The Geography of Blackness

"How To Be Black" by Baratunde Thurston. Harper Paperback. 2012. Kindle Edition. $3

I first ran across Baratunde on Twitter (@baratunde). I use Twitter for personal & professional development. When I declared Facebook bankruptcy years ago, I decided I could not abandon social media altogether. I decided to use Twitter to learn, and to follow only people who I felt I could learn from. Baratunde is one personality among many I follow to learn something. I'm pretty ignorant of black people even though I have black friends. Living in rural Kentucky makes things even more isolating simply due to the lack of diversity. Living and working near a university does improve exposure a little bit but not like the days of living in Kansas City, Missouri. Two decades ago I had black friends I partied and hung-out with, went clubbing with. Today, life and times are different.

I look for people of all types of backgrounds to follow on Twitter, scientists, authors, civil rights activists, journalists, comic book artists and writers, programmers, whoever I think I can learn from.

When I heard Baratunde on NPR (transcript) his comments pushed me off the fence and I bought his book. Amazon ran a good deal, $3 for the Kindle edition.

With my blog, I try to stick with a singular theme - what is the geographic theme of the topic or subject? With "How To Be Black" a number of questions crossed my mind.

1. How do I write a review of a book which deals with a subject with which I have zero experience?
2. Can I white dude write about being black? That question is easy: no.
3. Can I bring something to the conversation on race, at least within the context of Baratunde's thoughts expressed in his book? Answer: Maybe. Probably. Anybody can have an opinion, right?
4. Do I feel awkward writing about "How To Be Black?" Absolutely. But, feeling awkward hasn't stopped me from doing stuff.

Baratunde evokes many thoughts about race wrapped in his humorous story-telling. His "scientific" panel of experts on 'blackness' which includes one white Canadian, self-described as more of a "hard-boiled egg" than Caucasian, provide substantive, poignant vignettes of their experiences within black culture. His Panel of Experts are sound like groovy people who I could see myself being friends with, going to Blues clubs, book readings, comedy clubs, talking politics or current events with over beer and pizza, or sushi, or Pad Thai, and generall just hanging-out. Each Panel of Experts member is a stand-out in their own right, bring published authors, comedians, musicians, having achieved some personal goals and recognition for their efforts to move society and US culture forward. "Hard-boiled egg" by the way, refers to being Caucasian on the outside and Asian on the inside.

Baratunde's wryness and sarcasm might be lost on those who are unable work against the current of their own personal struggle or animosity or grievances. Barantunde never comes across as "angry" or "belligerent" or "just another black man trying to bring the white man down." He is a man of observation, of diligence, and of eloquence who has a depth of experience which surpasses the majority of white people. Not many white people have been shouted down for not being "white enought" by other white people. Not many white people I know who've traveled to Europe get accosted by Europeans for being named "Paul" or "Michael" or "Seamus." When Baratunde traveled to Nigeria as a teenager he was shouted at by an elderly Nigerian man for having a Nigerian name. "YOU ARE NOT NIGERIAN! What gives you the right to such a name?!" Thus, his comments are worth exploring. I never realized being black was so complicated. Blacks have to constantly struggle not only to maintain their "roots" but also interact in several different realms, and act in many different capacities.

• Blacks have to be experts in all black culture.
• Blacks have to be experts in all black politics.
• Blacks must know every other black person.
• Blacks must know what President Obama is thinking at all times.
• Blacks must represent their race within Business and Industry.
• All blacks are experts in Welfare and Poverty.
• All blacks must understand and identify with Blues, R&B, and Rap.
• All blacks are related to Robert Johnson, Rosa Parks, MLK, and Malcolm X.
• All blacks must regularly attend Black Culture Training, which includes dance classes.
• All blacks must be ready to assume the role of The Black Friend and be ready to respond to well-meaning but ignorant and possibly insensitive questions.
• All blacks must be fluent in drug culture, terminology, and use.
• All blacks must have either killed someone, been shot, know a shooter, or know a victim.
• All blacks must belong to a gang, or if older than 40, must have belonged to one.
• All educated blacks must work to prevent exposing their education to other blacks. Otherwise, they may be "outed" as a white person.

Being black is far more complicated than I ever would have dreamed. While some of the above list is tongue-in-cheek, my guess is some of these stereotypes have been held/are currently held by whites, Asians, and Hispanics. It's not easy being black. The milieu of Blackness does raise many interesting geographic questions. Being a professional geographer, Baratunde's prose has embedded within many geographic questions.

1. Does "blackness" vary by geography? I mean, do blacks treat other blacks differently based on geographic bias? If blacks in Madison, Wisconsin, run across a black person from Birmingham, Alabama or Detroit, Michigan, is automatic black 'cache' awarded?
2. Does cache vary by skin tone? That is, you can't be very black because you are too light-skinned?
3. Do white people own the roots of racism? Are white people solely responsible for curing racism?
4. Do educated blacks suffer bias from less educated blacks?
5. Do we live in a "post-racial society?"
6. Why the "N" word? Why do white people use the "N" word referencing other whites?

The N-Word I want to address the last point first. I hate the "N" word. When I hear or read one black person use the word against another black person - and it is against the other person - this is how I translate:

"No matter how good, smart, rich, kind, thoughtful, successful you are, you will never be anything more than a slave."

I see the N-word as nothing more than black peers trying to prevent black progress. People need to surround themselves with positiveness, positive comments, helpful supportive energy, not negativity. No, I say, to black people, you are not a slave and you do not have to accept the mentality of your peers who want to hold you back from who you want to be. I wish black people would work to abolish the use of the word in every day conversation. I don't hear Hispanics, or Jews, or Asians using racial epithets. Asians, in particular, are very good about using positive reinforcement on each other.

For white people to use the word in any sense is simply moronic. Seriously, using the word does not make you cool, hip, urban, trendy, dope, in touch with your roots. No rational reason exists for a white person to use the N-word in any capacity. White people who use the word have a mental disease or defect, I suspect.

The N-word among whites seems to be popular among young urban white kids, impressionable and thinking they achieve some form of credibility by using the N-word. In rural areas, whites continue to use the N-word due to cultural inertia. Grandparents and parents both used the word and transfer the acceptability of the word to their children. Kids in rural countries perpetuate N-word use as a means of seeming more "urban" or "hip." Just stop being ridiculous, please.

