Criminalized Homelessness?

Has anyone heard about this? Apparently, there are numerous cities nationwide in which it is illegal to be homeless.

I was investigating allegations by a reader that the Green Party is communist. Their party platform isn't a great read -- the PDF is 115 pages long and pretty dense -- but a few things caught my eye. Among them was a mention of the Green Party's commitment to "repeal laws that criminalize homelessness." As someone who has been homeless, that interested me, so I researched it, and discovered that for a really long time now, and at an increasing rate, many larger cities and some municipalities, and even entire countries, have made it illegal to be homeless. So, you lose your job, can't get a new one, miss your rent payment, and you're living in your car -- then you get sent to jail for it.

My experience with homelessness was admittedly very different from the people targeted by the laws mentioned in the links above. I had foreseen it and prepared for it, both materially and mentally, and when it happened I eschewed urban areas and set up my one-man tent city in a forested area near the Lehigh Gap. The area was subject to intense mineral exploration during the Industrial Revolution, so most of the forest overlaid overburden piles, the loose rocks and gravel of which make for excellent and sanitary latrines. I disposed of waste by hauling it out to public trash receptacles, or composting on a pile several hundred yards from my campsite. The forests of Pennsylvania possess bountiful food sources for those who know where to look, and my naturally reclusive nature made it bearable, even desirable -- I still miss it sometimes. The Gap's proximity to the Appalachian Trail gave me occasional access to human companionship, and there are three small towns within walking distance, so I never felt cut off from society. But hardly anyone even knew I was there. There were a few tense moments when hunters began arriving, but I was gone within days of the opening day of deer season, having procured the lucrative employment situation I still hold.

There are two major causes of homelessness which I see, based on research and my own contact with other homeless:

1. A deteriorating economic situation which results in job loss, loss of savings, and eventual loss of paid lodging.
2. Inability to cope with drug or alcohol addiction or mental illness.

The problem with homelessness comes from the fact that the majority of Americans have never been homeless, and thus are unable to distinguish the two categories. All homeless tend to get lumped in together, defined as a "problem" which requires harsh legislation. On the one hand, the truly criminal homeless create difficulties for residents with thefts, aggressive panhandling, littering, public drunkenness, and other mayhem. On the other, some people just run into a long string of bad luck, a problem which has become endemic since the '08 Crash. The problem is compounded by the fact that aid groups do exist, but generally target specific demographics. As a single woman with no children and no drug problem, I was unable to secure lodging at any of the homeless shelters in the Allentown/Bethlehem area. Pets pose a major problem for many shelters, as well.

In this article from the Seattle Times, we find a homeless community struggling to cope with increasingly hostile residents. While the community appears to be taking every step to keep their tent city safe and sanitary, the problems are coming, again, from the criminal element, people who have rejected civil behavior and live a largely hedonistic homeless lifestyle. Paid residents of the area are understandably upset over the disruptions, but the tent city seems to be increasingly viewed as the source of the problems. 

Again, I'm seeing a tendency for humans to revert to ape-like thinking, generalizing other people into broad categories of "otherness" and branding all in those categories as identical. "They all look alike." Or act alike, or think alike, et cetera. I think that many people could benefit from a short spell of homelessness, if only to understand the dehumanizing treatment the homeless receive at the hands of general society. The stigma alone can be crippling. People are perennially amazed at my willing to even admit that I was homeless, let alone discuss the particulars of my experience. To me, it's a point of pride. I lost everything, but forged a new life for myself. Also, I never panhandled, I supported myself by my own effort, and I never created a nuisance for others while homeless (except for one poor hunter, who may have required a change of underwear -- sorry about that, guy). Many, many homeless and former homeless can make most of the same claims. But many more were and are unprepared for life on the fringes of society, and desperate people will often take desperate actions. It is that criminal element which needs to be specifically targeted for legislation, as with every other aspect of society, and not those who are struggling to remain civil.

We need to change our thinking on homelessness. In a future blog, I'll detail certain points of my experience, and how I managed to cope with being homeless. In the meantime, remember that homeless people are still people, and being homeless does not change that. 

Shake Hands With Danger

Caterpillar opened its newest plant in Texas today, expecting to employ about 800 workers in the manufacture of hydraulic-lift equipment. Exciting news! Of course, thinking about Caterpillar makes me think of one of my favorite safety films, "Shake Hands With Danger," released in 1970 by Caterpillar (now in the public domain) to illustrate the importance of following safe work practices at job sites and in the shop (also one of my favorite shorts at RiffTrax). It features a kicky country soundtrack, "Three-Finger Joe," by a Johnny Cash soundalike, and two or three scenes which I would categorize as gruesome (sensitive viewers beware). I don't know how many of you have witnessed first-hand someone losing skin, scalp or digits in industrial accidents, but I can assure you it's something you do not want to see.

