Also, I feel like I'm taking myself too seriously. I mean, it's a good way to vent how I feel and keep track of current events, but I can't really do that too well anymore with school taking all my time. Besides, there are plenty of other places to get news and such.

Plus, I'm getting a bit fed up with internet blogs in general. As nice as it is to have people expressing themselves, I can't help but feel like it's a bunch of people competing for popularity. Plus, not many people read a lot of them, anyways. A few of my friends enjoy reading this stuff, and I guess total strangers come across it, but I don't feel like my stuff reaches a wide enough audience to justify all the time that goes into it.

On a side note, I'll still be contributing every now and then, but it won't be the same, at least for a while. I'll finish this later. I need sleep.

what anarchism means to me

It appears that some of our reader base (smart as ever) is confused about the anarchism definition in the corner. I really should explain the "anarchism: act-a-vision activism" thing in the corner. Its nominal definition is pretty vague and its usage in everyday language as "chaos" or something like it is bound to confuse people.

I'd consider myself an anarchist in more of the classical sense of the term (think Mikhail Bakunin). While anarchism could be considered an ideology that advocated the abolition of the state, I'm of the sort that believes it is much more than that. I probably most resemble the anarchists that have the libertarian-socialist ideals, but differ in certain areas. I believe in a more methodological approach to social change. I try my best not to let my ideals get in the way of things; I don't like to burn bridges with people, but on the same note I don't take shit from anyone. I believe that direct action is the most effective way to bring about change.

A lot of progress is hindered when people want to believe things that aren't true and subsequently, many efforts are wasted on bad analysis on all sides of issues. But, there are all kinds of things that lead to bad analysis that I won't really go into (like the absurd amount of specialization in certain fields, which leads to an abstract analysis of real life situations, and a kooky analysis that often has bad implications). So, for these reasons, I don't really belong to any particular doctrine or group of people, but I find the term "anarchist" the most fitting for who I am. I'm anti-capitalist in just about every sense of the word, but I like the work of Austrian Economists for its praxeological approach to economics.

Now I hope you can understand the act-a-vision activism I have up there. To me, it means that we see ways to make the world better and act upon this vision. Kind of cheesy, but whatever. I think it's more rational of an approach than a lot of the left offers. The typical socialist takes a while to get warmed up with all their commitees and whatnot. I'd prefer to just start working and do my job well enough that it catches on.

In response to Robert....

Yeah, uh, that was more rant-like than normal, I should elaborate.

I recall the Ritter interview where the inspectors concluded Iraq was free of WMDs (95% free?) I'm having trouble finding it. And I remember well the typical Z analysis: Iraq was devastated by years of harsh economic sanctions and could not afford to build weapons, also under tight scrutiny; the building of weapons claimed impossible. Of course, I don't know if I've seen a truly objective analysis of the war. Everyone seems to have their own agenda. I should probably take the Zinn/Chomsky/Solomon, etc articles on Znet with as much salt as I would an article from Fox News or something.

The point I was trying to get across was that there is a noticeable pattern in the media. The anti-war movement will denounce the claims of the administration responsible for the war and the mainstream media or whatever will denounce them as cooks. Then, something from the corporate media will come out and is now more "credible," but no one seems to care about it because they're all caught up in some new illusion proffered by an actor of another agenda. Indeed, it would be interesting to look at the evidence that led these people to this conclusion. And who knows what would have happened if the invastion didn't take place? You said that the 500 tons of yellow-cake was a "known quantity" and that efforts to process them into weapons of destruction "would have raised alarm bells". I'd have to agree. Any processing of that material would have been detected promptly and I'd bet money that there would have been more international cooperation in preventing something bad from happening.

Anyways, I think the more important thing is the logic that went into the conclusion. I believe in justice, so I believe in the whole "innocent until proven guilty" ordeal that seems to be losing popularity in our justice system. Most of the anti-war movement follows this logic. We were not offered credible evidence that there were WMDs and I think they're still having trouble finding it. In fact, I don't think the US has come through on any of the reasons that were given to legitimize the war. The WMD thing didn't go through. Democracy is pretty false. The first thing the appointed interim government did was declare marshall law and soon after, they reinstated capital punishment. The election likely won't take place until well after the latest date the UN requested. I believe the new rhetoric offered is political stability. Who knows where that's going? It's pure speculation from where I'm sitting in suburban Texas thousands of miles away from what's happening. As far as I can tell reading the news, the interim government is incapable of representing most of the population of Iraq with intense relations between different ethnic groups and will be incapable of resolving the turmoil right now. As long as so many distressed people are irritated by military occupation, government corruption, and are not understood by anyone in the West, I don't think any of the problems will go away. Hell, I'm so ignorant that I can barely tell what the problem is.

I'm not sure what you were trying to say in your response, but I'm pretty damn confused and angry, too. I wanna see what's going on, what really happened. Sorry about the lazy journalism, my resources are limited, I'm tired, confused, and I've got homework to do. In the meantime, I'd like to hear more from you. Thanks.

I know some of you read stuff like this like 2 years ago, but...

The BBC put up an article about Iraq weapon's capabilities and the like. Essentially it says what the leftist/activist media had been saying since before the invasion of Iraq based on the whole WMD farce. I know it's been discredited for a while, but I guess it doesn't matter too much because there's always a new excuse. First WMDs, then democracy, now it's peace and stability or some shit like that. Pretty soon it will be "sustainable extraction of natural resources for optimal profiteering" judging by how easily manipulated most people are. Maybe Bush will let slip in his campaigns for improving the economy and creating jobs that he really plans to "accelerate the jobbery of America"? Maybe he'd get away with it? Fuck no.
_ _ _

Just to let you know, school started this week and I'm going to be really busy for a while, especially when swimming starts up. This means around 2-4 updates a week from me as opposed to at least one a day like before. Sorry about that. However, I've added my good friend Athar to the team, which should make things pretty interesting. He'll be posting every now and then. If you really want to post some, just talk to me about it and I'll consider adding you to the team. We can't be much of a circle of solidarity with just one or two people. Word.