Being an Educated Black Person Being an educated black person in the United States is probably one of the most challenging racial roles I can imagine. Whites don't expect an educated black person, nor an educated Hispanic, for that matter. If we run across an educated black or Hispanic, whites either don't believe it, or we go through this internal argument that the black person's education must amount to about 3/5ths of a white person's education, regardless if we were in the same school and class together.

As Baratunde discusses in detail, black people have to work 2xs as hard just to be black and educated, and play a role. If another black person works in the same office, the complexity does not double but is squared.

Blacks are no longer the largest racial minority. Hispanics are the largest racial minority. Hispanics are not the fastest growing minority. Asians are the fastest growing minority group in the U.S. (National Review, 2012).

Black females tend to do better in higher education than their male counterparts. While black males attend college in rates which mirror their proportion in the population, they do not finish college at the same rate as males in general, and are suspended and expelled at higher rates than white males (CBC Foundation).

That research is being conducted to examine educational disparities is a step in the right direction; research, analyze, and interpret. Then, figure out approaches to change behavior or policy. However, blacks need to be supportive of each other in their educational and business pursuits, not derogatory, nor be a hindrance towards progress. Thug or "gangsta" life is a false life, a facade, a false cultural meme which will ultimately fail and prevents social progress, working to restrain black culture, not promote.

I love basketball, college basketball. I can't play, can't shoot. Have never been able to. But, college basketball is the ultimate team and individual sport, in my opinion. Watching an ESPN broadcast of a high school game, I was struck by the way the commentators were talking about the players. All of the high school players were being watched because several had verbally committed to Kentucky, Syracuse, and Pittsburgh.

I thought, wow, this is 21st century slavery; listen to these commentators.

"He is strong and powerfully built."

"He is very fast and quick on his feet." 

"He will be very productive for the right team and the right coach."

I thought, man, if slavery of the 18th and 19th century existed today, this is exactly what it would sound like.

"He is strong and has a great back. He could pull a plow and work all day."

"He is smart and he could carry bushels of cotton and make strong children.

"He would be a very good asset to any plantation owner."

And, I was like, damn. That's messed-up. These ESPN guys are the 21st century equivalent of a 17th century hawker for a slave auction.

This realization led me to this notion. To the black man who is given a scholarship to play basketball, I say, "make sure you take advantage of this opportunity. If you do, you win, you win for the rest of your life. If you do not use this opportunity towards investing in yourself, to make yourself better, and to graduate, then you have been complicit in your own 21st century slavery, of working for people who only want to exploit your skills for their own ends, not yours. Once they have used up your eligibility, watch how fast they dump you. Take charge of your future.

The White Roots of Racism

In terms of black and white culture, whites certainly have run the table on racial discrimination, of that there is no doubt. Also, racism was also promulgated by white people for about 400 years. You might be compelled to argue, but only my timeline is mootable, not my comment. The British, French, Germans, Spanish, and Dutch all at some time period or another believed Caucasians were racially superior to races of other skin tones. All one needs is read the journals of their diplomats, explorers, and politicians. Or, simply read their early textbooks. No less than shocking in these days. Also, one must also recognize Christianity is also responsible for racism to some degree. After all, the non-European world was full of differently-colored heathens, pagans, and atheists who must be treated as children and shown the error of their lives.

Racism is discrimination (different treatment) based upon race. Bigotry is discrimination based upon some other trait, intelligence, religious adherence, politics, etc. I know some blacks have been discriminated against by other blacks based on skin tone. I call this "bigotry" as I'm not sure if a black person can be racist against someone of their own race. Anyone can be bigoted, though. Jews throughout time have suffered racism by people of all races.

Jews were subjected to atrocities in Russia, in Europe, in the United State. Of all places, Jews in the Middle East were tolerated and appreciated, at times. Jews can handle money and charge interest, something upon which Islam places many restrictions and some Christian sects. Hence, Jews became known for being monetarily successful not through any great skill on their part, but due to religious restrictions found in other religions.

Asians, especially Japanese continue to exhibit subtle bigotry towards other Asians, especially Chinese, and to some extent Koreans. But, I call this "bigotry" and not "racism" because Japanese, Chinese, and Koreans are essentially the same race, and by my definition a person cannot racially discriminate against another person of the same race. But, they can be bigoted. Japanese can be racist against blacks and whites, though, as they have a sense of cultural superiority. If one looks at Japanese immigration law and societal mores on marriage, one can see direct evidence of bias.

Discrimination based on race and skin color is not unique to white people, that is my point. White people may be responsible for discrimination in the Western World. However, we cannot re-write history to pin the global distribution of discrimination, bias, and bigotry upon one group. We cannot even say, "we'll white people started it." No; if you are Christian, read your Bible. Those were not white people, Europeans. Those were Central Asians, Africans, and Arabs.

Whites are also resistant to their own hypocrasy. Whites will point figures are urban blacks and say, "they use welfare. Black people do nothing except use welfare and return nothing. I hate 'em. They have all these kids and my money goes to support these kids."

First, black people sort of their own worst enemy in this regard. Black people tend to congregate in urban areas and thus are easily noticed. In other words, they cluster, or group themselves, and in doing some make themselves into easy targets.

However, white people are wrong. All one has to do is look at some Census and Center for Disease Control data. Three times as many white people are on welfare. In fact, if you were to add all minorities on welfare they would not add to the number of white people on welfare. White people also abuse prescription drugs more than minorities. White people also abuse illicit drugs more than minorities. Examine the geography of Appalachia sometime. The greatest poverty in the United States, outside of Native American territories (talk about whites and racism), is found in predominantly white Appalachia ... and prescription drug abuse, and illicit drug abuse. But, whites don't acknowledge this. We hear about helping urban poor, rarely Appalachian poverty.

The Spatial Distribution of Blackness

I found Baratunde's comments about 'blackness' and its geographic overtones interesting. I have many black acquaintances. My favorite is April, who lives in Atlanta. She is a beautiful, light-skinned black woman and when she was in school, she told me once if she couldn't find a suitable black man she would marry me and we would have beautiful children. I found this highly complimentary.

When I was in junior high school (7-8th grade), I was passed a note through friends a black girl wanted to be my girlfriend. She was very pretty and dark-skinned. My 'friends' were freaking-out, though, especially the white girls. I was a little unnerved, honesty, more because I was terribly shy and the thumbs of my parents pressed hard. Neither thought dating was suitable for me, only my education. "Plenty of time for dating when your in college. Or, even better, wait until after college." And, my dad did, and does, favor the N-word, and I could only imagine bring my black girlfriend home and dealing with all the above. So, yeah, not only did I not have a black girlfriend in junior high, I had no girlfriend until I got to college. But, blame me, not her.