My employer (whom I shall simply call The Company to avoid confusion over whether they endorse my commentaries or not) holds safety as their number-one priority in all their facilities. Plenty of places where I have worked have had comprehensive safety policies, but there was never any active enforcement. The safety rules were just there probably so they could legally fire you if you did get hurt. However, at The Company, we actually have floor inspections and audits to ensure that all safety rules are, in fact, being followed. Everything from proper placement of materials to safe lifting practices are scrutinized and included in reports, and the scores affect our monthly bonuses. Get caught violating any safety rule and you can be subject to disciplinary action; however, it usually just results in a coaching. Associates are encouraged to coach one another if they see any violations, to ensure nobody gets hurt.

Getting hurt on the job is a very costly occurrence. Just last week, I skinned my knee and spent 45 minutes at the health station getting treated and filling out reports. That's 45 minutes I could have spent working. In addition to that lost time, for which The Company had to pay me even though I wasn't working, it cost my manager an hour and a half of his time. There is also the cost of the first aid materials (a bandage, icepack and antibiotic ointment) and a ding on the safety report, which could affect my bonus (and everyone else's). But it goes way beyond that. The associates in my assigned work area had to work that much harder to make up for my absence, increasing their risk of injury. And enough injuries at a particular site could raise The Company's insurance premiums, which cuts into raises and bonuses, so there's that risk as well. All because I wasn't watching where I was going.

Safe work practices are nothing to sneer at. If you watch the video linked above, you can see what happens when you don't. A few of the men in the video just got badly shaken up. One lost a finger, another lost a hand, and two lost their lives. According to OSHA, 4,690 workers lost their lives on the job in 2010. According to the American Society of Safety Engineers, in 2004 alone workplace deaths and injuries directly cost companies over $142 billion and about 120 million days in lost productivity. That's some serious money we're talking about. Even getting injured while not working can be costly. The ASSE link above states that 165 million days of productivity were lost in 2004 from off-the-job injuries.

That's entirely aside from the pain and indignity associated with getting injured. A bad back or knee could put you out of work permanently.

There are plenty of sites on the Web which list tips for staying safe at work and at home, so I won't go into that here. I just want to make you all aware that safety is important. Avoid shortcuts, be aware of your surroundings, treat every situation as a potential injury, and speak up if you see your neighbors or coworkers doing something dangerous.

Prep Rationale Vindicated! (anecdote)

Emergency stocks of food and water may still seem to be a "tinfoil hat" subject to some, but I have here a personal anecdote which may change that view for some of you.

I related elsewhere an anecdote rationalizing water storage. Now, on to food. The neighborhood here on this block of Green Street is a fairly good one. Across the street is a stretch of houses that were part of the Pine Street Neighborhood Revitalization project, and I see the owners of those units spending a decent amount of time maintaining their homes and gardens. The houses to the east are owned by friendly Hispanic families with loud energetic children, and the patriarchs spend a whole lot of time keeping up their homes' exteriors. To the west are two duplexes (duplices?) owned by landlords who are forever painting, shingling, and carpeting. Which leaves my duplex. On one side is a man who works a low-paying, strenuous job, who comes home exhausted every morning yet still finds time to mow the lawn and sweep the sidewalk. This side has had at least four sets of tenants in the last two years -- it's hard to tell because some of the succeeding sets contained individuals from previous sets. I've had my eye on the unit the whole time, because the loud music, rampant drug use, and neighborhood thefts have long been a serious nuisance. So, when the unit became suddenly available, I jumped on it. Getting the riff-raff out of the neighborhood has been on my to-do list for too long.

I knew that I wasn't fully prepared for the expense of renting the house, but I wasn't worried. There was a 250 percent increase in rent, security deposits on electric and gas, cleaning supplies, pesticides, furniture and appliances, and all the other "minor" expenses associated with taking possession of a house -- especially one which has been so long neglected. For those of you familiar with my life, this house was actually worse than my first house in Allentown, known informally as the "18th Street Soap Company." As a result, as of right now (after budgeted expenses) I have $13 and some change in my purse, and it has to last me another week and a half.

"Surely you shall starve, Annie!"

Not so fast. Over the past two years, I have been building up my stock of emergency food. There's rice, beans, canned meat, corn meal, flour, even powdered milk in my stash. There are more than five dozen cans of vegetables. All told, there's about three months' worth of healthful, nutritionally complete meals in the house, and enough variety that I won't eat the same meal for a week. All I need to do is keep myself in coffee and fresh leafy vegetables, which, thanks to the Spanish grocery over on Wyoming and the Saturday farmers' market on Broad, shall be easier than getting this place clean.

