Instead of the Limbaugh / Olbermann model of debate that incites division, fear, irrationality, and now violence, try instead the “Socratic” method of dialogue. What is painfully dangerous in our American politics today is the lack of a sincere quest for knowledge.

Every now and then I come across an excerpt from a book that produces a moment of “rebirth” in me. These passages of text solidify years of thought into a single moment of clarity. Ideologies that I have been struggling to understand for years suddenly are expressed in a page or two of text that beautifully encapsulates these struggles into a few paragraphs:

“In our society, rational discussion is often aggressive, since participants … are doing their best to demonstrate the invalidity of their opponent’s viewpoint. In a Socratic dialogue … the ‘winner’ did not try to force an unwilling opponent to accept his point of view. It was a joint effort. You expressed yourself clearly as a gift to your partner, whose beautifully expressed argument would, in turn, touch you at a profound level … a successful dialogue should lead to ekstatis: by learning to inhabit each other’s point of view, the conversationalists were taken beyond themselves. Anybody who entered into conversation with Socrates had to be willing to change” (Karen Armstrong, The Case for God).

And this occurence is not just happening on the Right. The Left is equally guilty. There is no difference between Limbaugh and Olbermann if you measure them not by their politic leanings, but by their level of adherence to the Socratic model of debate.

In their disregard for truth, understanding, and context, they are further dividing the country that they so vehemently claim to love. I have a feeling that what many of these wingnuts really love is their power, wealth, and celebrity–certainly more than they love the country they are claiming to defend from the so-called Socialists or Capitalists.

But why are we, as political spectators, so eager to pick between Left & Right? Conservative & Liberal? And follow every announcement of the Party without insight, research, or examination?

Humans, you see, are a “religious” being. Before you think I am about to preach the Gospel to you, I am not using the term “religion” to refer to what you may traditionally think of religion (church, mosque, Sunday school, and Bible). I am referring to a systematic thought process that blindly follows a learned human behavior duly reinforced over time, rather than seeking the simple and evident truth in God. Psychologists or sociologists may refer to this as Group Mentality, commonly known as “following the herd”, “acting like sheep”, etc. But to me, no word describes this human phenomenon better than the word, “religion”. Religion in all aspects of our lives, from our understanding of God, politics, family, business, culture, and every other thing “under the sun”.

Our reaction to 24/7 cable newscasts and AM Radio are not exempt from our ability to want to fit in with a group or macroculture that will give us a false sense of belonging and empowerment.

Jesus Christ famously rebuked the religious of his day because their devotion to religion was obstructing their devotion to God. It is the same today. Religion can be found in the complex diarama of our lives and is not restricted to our theological and spiritual views. We must renounce our love affair with religion in order to regain our sacred relationships.

In all aspects of our lives, in order to find truth, morality, and even God, we must constantly examine ourselves. This must be applied not only to our religion, but our patriotism and politics.
Religion gives us temporary stability and peace, because we can shut off our minds from our busy, overburdened lives and just follow. This inevitably adds just another “brick in the wall” in our journey to Orwelian Utopia, i.e. 1984.

Orwell’s brilliant envisioning of a Government take-over of its people’s minds and souls was neither truly Socialist or Fascists — it was not the extreme spectrum of either Left or Right. It was Ambiguous Extremism itself, which could in many ways be identified with neither Left or Right. The true danger was not Liberal politics or Conservative politics, it was not even Socialism or Capitalism per se, but the lack of reason, of judgement, of balance; it was an insatiable desire to control every aspect of life by following the edicts of the “Party”, as espoused by a select few.

What is sometimes overlooked in Orwell’s 1984 is that the reverse Utopia we discover by reading its pages is not a government takeover, but a lack of knowledge and will on its people’s part. A government cannot form into a true state of reverse utopia without the consent of its people, without their willingness to forgoe the Socratic wisdom that is so dear and necessary to a truly free and democratic society. 1984 cannot germinate within a system of government, until its people stop thinking.

I understand, it is tempting to be religious. It may in fact be the original sin. I, too, want to shout at you, “What the fuck are you thinking, America?” But alas, I must restrain myself, in deference to Socrates who I will now go and attempt to learn of.