Baratunde's comments, though, helped me expose my ignorance of how blacks see each other. Do Southern blacks get more respect from other black in more "progressive" or "liberal" regions of the U.S.? Is a black person from Birmingham, Alabama seen in a different respect by a black person living in Chicago? Do black people harbor biases for or against other black people based on perceived regional differences?

I suspect the answer is "yes," not because that is a trait of black people but because that is a trait of people, in general. We are all familiar with the notion of "living on the other side of the tracks" or "being from the "wrong side" of the tracks." We all carry mental, or cognitive, maps in our heads of where wealth people live, nice or gated neighborhoods, good schools, good shopping, as well as places where life is more visceral. When we have this knowledge thrust upon us in the form of a person, we then make internal value judgments, which we then might have to work to overcome if these judgments result in negative biases against the person. We want to work against the perpetuation of stereotypes but challenging our own personal biases.

Our Post-Racial Society 

Do we live in a post-racial society? In short, are you freaking kidding? No. No...no.

We are getting better but we are several generations from a post-racial societal. Simply because President Barack Obama, our first mixed-race President, does not make U.S. society "post-racial." Our President is half-black, and as Baratunde points out, even among blacks President Obama's election could simply be a historical fluke, an aberration. The next black president will be the U.S.'s first black president. It's easy to dismiss the first as an accident. A second black president would have to be a deliberate act.

Now, put a Native American in the Oval Office, and we might be able to talk post-race society. Or, a black woman in office. Or, a Hispanic woman. Then, we can talk about post-racial society.

As long as we continue to elect old, white, Christian people into Congress, or as Presidents, or governors, we cannot discuss the "post-racial" nature of U.S. society.

As long as we have hiring, scholarship, grants or other benefits based on race we cannot have a conversation about a "post-racial" society.

Keeping track of statistics is necessary. Statistics are information, data, and knowledge is always necessary. Every organization should keep statistics on race, religion, creed, ethnicity, etc., but public policies which provide race-based benefits stand in the way of "post-racial"society conversations.

Essentially, all people need to be treated the same way under the law, regardless of who they are. However, that is an ideal. As long as we have a legal system which discriminates against women, gays, blacks and minorities we cannot call ourselves "post-racial." Simply nonsense.

Tomorrow is Martin Luther King Day. I honestly did not plan my essay around MLK observation. I merely finished reading How To Be Black and as I normally do, try to bring some geographic context to Baratunde's themes and ideas. Living in the south, many whites see MLK day as "stupid." Someone on Twitter posted a Facebook conversation among his 'friends:'

"Black people just need to get over being slaves. They aren't slaves now." "Black people would probably sue if we made them do anything on MLK day." "We [white people] have to constantly walk on pins and needles just to make other feel like they are worth something."

Thank you, Southern white kids, or kids, in general, and our decrepit U.S. educational system. You might as well tell Jews, "you need to get over the Holocaust. It was 70 years ago. Old news, move on. You have your own country now. You should be happy."

I am not a White Apologist. Being a student of history, and human nature, the above comments expose ignorance, immaturity, and hypocrisy among children and young adults. I am sure if we plumbed the depths of the lives of these people we would find them clinging to cultural traits passed along by parents and grandparent which are barriers to self-improvement, racism, denigrating smart people, drug or alcohol abuse, or a cycle of poverty. Hypocrisy is a shadow which follows everyone everywhere.

Cultural history is important to remember. Cultural history cannot be worn like a cloak, though, or used an excuse not to be better or to improve one's self and one's position or status in life. MLK day helps everyone remember where we were in time, to help us not forget how all people are damaged by racism. MLK day is not a day strictly for black people but for everyone to experience as a societal landmark of where we were, for us to realize where we are, and to think about where we need to be. And, those ignorant comments above illuminate how poorly understood are the overarching messages of MLK and those people active against racism.

Individually, we have to work to overcome our own personal concerns. We cannot allow our individual or cultural histories to psychologically wear us down. Whether we are children of divorce, or abandonment, or tragedy, or abusive parents, we do not have follow in the same path. We have choice, we can make choices about who we are and how we act. We can challenge the traits passed to us by our local culture and we can make a choice to act and behave in ways which are in our own best interest. Racism and bigotry are never good choices and represent the worst of false memes. When we cross the threshold from being children to adults, which I submit is more into one's 20s, based on intellectual and emotional maturity than the de jure age of 18, it is incumbent we leave behind our juvenile thoughts, feeling, and false memes about people and aspire to higher level thinking.

Thank you for reading this far, if you managed to do so. If you leave a comment, or RT/MT on Twitter I'll give you a shout-out (s/o) in return. PAX

How Memes Explain GOP Dysfunction

I'm amending my post based on results from the 2012 Presidential Election. Comments by GOP pundits speak directly to my comments below. Both Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer exemplify the anti-rational memes I identify and discuss below. Krauthammer, in fact, argues the GOP platform needs no changes; the GOP simply couldn't motivate the proper personalities to communicate the Republican message. If the message is so complicated 9 candidates cannot communicate the "message," the problem might be the message.
My previous post, a book review of D. Deutsch's The Beginning of Infinity, left a cliffhanger, of sort. D. Deutsch spoke of static versus dynamic societies, specifically, static societies fail; dynamic societies endure, unless compromised or infected with non-rational memes. Then, demise of a society is a guaranteed surety. I dropped a parenthetical comment within my review indicating I would speak more on this topic later. This is later.
David Deutsch introduces a stunning array of ideas in a few short pages. He essentially breaks down culture and the transmission of cultural ideas and describes the bifurcation of a society’s choices into two paths. One path takes society down a static path, and essentially the end of that society. The other path takes society down a dynamic path, and persistence. Sounds a lot like Robert Frost, “the path not taken.”
My chosen theme for my writing is geography, the entire milieu of geography. When a quantum physicist wanders into the realm of culture and nation-building, my “geography-sense” begins to tingle. I have nigh-incomplete knowledge of quantum physics but I have a lesser amount of incomplete knowledge about geography. However, tying a few ideas from The Beginning of Infinity (TBOI) to geography should not be too difficult. What comes thereafter, might be.
The notion static societies and dynamic societies are part of the milieu of geography should not be too indulgent; this notion should be self-evident, actually. TBOI introduces a term which is not generally used in geography. The term is expressed more in sociology, or psychology, perhaps. However, TBOI introduces the term as a fundamental components of culture. The analysis of the term is used to examine the general success or failure of societies within a historical context. For instance, the failure of the Roman Empire, the failure of Nazism, the failure of the Soviet Union are all potentially explained by the function of a single term, and the terms components.