Overall, my expenses are going to be lower in the long run, as I swing fully into household budgeting. Eating out of the convenience stores was easy, but expensive. The easy life is, in fact, over.

Think of how much you eat out. How many times do you grab a McBurger, or a convenience store salad, or an energy drink, or a vending-machine "wheel of death" hoagie. Now, imagine all those conveniences have vanished. The C-stores and groceries are all closed. The farmers' markets are over, as the farmers sit on their produce to feed their own families. How will you eat then? In a broad crisis, with little or no ability by local governments to intervene, a lot of people would starve.

It doesn't matter how the disaster started. It could be a global market crash, or a flood, or a meteor strike, earthquake, revolution, solar-mass ejection, truckers' strike, or even just suddenly losing your job. Disaster happens, on small and large scales, and the question is not if but when it will strike. You have to be ready to face it, or be prepared to stand in line for a handout -- or to join a The Road-style gang, roaming the streets looking for food. Don't worry, though, cannibalism probably won't be endemic.

I'm preparing a more general post on food preparation. This post simply provides anecdotal evidence of the inherent utility of stocking up.

True Freedom For Women

I just took apart a dining room table for transport, then put it back together within five minutes. I'm in the process of replacing half the electrical outlets in the house (the half that still exist). I'm removing the old linoleum shower walls and replacing them with tile. I once replaced the brake pads on all four wheels of my car in an afternoon. Is it because I used to be a man? I think not.

These are some truly independent women. This is another. Here is a tool set for women -- just as good as any tools out there, even though they're pink. My point is that women can be just as good as men at home and vehicle repair. It's true that some of the musclier tasks can be much more difficult. When I was still on hormones, my muscle mass went way down and I had trouble lifting and moving some things. But I could still swing a hammer, and turn a screwdriver, and wield a drill. Figuring out how to do things for themselves is totally within reach of all women.

What prompted this little rant? The death of Helen Gurley Brown, of course. Brown called herself a feminist, but her brand of feminism involved using your feminine wiles to get men to do things for you. This "queen bee" mentality does not empower women -- quite the opposite, it reduces women's independence greatly. If you've ever seen the Start Trek: Enterprise episode entitled "Bound," you'll understand exactly how Brown's brand of "stiletto feminism" creates more co-dependence in modern society and reduces the stature of women to "meat."

Women in the States won the right to vote in 1920. This made us sovereign beings. I say quite a bit about sovereignty, in relation to nations and individuals. Sovereignty means taking total responsibility for your affairs. It means having certain rights, which only remain rights if they are exercised regularly. It's time for American women to step up to the plate and take responsibility for their lives and be truly independent. Sovereign, if you will. A popular current in culture today is the "princess" theme, pushed heavily by Disney. But why be a princess when you can be a queen? Follow the link to find out what a real woman is like.

Run From The Monsters!

I didn't know just how epic my quest would be when I undertook to examine the various political parties' platforms two weeks ago. Democrats and Republicans pretty much spell out their platforms in their press releases, and negatively conflate each others' stances. The Libertarian Party platform was a breeze -- simple and to the point, just like their views. Then I got to the Green Party. My goodness. On Facebook I mentioned that it may take me longer than reading Atlas Shrugged the first time through. (I've read it four times now.) The text is dense, yet concise, but there's just so much of it. They have an official stance on just about every aspect of American life. Some of it I agree with, some of it I don't, but their positions (and the large number of positions) got me to thinking about why I became involved in political commentary in the first place.

My biggest thing has been advocating the rejection of the Big Two parties. To me, Democrats and Republicans represent "big politics," just like ConAgra and Monsanto represent "big agriculture," Bank of America and Goldman-Sachs are "big banking," et cetera. Big institutions represent the consolidation of control of various aspects of American life into centralized structures, with a resulting major loss of diversity. As I wrote elsewhere, joining in anything "big" surrenders a bit (or a lot) of your personal identity to another group, which could be described as "mob/herd mentality." It's no secret that I am quite a bit of a lone wolf, but unlike other lone wolves I actually enjoy being around people -- just not a lot of them and not for long periods. (You can call it "empathic fatigue" or plain ol' curmudgeonry, whatever suits you.)  Surrendering to a mob (it's an ukly ting) can cause you to undertake activities in which you would not ordinarily involve yourself.

One issue away from which which most political commentators shy is "big labor." There was a time when labor unions revolutionized how American workers work and how employers worked them. Without labor unions, we would not have the forty-hour work week, the minimum wage, paid vacations or health benefits, and many of the perks most American workers now take for granted. But, just like any monster organization, labor unions metastasized into cancerous masses which are now eating away at American liberty and economic viability.