At the center is the Hillary Clinton arm of the Obama administration who has been pissing off Chinese officials in the past two months. There are 3 main contentions:

(1) Stopping Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons by imposing a U.S. lead U.N. sanction on Iran’s Islamic “republic” leadership. Everyone is on board, including Russia, which we thought may be a problem initially–everyone, that is, except China. China seeks to lose a major source of oil in their relationship with Iran by imposing sanctions. At a time when China’s economy is growing, this energy source is indispensable to China. So they are balking at any UN Resolution and they have Veto power.

(2) Obama has agreed to meet with the Dalia Lama, which really has pissed the Chinese off. This has been further aggravated by the U.S. currently agreeing to supply arms to Taiwan, including a fleet of F-16 fighters, 114 Patriot missiles, 60 Black Hawk helicopters, and some communications equipment. China has retaliated by saying they will provide medium range missiles to Pakistan.

(3) Clinton has sided with Google–against China–in a freedom of information dispute. China wants to censor Google.Cn and even Google.com from showing search results that include the Dalia Lama, Tiananmen Square, and other freedom issues that China deems inappropriate. This, too, was further aggravated when Google accused China of hacking into their Gmail accounts to obtain information about rebels who had been using Gmail to share information. Google has threatened to pull its operations out of China. Unfortunately, spineless investors pulled some stock out of Google since this conflict, and Google stock has plummeted a bit, along with the rest of the market which has seen a heavy decline over the past few weeks. Google’s moral stance being discouraged by investor greed and fear.

P.S. CNN–are you still covering Michael Jackson’s chimp’s reaction to his death? How’s that going?

In a society in which its people care more about what David Letterman said to Sara Palin in a childlike outburst, the internet has become a more reliable source of news and dissemination of knowledge than the mainstream U.S. media, which runs itself more like a business than a dispenser of truth.

Ratings matter. Truth–well, matters–when it enables TV stations to sell commercials.

In face of such a news-business model, the Internet and Facebook have become more legitimate in their dissemination of the news than CNN and FOX News combined.

While the U.S. media barely covers what is happening in Iran in 10 second clips and sound-bytes, the people in Iran risk their lives to capture video footage and spread it on the internet via Facebook, asking that their friends “share” the clips with others.

America considers Iran one of its greatest threats today. Even if not for the Iranian people who despise their government, shouldn’t U.S. news outlets at least cover current elections in Iran and its subsequent mass protests because it is in the best interest of America and it’s own citizens to do so?

In a society that cares more about American Idol and Reality TV Shows, it’s not surprising that the U.S. media does not feel it is important enough to cover the above protests in Iran.

One has to be shiveringly reminded of prophetic novels like Fahrenheit 451, 1984, and A Brave New World. Except this time it’s not “Big Brother” who is censoring our news … but we, the people.

Blago’s hair was on a news interview tour de force the past several weeks. For us, the viewer, it was nothing short of surreal and somewhat unsettling to suddenly view the man on our High Definition Screens sitting next to the likes of Larry King and David Letterman.

Even comedian D.L. Hughley “broke the news” with Milorad “Rod” Blagojevich on CNN.

I like Blago for two reasons. First, the obvious: his wonderful hair has provided countless hours of entertainment.  Second: He’s easy to disparage in a time when people are livid about their lives and the world around them. With the loss of 600,000 jobs in January alone and the world economic meltdown, Blago is a large hydraulically filled punching bag.

“All I ask for is an opportunity to be able to address these allegations and show my innocence”, Blago told Larry King, on Jan. 26th, adding, “Snippets of conversations taken out of full context is unfair.”

As much as Blago disappointed everyone by reminding us of the true face of American politics, one important fact can be gleaned from Blago’s fantastic TV interviews: with the aid of the “drive-by” news media, we are very efficient at sentencing people to life imprisonment in the formidable court of public opinion. Blago is scummy.

But there is an “inconvenient truth” that we must deal with called the United States Constitution, and particularly, the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which deals with the pesky belief that everyone deserves due process:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

Blago was impeached and convicted on January 29th by a Senate vote of 59-0, but impeachment is a political, not a criminal conviction. Blago still faces federal indictment charges in the future, unless he changes his plea to guilty or nolo contendere, enters into a plea agreement, charges are dropped, or President Obama pardons him (yeah, unlikely).

I love to hate Blago too; it’s purely delightful. However, perhaps we should respect the Fifth Amendment and consider … oh, nevermind, who made it into the Top 36 on American Idol this week??