What is a meme?

Richard Dawkins, in his book The Selfish Gene (1976), posited the idea of a “meme.” A meme is a self-replicating idea (369). But not this simple, as a meme is a self-replicating idea within a culture much like a gene is a self-replicating set of biological instructions which communicates to cell how to develop. Memes carry cultural instructions which communicate and define individual’s behavior within a culture.

A meme is a self-replicating idea which carries the cultural instructions which communicate and define an individual’s behavior within a culture. Memes can mutate due to societal pressures, therefore memes evolve over time.

Thousands of memes can exist. Memes can arise and disappear within a person’s lifetime, or they can persist over generations. Memes can self-replicate with varying degrees of success. Some memes persist over time with considerable fidelity; they do not lose their message. Some memes adapt over time and evolve. The information content will change; did a new meme arise and replace the old meme? Or, is the meme simply a mutation?
Memes can be categorized as one of two types. “Rational” memes are based upon rational and critical thought (388). Being based upon rational and critical thought, rational memes are able to be accurately replicated. Rational memes evolve in the direction of real understanding and knowledge (389).
“Anti-rational” memes are founded upon non-rational thought or non-critical thought (388). Non-rational thought or non-critical thought is a means of saying the idea is not likely to be replicated with any degree of accuracy. An example of non-critical thought is the response to a question, “because I said so.” Another example includes memes which are based on religious ideologies, faith-based ideologies, or political-based ideologies. An example of such anti-rational memes would include the belief women are inferior or too delicate to vote or to become involved in politics, or the notion Blacks or people of color are inferior, or the notion the only true faith is Judaism. Anti-rational memes mutate away from developing better understanding and increased knowledge, and in doing so hinder or eliminate adaptations which encourage greater critical thinking.

Rational memes arise from critical thinking and encourage greater understanding through promoting more rational thought.
Anti-rational memes arise to hinder or prevent critical thinking and impair understanding and restrain knowledge.

Rational memes persist and are enjoyed throughout society and across time. Rational memes succeed in spite of debates and criticism because the memes themselves inspire debate and criticism, becoming better and accepted throughout society. The example set forth in TBOI are the Laws of Motion described by Isaac Newton. Newtonian physics not only is useful for construction, such as cathedrals and bridges, and useful for artillery (388). In other words, rational memes are useful across a broad spectrum of people and disciplines, are well-suited for being re-purposed, and foster more criticism and debate.

Anti-rational memes can persist and spread among people in the very same as rational memes. However, their effect is different. Anti-rational memes harm society (378). Anti-rational memes discourage criticism, debate, the pursuit of knowledge and deeper meaning. These effects may see mundane, yet the effects of those effects tend not to be mundane. Discouraging criticism and debate leads to the rise of police states, censorship of the media, detainment, loss of freedoms, imprisonment, or death. Russia has created a set of Internet censorship laws which greatly restricts access to the media, makes libel a criminal offense, and forces foreign news reporters to register as foreign agents (Atlantic, 3 Nov 2012). Fascism is another example of an anti-rational meme. Fascism is the unquestioning devotion to an ideology, typically a political ideology. Fascism is not limited to politics; the adherence to religious indoctrination in the face of contrary evidence is also a form of fascism. The United States is not immune to anti-rational memes. The Salem Witch trials springs to mind, the Red Scare & McCarthyism of the 1950s, and the "You Are Either With Us Or Against Us" domestic and foreign policy during the 2001-2008 Bush Administration are all forms of fascism, and anti-rational memes. The persecution of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks is an interesting circumstance. Yet, despite the controversy, I would argue this persecution is also an anti-rational meme because deeper truths are being hidden or concealed. This is precisely the nature of anti-rational memes.

The precise nature of anti-rational memes is to work against the revelation of knowledge, to blur or conceal the truth.

At this point I'm departing from my synopsis of memes, and discuss of rational and anti-rational memes. Rational memes are consistent with dynamic societies. Dynamic societies are not immune to the dangers of anti-rational memes. Within dynamic societies, both types of memes exist and are both exposed to the same sets of criticism. Anti-rational memes do not stand up to criticism, however, falter, fade away, and are replaced by rational memes. Even rational memes are under constant scrutiny and may be replaced by new memes or evolve into a new meme. Because of the continual improvement of rational memes in dynamic societies, the memes themselves become increasingly easier to replicate without loss of fidelity (388).

All meme forms and variants can exist within a dynamic society. Dynamic societies allow scrutiny and criticism of memes. Anti-rational memes will be identified as false, shallow, or useless. Rational memes will persist under critical observation and will be replicated accurately.

Static societies may have rational memes. However, due to the persistence of anti-rational memes, rational memes are disposed. Anti-rational memes can be as faithfully replicated as rational memes. For example, slavery in the United States was a persistent anti-rational meme based on several specious arguments. Generation after generation of people in the U.S. South were indoctrinated into the Slavery System. Most any attempt to argue against slavery, i.e. to criticize the meme, was immediately squelched. Static societies encourage the Status Quo, suppress criticism, and enforce invariant compliance of anti-rational memes (381). Laws are passed which encode the meme into the social fabric, such as the "Sundown Laws" which persisted in the United States well after Black Emancipation. Society may even foster and encourage the use of taboos to control behavior. Even within the allegedly "free and open" United States, some mixed race couples continue to find bias and discrimination.

Static societies are doomed to fail. Static societies impose rules, regulations, and restrictions which have the effect of ultimately shutting down human creativity. Human creativity is essential for meme evolution and transmission.

The society of the United States is generally associated with being a "dynamic" society. Many societies today are dynamic societies. All of Europe, India, the United States, Chile, Argentina, Canada, are all examples of "dynamic" societies. If you don't see your country mentioned, its probably still dynamic, I merely did not want to develop a comprehensive list. As long as a society is able to evolve to more rational ideas, i.e. rational memes, the society has a good chance of being a "dynamic" society.