At least three generations of my family have suffered at the hands of labor unions. My grandfather was a supervisor in a machine shop which made tank parts during World War II, and he grew to hate unions with a passion. My father was a member of the United Auto Workers for thirty years. Dad is what I would call an excellent worker. The biggest thing he taught me growing up was, "If you're not going to do it right, don't bother." He strives in everything he does to produce the best outcome his ability can create. Such characters of excellence are fed upon by modern labor unions, the leadership of which strive to keep their cronies in jobs they really don't deserve while justifying the existence of the union as a viable political force in the American workplace. My own blessedly brief stint in the UFCW bore out the bitter resent that both Dad and Pop-pop felt toward big labor. Modern labor unions reduce the responsibility of individual workers to the kind of quality and performance standards which made American manufacturing the best in the world during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. As a result, American manufacturing is now about on par with the "cheap Chinese crap" we all complained about during the late 20th century and even to today. Unions destroyed the railroad and auto industries by resisting automation and innovation to keep their workers in positions which became largely irrelevant.

As an aside, my own employer has repeatedly reinforced their stance against unionization in their facilities. The pay and benefits are better than anything I've ever received in my lifetime. Each worker is held accountable for his or her actions, and the company is free to take whatever corrective action is necessary to ensure the highest quality of its workforce. If the workers were to unionize, I would quit the very same day, because it would not be long before the quality of the services we provide decline to average and the company becomes "just another online retailer." If you know who my employer is, rest assured that my opinions are my own and in no way reflect my employer's position, though major similarities exist between the two.

Big politics have destroyed the American political process, leaving voters with merely the choice between the lesser of two evils. Big agriculture has homogenized American farming, leaving the entire system vulnerable to otherwise minor economic and climactic fluctuations. I don't need to tell most of you what big banking has done to America and the world, since the crash of 2008 is still fresh in everyone's minds. Our Founding Fathers feared exactly the kind of centralization of power and homogenization of culture which is now destroying individual liberty and removing the distinctiveness which gave each state its own identity.

My point is simple: stop voting for Democrats and Republicans. There are plenty of other choices. If you are conservative, you could do better with the Constitution Party. If you have a liberal bent, consider the Green Party. If you're somewhere in between, go with the Libertarian Party. There is a whole list of political parties from which to choose. Use your choice. Be an individual.

You Are Surrounded By Coaches

I work for a major online retailer. I will not mention the name in this blog, because I don't want anyone to construe my opinions as being those of my employer. I shall simply refer to it as the Company. I was a big fan of this Company long before I began working there, and my affection has only increased during the time I have spent there. If all major corporations in America were run the way the Company is, we would likely not be in a global depression right now, and America would still be a shining example for the rest of the world.

One of the major operating philosophies used at the Company is the idea that "everyone is a coach." If you see someone doing something wrong, show them the right way to do it. I've been coached by a good number of people there, and have provided coaching to many more. The idea behind this philosophy is that wisdom is to be had from a variety of sources. You need only keep your eyes and ears and mind open, and wisdom will come to you.

Most of my life, I've been called wise beyond my years. The reason for that is that I observe everything and listen to all arguments. Of course, I've been and continue to be guilty of "selective hearing," as we all are at one time or another. We humans tend to view criticism as attacks on our person, which sometimes it is, but which is more often than not motivated by a genuine desired by the advice-giver to improve the lives of those around them. The Objectivist in me sees this as a desire to improve our own lives by reducing the number of community members about whom we need to be concerned.

And it certainly is in your own self-interest to listen anytime someone approaches you with unsolicited advice. You have no obligation to follow that advice, of course, but you should actively listen, discern the intent of the advice-giver, and judge what parts of the advice are in fact wise. We resist change, but we must not be afraid of it. Every moment of every day is an opportunity to change our lives and the world for the better. Pay attention to those around you, because they may just be able to help.

American Women Are Worthless

Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.

(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment)

I've been a woman for six years now, and a few simple truths have been revealed to me in that time:

1. If you are not overtly sexually attractive, you are worthless.
2. If you are unable to bear children, you are worthless.
3. If you are unwilling to be utterly dominated by men in all aspects of your life, you are worthless.
4. You have no identity apart from your present or future husband. Until then, you are merely a sex object.
5. Women have completely equal rights, insofar as men allow.

I concluded a long time ago that God does not make mistakes. On other venues, I have chronicled my journey into womanhood, and told of the inevitability of that transition: change or die. So, I concluded that God made me this way, and She must have had a very good reason. I'm beginning to see the first hints of what that mysterious purpose may be. Having been raised male, I received none of the cultural indoctrination which nearly all girls receive growing up, so I started my womanhood tabula rasa. Immediately I began to see how women are still looked down upon by men in modern society.