Some societies I tend to think of as being dangerously close to becoming static societies. Russia comes to mind. The more restrictive the government becomes, the more speech and political expression is curtailed, the more likely Russia will become static. China falls into the same category for essentially the same reason. North Korea is a static society. Venezuela under the rule of Hugo Chavez, becomes more of a static society under his strict leadership. Any of the Middle Eastern countries, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Maghreb countries, and many countries of sub-Saharan Africa have the potential of becoming static societies. Rules, laws, or taboos which restrictive the free movement of ideas, or limit certain populations are anti-rational memes. Limiting the role of women in business, industry, sports, or government are anti-rational memes. Discriminating against a population based on skin color or other physical traits is an anti-rational meme. The killing of albinos in Tanzania because they are seen as "ghost" people is an anti-rational meme. The notion in Malawi of having sex with a virgin girl as a cure for AIDS/HIV is an anti-rational meme.
In the United States, our political parties are susceptible to becoming victimized by the spread of anti-rational memes. The Democratic Party support of unions is an anti-rational meme which hinders business, disallows the movement of ineffective workers and their inherent inefficiencies, and prevents the replacement of outmoded business models with modern adaptations.
The Tea Party movement itself is based almost exclusively on a host of anti-rational memes, racism, Creationism, pro-Christian, pro-faith, and a return to the Gold Standard are simply a few anti-rational memes prevalent among the Tea Party.

Republicans, especially Conservative Republicans, have become significantly enamored by anti-rational memes. The "Patriot Act" provided unparalleled access to law enforcement for domestic surveillance. During the Bush Administration, citizens throughout the country found their "patriotism" challenged by simply criticizing White House policies. Members of the Senate Science and Technology Committee side with Creationists and other anti-science advocates against current research extending from the study of Cosmology, evolution, stem cell research, to climate change. Conservative Republicans, such as Donald Trump persist in perpetuating the Birther meme concerning President Obama's place of birth and his academic record. Other Conservative Republicans persist in associating environmental catastrophes like Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Sally with God's wrath against the moral turpitude of homosexuality and abortion. The current political clarion among Republicans, "Take Back America" exemplifies yet another anti-rational meme. The United States has not been lost, has not been over-run or taken over. The government is not besieged. A coup d'etat has not supplanted any of our three government divisions.
Dynamic societies succeed by critical investigation of memes, by moot, and by using human creativity to expose, evaluate, and adapt memes. As memes are replicated, and evolve, individual memes may become static (383). Static memes are not necessarily bad. The idea of one-person, one-vote is a static meme which is important for governance which cannot really get more any more simple. Remember, the previous memes prevented women from voting, black males could cast a vote which counted as 1/2 the vote of a white male, and only white landowners could vote. Individual memes may become static. Danger arises when static memes become encoded with the law, or imposed by taboo, and society in its entirety is restricted from exercising creativity in advancing knowledge and gaining deeper understanding.

The two major parties, the Democrats and the Republicans, are catalysts for memes. Democrats, often referred to as "Liberals," are criticized for simply being that, liberal. Liberal carries many connotation; open, explorative, educated, flexible, wavering, and progressive are a few terms which come to mind. Republicans are often characterized as "Conservative," meaning resistant to change, parochial, narrow-minded, and traditional are a few terms which come to mind.

Both political parties are far from perfect. However, Republicans are dangerously close to becoming the bastion of anti-rational memes. Advocating increased levels of religious expression in schools disaffect members of a society which purports to be accepting is an anti-rational meme. Anti-science faith-based messages which articulate evolution and cosmological sciences as being straight from Hell is an anti-rational meme. Deprecating education at levels beyond high school is an anti-rational meme. Denouncing climate and atmospheric sciences is an anti-rational meme. Advocating the status quo upon reliance on fossil fuels and against alternative energies is an anti-rational meme. Denouncing the rights of gay and lesbian citizens based on religious intolerance is an anti-rational meme. Stripping rights away from individuals to exercise control over her own reproductive rights in an anti-rational meme. Restricting the use of embryonic stem cells on religious grounds is an anti-rational meme.

For Democracy to succeed, at least two parties of equal rational and critical thinking acumen are necessary. My criticism of the Republican party is levied mostly to vent frustration over the entire political process. In reading TBOI, particularly the portion regarding memes and culture, I was struck by the relevance of Deutsch's comments and their applicability to current societal and governmental concerns. Much of the vitriol of our current political climate arises from anti-rational memes, examples of which I have already mentioned. These anti-rational memes are associated with members of one political party, are encoded within that party's platform, in fact. That the GOP cannot mount a substantive and unified front to the Democrat Party can be tied directly to the anti-rational memes harbored by many Republicans. To provide a better leadership at local, state, and national level, GOP leaders need to scrutinized their platform, their ideals, eliminate those notions which are parochial, limiting, predicated on ignorance and non-critical thinking, and purge their party of members who support anti-rational, non-critical memes. Otherwise, the Republicans are dooming themselves to irrelevance, being diluted by more non-critical thinkers, and radicalists, eventually being replaced by a number of factions.

Source: Deutsch, David; The Beginning of Infinity; Penguin; 2011.

Three Decades of Spineless Governing of the World’s Waning Superpower

This is an old essay, written in December, 2011. After rereading, and committing some edits, my sentiments still feel the same.

As I write this, the country is caught in the midst of bickering that encroaches upon racism and bigotry. Two basic controversies test the U.S., under the guise of of one theme: Islam. First, we have the Birthers, people that despite all evidence to the contrary, believe Pres. Obama is an illegitimate president and a Muslim. Then, we have controversy surrounding the building of mosques and community centers. In Nashville, over the weekend, a building site was vandalized, building materials set afire. In New York, NY, a planned community center, two blocks from the former World Trade Center site, is driving a huge wedge between politicians and common Americans. The argument: Muslims are violent, anti-Christian, anti-American, and their places of worship, or simply of gathering, are places for the training of suicide bombers and terrorists, and therefore have no place in American society.

Stupid. People are just so stupid. Individually and in groups, regardless of size. A two-person group seems to be as ignorant as a 200-person group these days. And Americans do not seem to be aware that we are the root cause of this ignorance, bigotry, and racism. Those Americans that seem to be aware that we are the problem do not appear to be pointing the fingers in the right direction (“Republicans are evil,” or “Democrats are evil,” or “the government is evil”). The Finger of Blaming Pointing is too unidirectional, in my opinion, and therefore is pointless. And ignorance is a plague as deadly and destructive as any real disease.

Politicians are creations of the common people. We elect politicians and support them or not depending on their campaign rhetoric which translates via elections into a “win” or “loss.” The Body Politic was never meant to be a career. Politicians that have served for decades are really not people to be admired, at least not according to those that helped developed our federal system. Serve, then leave. Like serving on a jury. Represent your constituency then go home.