The Equal Rights Amendment, the text of which is included above, is deeply flawed. It is too vague, and has too many hidden impacts, and this is why it has not been ratified. CEDAW is better, its provisions spelled out very specifically, and its impacts carefully managed. However, it has not been ratified here in the States, either. As Arkansas assemblyman Patrick Briney made perfectly clear, it seems to be an utterly alien concept  that women should be afforded any consideration apart from the enumerated list above.

Here in Pennsylvania, there is nothing about who I am which impacts my rights. Article I, Section 26 of the Commonwealth's Constitution: "Neither the Commonwealth nor any political subdivision thereof shall deny to any person the enjoyment of any civil right, nor discriminate against any person in the exercise of any civil right." Any person. That means me. That means you. That means anyone who lives in, works in, or visits the Commonwealth. Your weird neighbor, the prostitute on the corner, the dozen illegals living in a studio apartment down the street. The Commonwealth affords the same basic human dignity to all of us, separate from race, gender, religious belief, national origin, or any other factor. One simple sentence, with two simple parts, covers a multitude of discriminatory practices. Not bad for a bunch of poor white farmers and coal miners. And many other States have similar wording in their constitutions. 

If the States can do it individually, then they can do it together. It's time to end discriminatory practices of all types.

Obama Attacks Soldiers' Votes?

http://aclj.org/us-constitution/oppose-obama-lawsuit-against-military-voting-rights

http://factcheck.org/2012/08/obama-not-trying-to-curb-military-early-voting/

I've ready a good number of articles about this issue, but the best one is the one from FactCheck.org. While an obviously left-leaning site, I've found their analyses of political issues to be full of facts which the reader can use to draw her own conclusions. And boy, have I!

First of all, I can't fathom any real reason for the Obama campaign to even bother with the time and expense of opposing the Ohio law extending in-person voting for military personnel by three days. Federal law provides for 32 days during which voters may cast their votes in person at approved locations, with the cutoff being the Friday before the election. The Ohio law extends this for the military through the Monday before. This adds a little flexibility for military folks, whose schedules are already tightly regimented and largely determined by the needs of the government.  The Obama campaign filed an injunction blocking implementation of the law, claiming it creates a separate class of voters in Ohio.

Well, here's where things get nasty. The Romney campaign immediately jumped on the lawsuit, claiming that Obama is trying to limit the voting rights of the military. (Not true, since the suit is merely trying, they claim, to restore equal voting rights to all people regardless of military status.) Liberals, in turn, immediately seized on the condemnation as yet another example of Romney outrightly lying in order to buy votes. (True, as far as I can tell. Romney changes positions more often than a temple prostitute.) The issue is still fresh, but I'm sure this sandlot brawl will devolve even further into partisan bickering.

Here's my conclusions.  Ohio is merely exercising her Constitutional rights to conduct state affairs, and the Obama lawsuit is baseless. Romney is a liar who will do anything to get votes. Extremist commentators like Rachel Maddow, Keith Olbermann and Rush Limbaugh should be lobotomized.

Worst election season ever! It makes 1988 look like a tea social.

But Corporations ARE People!

Romney made a supposed gaffe that was immediately pounced upon by the liberal media and has been regurgitated so many times in the ensuing months that I'm going to regurgitate soon. "Corporations are people," the governor said. Taken out of context like that, yeah, I can see how it would make him appear to be clueless and out of touch with the sensibilities of the common man. In full context, Romney was referring to the fact that corporations are made up of people. However, even out of context, it is still an accurate statement.

A corporation is an entity known as a legal fiction. Basically, you make something up, give it to a clerk or notary, and it is called into existence. "As above, so below," in alchemical parlance. And the production of legal fictions is an ages-old practice designed to separate real people from the liabilities incurred by these entities, which, once created, become virtual people, puppets controlled by the board of directors or whomever pulls the strings.

The basis of the sovereign citizen movement is that birth certificates create legal fictions with names similar to those of the real people to which they are attached. The assertion is that once a real person uses the Social Security number attached to the legal fictional "person," it signifies acceptance of control of that legal fiction as an unlimited liability corporation, subjecting the real person to any consequences of the actions of the legal fiction -- taxes, incurred debt, legal violations, etc. There are two branches of the sovereign movement. One advocates "redeeming" the legal fictional "straw man," converting it into a limited liability corporation to insulate oneself from any repercussions. The other favors cutting all ties to the legal fiction. Members of both branches have suffered prosecution and persecution as a result of their actions, although the "Redeemers" have suffered more. For more information, visit the Sovereignty Education and Defense Ministry (sedm.org)." (Be aware that merely looking at the information presented there subjects you to their member agreement.)

I was long skeptical of the assertions of the sovereign citizen movement regarding birth certificates, driver's licenses, and so forth. The idea began to gain traction in my mind, however, when the gay marriage debate really began heating up and I began to research marriage. The idea that the state can regulate who marries whom really struck me as wrong. But when I began to consider marriage as akin to a corporate merger -- as famously mentioned in the classic comedy film Back To School -- I realized that, if a marriage is between two legal fictions, rather than two real people, then the state has every right and, indeed, obligation to properly regulate the practice.

Regardless of the truth about my legal status, whatever that may be, I do not believe that marriage should be a legal institution. It is entirely spiritual, a bond forged by and between two people for their own purposes and with the blessings of their own God, and not requiring the intervention of any institution of man.

Water

With drought firmly settled across much of America, I'd like to say a few words about water. Water is the primary element of my disaster preparedness. The human body can last less than a week without water. In the event of a power outage, water supplies to affected urban areas will cease almost immediately. Two years ago, a boil advisory was issued here in Hazleton when an Escherechia coli contamination was suspected in some city water lines. Panicked city-dwellers quickly depleted stocks of bottled water at area stores. I, however, took no action. Since I habitually store water reserves, my house had all the water on hand to survive the crisis, which fortunately only lasted for two days and turned out to be a false alarm. However, a real disaster, such as a tropical storm -- of which NEPA had two last year -- earthquake, or solar storm, water supplies can run out very quickly. In April, it was reported that the Hazleton City Authority was pumping 2.5 million gallons of water daily from the Lehigh River to keep the Dreck's Creek reservoir filled. 2.5 million! My little 22-liter stockpile -- about a week's supply -- is the tiniest drop in that sea (precisely 2.3 millionths of the volume).

Disaster comes in many forms. Residents along the Susquehanna River learned last year how quickly a flood can ruin local water supplies. Overflowing sewage mixes into reservoirs and aquifers, making water unsafe to drink without filtration and disinfection. Up here on the mountain

So, putting back a stock of water should be a major part of your disaster plan. It's as easy as filling up some bottles. I drink a fair amount of Coke, so I always save the 2-liter bottles and keep them on hand to fill up in case of imminent danger. I simply rinse them out thoroughly, fill them up, add a few drops of bleach, then let them soak for a few minutes. Then I drain them, let them dry (upside down to prevent dust contamination), put the lids back on, and they're ready for action. In addition to the empty bottles, I keep eleven full bottles in a plastic crate at all times, stashed in my pantry. Most disaster preparedness FAQs I've read recommend a gallon of water per person per day, so for just me it's a week's supply. With the western third of the state under drought watch, I'll be expanding it soon, in spite of the soaking we've had here in NEPA. In times of plenty, you should be preparing for a lean future anyway, so strike when the iron is hot. With the western quarter of the state under official drought watch, and a third under at least D0 (abnormally dry), I'm prepared in case the drought expands.

Don't Join the Annie Party!

Some of you know that last year, I formed the Annie Party in response to the lack of satisfaction I have suffered at the hands of the Big Two and the ineffectiveness of all of the minor parties. The Annie Party has one and only one member -- me. And I am the only member it will ever have.

This post is primarily about individual empowerment. I began a post earlier in response to an Activist Post article about mass murders and its causes, but the I had a mind-storm and recalled everything I've ever thought about individualism. Individualism is the primary basis if Objectivism, the philosophy created by Ayn Rand, whom some of us greatly admire. I'm a fan myself. But I hesitate to call myself an Objectivist, even though many of my beliefs match up with the philosophy. I resist as identifying as a Wiccan, even though many of my spiritual beliefs match up with that religion. And I even resist identifying myself as transgendered, even though I began life as a man and now identify myself as a woman. Each of these labels comes with a typical set of traits common to each self-identified member of each group, and I, as an individual human being, rarely match up perfectly with any trait set of any label. I am Annie, and Annie means me! (paraphrasing Tolkien, btw, if that sounds familiar)

The same is true for all human beings. There are many commonalities shared by many individuals -- many people like punk rock, for example, or hold to conservative or liberal values. There are Democrats and Republicans, Goths and WASPs, Christians, Muslims, and Sikhs, Pennsylvanians and Californians, Americans and Arabs and Koreans, and so on. While each member of a particular group will bear several (or many) similarities to each f\of the other members of that group -- thus establishing them as a group -- there are always differences. It is the differences on which I like to focus.