Rules change, and change they did. People today, especially the group known as the “Tea Party,” do not seem to grasp that. Which rules do they want to adhere to? The Constitution is not a very large document. Other documents, unarguably, carry more immediate weight, I argue. The Constitution is not going to protect your business against legal suits, or guide businesses in conducting businesses. The framers of the American Constitution did not construct the Constitution to cover such details. Instead, we have the Legislative Branch, and the Judicial Branch to handle laws and legalities. When Tea Party supporters argue against some topic as “not being in the Constitution,” or “not being allowed within the Constitution,” they are completely correct. But they miss the point. Nearly every claim about taxation that the Tea Partiers claim is unconstitutional, is constitutional because those laws were created by the Legislative Branch of our government, by duly elected representatives, and therefore are, in fact, legal. We might not like those laws, or those taxes, but the Constitution does give the Legislative Branch exclusive rights to raise taxes in order to cover the expenses of government.

And, guess what? We, the People, by voicing our needs to our legislators, create those government expenses. The Government does not do this; the government is nothing but a paper artifact. Human beings power that government, and human beings put people into positions of power to create that legislation.

Again, we have only ourselves to blame. We put our faith in strangers, really. We don’t know who these people are, what agendas he or she might have. Snapshots of careers and resumes really do not tell the complete tale.

Politicians are not evil, not inherently evil, anyway. Unless we are. No, they are a product of us, of our personal ignorance. Our ignorance about our government, our political system, our own society and culture. Really, our own ignorance about ourselves.

Our own ignorance will be the downfall of the United States. Our ignorance began over three decades ago, and has progressed unchecked, really. My unfortunate prediction is this: our momentum of ignorance has too much energy to stop, too much inertia to change direction.

We have already lost our edge. We cannot blame Pres. Obama; not his fault, not even close. Nor can we completely blame George W. Bush, though he is certainly culpable, certainly due to his ignorance of American energy addiction that was borderline criminal, and two fruitless wars which stole generations of American tax dollars that would have been better used at home. Nor can we blame Clinton, though, again, culpable, as he certainly was intelligent enough to create both an economic policy and energy policy, just too lazy to accomplish either. Nor can we place blame entirely on George Bush, Sr. However, if he had the foresight, he could have altered the course of American culture. Many idolize Reagan; however, had he the foresight, the temerity, the leadership zeal, Ronald Reagan might have been the right person at the right time, with the personality, to push America in the right direction. Instead, he failed, too. People castigate President Carter. He will always be associated with the 1979 Iranian Hostage Crisis, and viewed through the Oil Crisis Lens, his presidency has always been seen as a failure.

People forget Carter first bailed out General Motors in 1979. And we forget that he help begin the work to limit nuclear weapons in cooperation with the Soviet Union. Of even greater importance, especially when viewed today, was his interest in reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil, and his interest in pursuing alternative energy sources.

In the mid-70s, the oil crisis hit the world hard. Oil prices soared as OPEC nations organized, set production quotas, and set prices. Demand did not decrease, and people paid the higher prices for gasoline. OPEC nations were fed by higher oil incomes, including Russia. Russia funded a war in Afghanistan, and subsidized inefficient industries and agriculture with its oil income.

Carter seemingly saw what was happening, that the United States could be manipulated through our dependence upon oil. He took efforts to turn himself into a model of reduced energy dependence. Solar panels were installed on the White House, and temperatures were modulated such that people had to dress differently to compensate for warmer or cooler inside temperatures. He was trying to get it right, yet he too came up short.

Outside of Pres. Carter’s meager efforts to institute energy policy in the United States, no president in the last 30 years has shown the leadership nor the responsibility to be a steward of the American people. None.

Americans are at this point in our history due to a complete and utter failure of any true leader to assume responsibility and set America on the proper path. As a result, we find ourselves bickering and fighting over whether a president is an American or not, a Muslim, or not, or whether it is OK to build a mosque, or not, issues that are banal and soporific.

Such events are symptomatic of weak leadership and the related lack of goals, direction, fortitude, education, and over-abundance of ignorance, lethargy, greed, and selfishness prevalent among Americans.

Government must exist. People who argue to the contrary are simply morons. Really. Walk directly away from them. Unfriend them from Facebook. Never ever speak to them again.

People must be organized, and that is one job of government, to keep us organized. Government, ideally, helps us use our resources more efficiently. Believe it or not. Governments help us manage our resources more efficiently internally and between us and other countries. Representative governments do this better than monarchies, dictatorships, and Communism.

A primary weakness of representative governments is the election process. Election cycles churn people through the Legislative Branch. Campaign cycles burn copious amounts of time and stupid amounts of money, and thus consume irresponsible amounts of resources. Because of these cycles, legislators have very short attention spans, looking only as far as their next election cycle. These cycles being short, has benefits. An election can put new blood in relatively quickly, or get the bum out, relatively quickly.

An unfortunate result of short cycles is that a legislator can enact laws or policies that do not come into play until years down the road. Not in office in ten years, people have short memories, and people forget that that these laws were enacted a decade or so ago. All accountability is lost.

Again, weak government leadership is responsible. Long-term goals, policies that have a horizon that persists beyond an election cycle can mitigate against legislators in government for short-term gain.

For at least 30 years, the United States has not had the leadership needed to keep us ahead of the game, to secure a sound future as a world power and a world leader. As a result, our leadership role globally is being eroded. Eventually, China, and India, will have more bargaining power than the United States.

We concede our leadership to China, and eventually, India. Our leadership role was not taken away; our national leadership, or lack thereof, gave away our economic, political, and cultural competitive advantage.

Our national leaders gave away our competitive advantage through two utterly avoidable failures.

First, the United States has no comprehensive economic development plan. Every administration since Eisenhower has taken a liaise faire attitude towards economic growth and development. No president, to my knowledge, has ever developed a strategic plan identifying key areas of development or education to ensure that the United States is at the fore-front of research and technology, to ensure that our workforce is constantly adapting and forward-looking, Our national leaders have left these goals to individuals and corporations and has provided little guidance or leadership.

China, India, most of northern and western Europe, Japan, and South Korea all have long-term economic development policies that direct laws, investment, and policies. In particular, China and India.

The leadership of the United States has not leveraged our strengths to ensure that those strengths continue into the future.