The differences are more interesting than the similarities, and generalizations such as labels take away an individual's -- well, individuality. When you identify yourself with any particular group, you surrender a bit of your personal power to that group. Sometimes this can be a good thing, but sometimes it can be bad. "A mob is an ukly ting," as Inspector Kemp said, and mob mentality is a lot of what I'm seeing up on Capitol Hill these days, with Congresspeople, party boosters and aligned commentators all sticking to their respective party lines like drowning people to rescue ropes.  There's no flexibility in party thinking, no compromise, no mercy. There seems to be a decreasing willingness among partisan politicos to view their opponents as fellow human beings, and to increasingly label them as "the enemy."

In a previous post, I gave anecdotal evidence of a common desire among most humans to live at peace with their neighbors. I neglected to mention the minority -- those who are not willing to live at peace. Enumerating the traits and determining the causes of such a mindset evade me at the moment -- for a better explanation, see Ayn Rand's book, For The New Intellectual -- but the evidence shows that a small number of people simply cannot bear the thought of other people living peaceful and productive lives. These are the people destined to become despots. You've probably encountered one, especially if you've ever worked in any hierarchical organization such as governments or large corporations. They either work overtly -- think of any jerk boss you've had, one makes every effort to stymie your efforts, or read about brutal dictators like Adolph Hitler -- or covertly, pulling strings from behind the scenes -- think Rupert Murdoch or Heinrich Himmler, or even Alexander Hamilton. They crave glory, but find that the only way they can achieve it is not to elevate themselves but rather to push down those around them until their heads rise above the masses. These are the kind of people in control of the major political parties here in America, and that is why I formed the Annie Party.

I know some of you are in awe of my intellectual prowess, and may decry my declaration that my political party is not open to new members. First off, I am nothing special. My brain may be big and powerful, but the concepts I lay out in my posts are not rocket science, easily grasped by anyone who will take the time to think about what they are reading and view it objectively, and apply the wisdom they gain to their lives. That is the role of a scholar, to learn and then to teach. Secondly, accepting other members would defeat the purpose of the party. My primary purpose in life is to empower my fellow humans, to throw light on their individual greatness and give them the tools to effectively control their own lives. Each and every one of us is capable of great things, separately and together. When we celebrate our differences, it shows how similar we are, how common our basic goals are at root. Basically, we all want to live. We want to live our lives, achieve our dreams, and give our children better circumstances than we had. Forces are at work in the world in opposition to all of that, and the only way to negate their destructive influence is to make our voices heard. That is not going to happen if you tie your views to that of a major political party, to allow your ideology to be subsumed by that of a political mob. If you are currently a member of any political party, then maintain that, but do not allow your views to be corrupted. If anything your party is doing bothers you, then speak up. "All that is for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing," as Edmund Burke wrote. Don't sit idly by while partisan bickering plunges us deeper into political gridlock. Change something. Form your own Tom Party, or Judy Party, within the ranks or outside of them. Be an individual. Use your power.

War Is Not Normal For the Human Existence

Several of my current readers have been witness to my struggles with religion over the years. I was raised in the Lutheran tradition, and when this proved unsatisfying to me I was re-baptized in the broader Born-again Christian faith. This also proved unsatisfying, so I fell away. The ensuing years were consumed with research and a little dabbling, from A (atheism) to Z (zoroastrianism), with a particular focus away from the Abrahamic religions. Nowhere did I find any tradition which exactly matched what I knew about God and the relationship between divinity and the human condition. I finally settled on an variation on the Eclectic Wiccan tradition, even though prevailing modern Wiccan beliefs aren't an exact match either. To date the only deity I've found in widespread use which comes even close to matching what I know about God is Vishnu from the Hindu tradition. 


Recently, I began examining the reasons behind what exactly it was about the Big Three religions which I found so odious. In my wandering years, I avoided study of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam quite studiously, although I couldn't really put my finger on exactly why. The only reason I could give, if asked, would have been "the god they all worship is not a true representation of God." Now, I can say that the same is true of all  deities, since God is deeper than the ocean and wider than the sky, and our limited human understanding can encompass only small parts of true divinity. As finite beings, how can we truly understand infinity? We can only form limited representations.  Bearing this in mind, I laid aside the theology and focused on the history and tenets of the religions. Each of the three originated in the perpetually unstable Middle East, which has been torn by strife since before the beginning of written history. Archaeological evidence continues to surface supporting the fact that the peoples of that region have been at each others' throats in a neverending cycle of wholesale slaughter and retribution.


I recently made an offhand comment to a colleague about "these combat-oriented religions," to which he responded with amused laughter and a suggestion that I research Yahwism. What I discovered (from more research than just one Wikipedia article) was the answer to all my doubts concerning the Abrahamic religions. Apparently, Yahweh (if I may write that without causing offense to any readers -- I am merely a scholar, after all) came to be a composite deity, based on a number of Semitic household deities. The primary influence, however, appears to be Ashur, the ancient Sumerian (Babylonian) god of war (borne out by references to Ashura, the supposed consort of Yahweh). This makes sense to me, since competition for dwindling resources would have led to widespread tribal conflict in the desertifying Fertile Crescent -- and history shows that it did. 


However, the key event was the imposition by Saul of Gibeon, the first king of Israel, of Yahwism as the state religion. This contributed to the attitude that there is "one true way" to worship. This runs in direct opposition to the truth I have discovered through intense prayer and meditation, namely that God is all things to all people at all times. Whoever you are, whatever your circumstances, God will provide appropriate guidance. (This is why I often refer to God in the feminine, She rather than He, since at critical times in my life God appeared to me in the form of a wise woman. The Wiccan "Triple Goddess" matches this image almost exactly, hence my religious choice.) This corresponds to the Semitic deity El, "He Who Is" (or Tolkien's Eru, "The One"). An old friend, a young woman wise well beyond her years, once told me "you can't put God in a box," and this is exactly what state religion does. It prevents individual discovery of one's personal relationship with God. This is why I often say, "I believe in Christ, but I will never call myself a Christian again."


"But wait, Annie," you might say, "how can you believe in Christ if you're Wiccan?" First of all, I am not Wiccan. In a way I am, since Wicca is a blanket term encompassing almost as many forms of worship as there are Wiccans, and my form of worship matches up most closely with the general forms of Wicca.. But there was, indeed, a man named Jesus, who appeared in Judah at about the time Christian tradition says He did, and He did bring a message of salvation to the "wayward" people of Israel which extended outward from Jerusalem to encompass much of the Western world. That message was: peace. Matthew 7, verse 12:  "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." It is the same message as Hillel: "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; all else is commentary; go and learn." It is the same message from The Sikh Guru Garanth Sahib: "There is only one breath. All are made of the same clay. The light within all is the same." It is the same message John F. Kennedy delivered June 10, 1963, at the commencement ceremony at American University: "For in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air, we all cherish our children's future, and we are all mortal." 


This message of unity and non-aggression forms the basis of Confucianism, Tenrikyo, Shintoism, Buddhism, and Neopaganism, and is present in some form in most religions I have studied. The point is that the goal of religion seems to be to unite humanity in peace, not to tear it apart into warring factions. So many of these religions have so many followers that I conclude that the most basic human urge is to live in peace with one's fellow humans. As one who possesses a warrior's spirit, I understand that conflict is sometimes unavoidable, that one should fight when one is called upon to do so, but I also believe that war is only a condition forced upon a person or a society by others, and that it is necessary to prosecute war only to get to the peace on the other side. And I believe that I share this view with an overwhelming majority of humanity.


Consider this wisdom, if you will, when you contemplate the coming wars. They are numerous and lengthy, but should only fought when we are left with no other choice.

Leave Cathy Alone!

ACK! What an uproar! I've been following the drama surrounding Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy and his views on marriage. The reactions have stretched from one side of the political spectrum to the other. Then, of course, there's mine.


Cathy, and by extension all of Chick-Fil-A, supports the "biblical definition of the family unit." A perfectly reasonable stance, since without my mother and father I would not exist. Even better, Cathy acknowledged that "we live in a country where we can share our values and operate on biblical principles." Also perfectly reasonable.


Some of you who know me may be thinking by this point that I've lost my mind. "Annie, you're everything these people are standing against!" Yes, I am a transgendered, bisexual Wiccan. However, the source of my freedom to be a transgendered, bisexual Wiccan is the same source as Dan Cathy's freedom to support the "biblical definition of the family unit." That would be the First Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America, Article the 3rd of the Bill of Rights: 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 While I may not totally agree with Cathy's views -- certainly not the views he expressed to Ken Coleman -- I do agree with Ken Coleman: there's no reason to be uncivil about this matter. I've been following the gay marriage issue for years, and some of the savage invective I've heard over the issue borders on barbarism. And I could say the same of many, many issues. If the liberals and conservatives could put down their spears and stone axes for two seconds and actually discuss the issues, try to see the issues from each other's points of view, society could actually move forward. But many people have grown alarmingly intolerant, including, as Coleman pointed out, those who fight intolerance.

So, my closing comments. To Chick-Fil-A: Keep doing what you're doing -- you make a sinfully delicious chicken sandwich. To gay rights activists: take a leaf out of the Christians' book and turn the other cheek -- meaning vote with your dollars. And to everyone: we live in America, and have American freedom unlike anywhere else in the world. Exercise that freedom and say what you want to say, eat where you want to eat, love who you want to love, and worship the way you want to worship. And finally, to Dan Cathy: I will defend your right to express your discriminatory, legalistic viewpoint to my dying breath, because it is your birthright as an American -- but I expect you to do the same for me.