Second, the United States has no comprehensive energy plan. Pres. Carter attempted to address our addiction to oil. He was laughed from office. Who is laughing today, as our oil dollars go to Venezuela and Hugo Chavez, who tells America to “go to hell.” Russia, who had its infant democracy stolen nearly overnight by Vladimir Putin, and who stole democracy yet again when his appointed successor, Medvedev, took over as president, and Putin assumed the role as Prime Minister.

Americans need to understand this: there is no way to drill all the oil we need to feed our addiction. China has 300 million people already that need oil, too. China also has five more “Americas” waiting, and they will want oil, too. India has thee “Americas” waiting for oil.

The media, the commentators, sound like people addicted to heroine or methamphetamine, “we just need to drill more. Come on, man, I need a fix! You can’t abandon me!” Like a junkie, America staggers down Energy Alley looking for their next hit.

Its time for rehab. Our national leaders run a perpetually irresponsible Methadone clinic. They get paid, and do not have any personal interest in changing a pattern of destructive behavior. They have figured out that Americans are addicted. And like addicts, we do not think rationally. Stupid issues rise to incendiary levels, and we turn on ourselves, like junkies.

And our elected leaders feed off of our irresponsible behavior, directly, by augmenting bigotry or racism, by propagating misinformation, or simply by out-right lies; or, indirectly by not standing up and making hard choices, or by going along with the crowd. or by remaining silent.

Even if a person were to rise above the national noise, with a clear, sensible message, that person would be drowned out amid the current chaos.

Even if a person were to rise above the national noise, and garner enough consensus to be elevated to a high office, or even the highest office, time to institute change may have already run out for the United States to affect any kind of positive change within a generation.

Instituting change is not easy. Changing people attitudes and behaviors to more moderate and inclusive modes is not easy. Overcoming inertia is not easy. Getting a nation of people, who have been led to believe that being an individual is a God-given right, and being allowed to be ignorant is a positive character trait, is nigh on impossible. Convincing people to work to their best ability, to work to their advantage, to ensure the future of their family and children and grandchildren might require more effort than reaching Mars.

And like a mission to Mars, convincing Americans to work towards national goals would require as much dedication.

Tea Party and Constitutional Confusion

"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"

The Tea Party, like I've said in past writings, has some good ideas. Having a government that is fiscally responsible, that is an idea I can connect with.

But, I am struggling with the notion that Tea Partiers have with the elimination of the Department of Education. Not necessary, Tea Partiers claim; give the power to educate to the states and local communities. And, they claim, there is no provision in the United States Constitution for a Department of Education.

Technically, that statement is true; nowhere will one find the provision to instantiate a "Department of Education." I don't see anything for the Department of Energy, or Interior, either.

As an aside, there is a provision for the Federal Reserve Bank, because Article 1, Section 8 specifically gives the government power to coin money and control the value of said money.

Article 1, Section 8 provides two provisions for the creation of the Department of Education, and any other Department, Agency, Office, or whatever else the government needs. Let's look at the obvious one first.

"...provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United State..."

I don't know how you define "general Welfare" but to me, and to the Supreme Court (whose job it is to interpret the law) "general Welfare" means that Congress can do pretty much as it pleases for creating or abolishing whatever it sees fit to create or abolish. That means if Congress thinks that we need direction for education, then the creation of the Department of Education is completely within the domain of Congress.

"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

The key part of the this provision is the "necessary and proper" fragment. It is this fragment that the Supreme Court, over the years, has allowed Congress to pretty much act with impunity in legislating policies.

People argue with me about the meaning of these provisions. These provisions are part of the original Constitution and not later Amendments. Furthermore, these provision appear in the First Article, which lends some weight to their importance. Arguing with me is like arguing against the Constitution ...

The Constitution is also what is referred to as a "Living Document," meaning the Constitution has the ability to change to reflect changes in American society and societal needs. The Constitutional is a tool with which to create, alter, modify, or delete elements of governance in order to adapt to changes in American society.

The vagueness of the document is DELIBERATE. There is no way the framers of the Constitution could anticipate future needs of Americans, other than to create a Constitution that would allow future generations the flexibility to govern. Govern, without the interference of Religion. Hence, the vagueness.

That there are no obvious references to the Department of Education, or to the Department of Interior, or to the Department of Energy does not mean that they cannot exist. There does not need to be any specific reference to any Office, Tax, Agency, or Department. The Constitution grants powers to Congress to create as needed.

Tea Partiers, and people leaning towards the Tea Party, need to really open their mind about their interpretation of the Constitution. Those that want to return the country to Constitutional Law - whatever that is - are living in a country created by Constitutional Law. Again, they seem to be a victim of Myopic Ignorance, of seeing only what they want to see.

Thoughts: Tea Party v. Federal Reserve Banking System

The Tea Party has some good ideas. Eliminating the Federal Reserve is not one of them.

People blame the Federal Reserve Banking System (FRBS) for such things as devaluing the dollar and causing the Great Depression. People actually do those things, through their misguided notions of trying to help - not the FRBS. That is like blaming the gun for killing people, not the people holding the weapon.

Americans have a dangerous form of myopic ignorance. First, we don't really understand governing processes very well. To compensate, we listen to allegedly smart people to tell us how we should think. These politicians, or WannaBe Politicians, get people worked into a lather, based some some truth, half-truths, and lies. The Tea Party is fomenting ignorance about the FRBS and advocating for its abolition. Second, not only do we not understand our own governing processes well, we do not understand the relevance of these processes to the Global Economy. I call these the Downstream Effects. Dump your garbage in the stream and who cares about the effects of your actions downstream.

Besides controlling monetary policy within the United States, the FRBS also engages with other countries. The FRBS is how countries pay each other for services or products rendered. Yes, that's right, that is how the United States buys and sells things on the global market. I'm not talking about Wal-mart, or IBM, I am talking about the money that the U.S. borrows from other nations to meet our own budget needs. Elimination of the FRBS throws uncertainty into the balance of payment equation as countries no longer understand the value of American currency.

People also need to understand this, too. Most all other developed nations, Japan, China, Russia, Germany, all have their own Central Banking System (CBS). These CBSs pretty much work the same way our FRBS works; controlling the money supply, interest rates, etc. Thus, not only does the United States have Fiscal Management Policies centered on a CBS, but all of our trading partners do, as well. Again, by going our own way, other countries now no longer have a basis of valuing American currency. Our trading partners expect and anticipate that everyone essentially operates in fundamentally the same ways, by the same set of predictable rules.

Consider this allegory for a moment. Imagine that each of our 50 States has its own currency. As long as each state operates by the same rules for circulating currency, each state understands the value of its own currency, and the currency of surrounding states. That is not to say that the values are equal. A California dollar may be of higher value than an Idaho dollar, or a Kentuckiana dollar may be more valuable than a Tennessean dollar. Exchange rates would be tabulated each day so people and businesses would know the differences in value. But, the market rules would be the same across the board. Now consider what happens when Kansas decides to eliminate Corn-backed monetary policy and instead impose a value based on Faith and the amount of Kansas dollars in circulation. People, being familiar with currency backed by some commodity, would have no idea what the value of the Kansas dollar might be. The Kansas dollar could become worthless, making life miserable for Kansans. The Kansas Government could peg the value of their dollar to the California wine-backed dollar, thereby saving the value of their currency. Kansas changed the rules for its currency. Our American lives are much better off that the individual state currencies alive before the Civil War did not survive after. Change the rules of our National currency has the potential of ruining the Global Value of our currency.

Another caveat to toss out: in order for the dissolution of FRBS to work, ALL OTHER COUNTRIES WITH CBS MUST DO THE SAME. Ron Paul-R (TX) states this in his book, "End the Fed," but states it in passing. All countries must agree to allow their currencies to float in the same way U.S. currency would float, or the process immediately fails, the American currency then becomes worthless. Now, what is the likelihood of all countries trashing their CBS in favor of free-floating currency. About the same as Satan converting to Catholicism, I'd wager.

Next, for our currency to have any value whatsoever, our money must be backed by something other than Faith (which it is essentially backed by now). That means returning to a precious metal supported monetary framework, like Gold. Again, another problem arises. In order to maintain the value of Gold, that means control of the Gold Supply. All Gold mines in the United States must then become wholly-owned, nationalized, by the government. Private ownership of Gold would also be severely restricted. In 1933 & 1934, in order to control the Gold supply, Executive Order 6102 required all people to sell their gold to the United States Treasury at a fixed price. Only since 1975 have Americans been able to legally own gold beyond a wedding ring.

Allowing U.S. to be backed by a precious metal and managed by market forces may seem like a good idea.
Actually, to me, this is a horrible idea. I should say, to the inattentive it may sound like a good idea. Or to those that are frustrated by current events, the removal of the FRSB may seem like a good idea.

The problem is that proponents, the Tea Party, especially Ron and Rand Paul, do not adequately describe the pitfalls of FRBS dissolution. I can only assume these proponents fall victim to Downstream Ignorance. They only see current events through a very small "lens" lack perspective regarding the repercussions of their ideas, and either have not fully explored all effects or simply do not care.

U.S. Budget Observations 1981-2007

I have the permission to use the chart at the right, because I created using data from the Budget of the United States Government, Government Printing Office (GPO).

American citizens are pretty blind when it comes to political parties, government spending, who spends more, etc. I am not immune to ignorance myself, but I try to make myself less ignorant when I can.

I spent some time over the weekend looking at budget numbers, overall revenues and spending, not on any special items. In my own life, I try to spend less than the revenue I bring in. In our political life, people think that is the basis of the Republican Party, think that is what sets apart Republicans from Democrats. I happen to think that both parties are fiscally liberal. That is, they both spend more money than the country takes in, they spend the money differently. My hypothesis is that while they are both identical in terms of spending habits, Democrats favor Social Spending and Welfare; Republicans favor subsidies for Business and Military Spending. The two parties differ only in their approach to social issues. Republicans are socially conservative, against Same-Sex Marriage, pro-Life, pro-Religion; while Democrats are socially liberal, pro-SS Marriage, pro-Choice, pro-Diversity.

The Tea Party seems to offer an option for those that are Fiscally Conservative and Socially Conservative. The Tea Party is currently causing turmoil within the Republican Party as they take issue with Republican spending habits. In essence, the Tea Party is illuminating the lack of spending discipline that exists within the Republican Party. Of note, controversy manifests through Tea Party members, such as Rand Raul-R (KY) supporting cuts of the military budget, and militarized welfare programs, such as commissaries, PXs, and the Morale, Welfare, and Family (MWF) Command.

Out of curiosity, I downloaded the Excel (XLS) file that contains data for all the budget receipts and spending for years between 1950s-2008. The graph represents the revenues versus spending over a 16-yr time period from the Reagan Administration through the 3rd year of Bush II's final term. I have noted terms of office. I have not altered or changed in any way the data. The link provided in the Title allows anyone access to the same data.

Presidents get the credit or take the blame for events or circumstances out of their control. People denigrate Pres. Carter for his apparent economic lapses. These people seem to forget that Nixon was the father of the problem, with his policy of instituting price controls that created the havoc. Carter got the blame because the bulk of the problems didn't arrive until after Nixon left office. Carter tried to gradually remove these price controls. His days were numbered as Americans blamed him rather than the true culprit, Nixon.

But the table is telling. Red is Spending, Blue is Revenue. When the Red Bar is higher than the Blue Bar, obviously we are over-spending. Republican Presidencies tend to be less budget-friendly, while Democratic Presidencies tend to be more budget-friendly. The trend is probably due to negotiations between the party in the White House and the party in power in Congress. Also, the trend indicates that a Democrat in the White House with a Republican Congress is better than the reverse.

Reviewing data from 1959 forward through visual inspection, only 5 years resulted in actual budget surpluses. Three of those years were essentially Clinton years, as they were the result of budget decisions during his term in office. The 2001 BY can be attributed to Bush II. However, Bush II would then go on to expand Deficit Spending more than any other president in history, and completely blow away the old record-holders of Deficit Spending, Reagan-Bush.

Sudan Leader to Accept Secession of South - NYTimes.com

Sudan, from CIA World Factbook

Sudan Leader to Accept Secession of South

This July, 2011, the continent of Africa, and the world, will gain a new state.

Barring any further controversy, conflict, civil war, the country of Sudan will divide into two separate countries.

I have no idea what these countries will be named. Perhaps, "Sudan" will refer to the northern portion, with a capital at Khartoum. The southern portion of Sudan will tentatively be name "South(ern) Sudan." The capital of Southern Sudan will reside at Juba.

It is not particularly rare that new countries enter onto the global arena. Recently, we saw the independence of Kosovo (2008), and Montenegro (2006). Both of these countries arose from the fracture of the former state of Yugoslavia.

In the future, we could see Scotland become an independent state, in the British Isles. On the European Mainland, Belgium is very close to splitting into a French-speaking state, and a Dutch-speaking state.