Subscribe to my podcast?

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

My Top 10 Albums of 2014

It's always misleading to do a "best of" year-end list, mostly because I have not heard the majority of music that came out this year. If I had done a better job last year, I would have had Washed Out's Paracosm and Sigur Ros' Kveikur up there. However, I have listened to quite a bit, and I think it was an exceptionally strong year.

Honorable mentions:

Electric Needle Room - It's Getting Personal (obviously)
The Worsh Ahts - Songs From Six Deep
Emcee DL- Where Have You Been
The Electroliners- The Electroliners (EP)
The Dead Girls- Noisemaker
Seasonal Men's Wear - Seasonal Men's Wear
Fake Fancy - New People
Alt-J - This Is All Yours
The Faint - Doom Abuse
Weezer - Everything Will Be Alright in the End



10. Love Technicians - Crystal Math





















9. Real Estate - Atlas




















8. Radiator Hospital - Torch Song




















7. Something and the WhateversWe Sold Our Souls For Wicked Lulz




















6. The New Pornographers - Brill Bruisers




















5. Pixies - Indie Cindy




















4. Ingrid Michaelson - Lights Out



















3. Foster the People - Supermodel




















2. Tycho - Awake




















1. Beck - Morning Phase



Saturday, December 27, 2014

Tuesday, December 9, 2014

Book Review - The Forgotten Man by Amity Shlaes

Sometimes it’s easier to just follow precedent. Sometimes it’s just easier to just stay within the confines of what is generally accepted by most experts. When one challenges any status quo, ridicule and attacks inevitably follow. After the release of The Forgotten Man, Amity Shlaes’ new interpretation of the effects of government intervention during the Great Depression, much criticism followed. Critic Eric Rauchway wrote that Shlaes was misleading with statistics about unemployment, citing a third of the people Shlaes counted as unemployed had a job that New Deal programs gave them. While Shlaes also received much praise for the book, it’s evident that it’s an anti-New Deal book, and she does not try to hide that fact. Throughout the book, Shlaes argues that both the Hoover and FDR administrations actually prolonged the Depression, while also creating a culture of fear for entrepreneurship and a phony economy. While it seemingly has an agenda behind it, The Forgotten Man provides a balanced, compelling, and important interpretation of the time period.


In the book’s introduction, Shlaes implies that today most seem to have forgotten who the true “forgotten man” is. She differentiates Franklin Roosevelt’s definition, the victim of laissez faire capitalism, from classical liberal William Sumner’s definition, the victim of lost economic liberty. Sumner wrote, “As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B propose to get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to determine...what A, B, and C shall do for X.” Shlaes adds, “But what about C? There was nothing wrong with A and B helping X. What was wrong was the law, and the indenturing of C to the cause. C was the forgotten man, the man who paid, ‘the man who never is thought of.’” She continues, “Whereas C had been Sumner’s forgotten man, the New Deal made X the forgotten man- the poor man, the old man, labor, or any other recipient of government help.” (Shlaes, p. 12)


While most historians prefer to focus on the hardships of the early Depression, Shlaes focuses on the stories of victims of the late Depression, likely to illustrate and universalize her thesis. “This was a depression within the Depression. It was occurring five years after Franklin Roosevelt was first elected, and four and a half years after Roosevelt introduced the New Deal.” (Shlaes, p. 3) Similar to how previous New Deal historians glorified FDR, Shlaes glorifies principally forgotten men in history. Two such figures, Father Divine and Bill Wilson (co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous), prevailed despite of government intervention, not because of it. Shlaes’ true anti-hero, however, was businessman Wendell Willkie. Throughout the book, Shlaes describes Willkie as initially receptive and compliant with New Deal reforms, but increasingly outspoken and influentially critical of them. Shlaes describes Willkie as a true classical liberal who had a grassroots and passionate following. “Before a crowd estimated at 200,000, and with the weather 102 degrees in the shade, Willkie asked the public to think about what it meant to be an American liberal. Was a liberal merely a left progressive? Or was a liberal someone who believed...in the primacy of the individual and his freedom?” (Shlaes, p. 374) Shlaes quotes Willkie: “I am a liberal because I believe that in our industrial age there is no limit to the productive capacity of any man. “Liberal” has been a nasty word to conservatives for decades, but Shlaes’ discussion of its connotation throughout the book is a great example of how she is trying to shift the official narrative of American history.


As Shlaes chronicles the period, she uses a unique approach to reveal the New Deal’s limitations and failures. She initially puts a positive spin on the New Deal, at least from the average American’s perspective. “The country was in no mood to in any case to put Roosevelt’s concepts under a microscope. What mattered was change: like an invalid, the country took pleasure in the very thought of motion.” (Shlaes, p. 150) In other words, the country wanted extraordinary changes because those were extraordinary times. Shlaes describes the goals for the Agricultural Adjustment Administration, with a quote from its leader, George Peek, saying the organization would enable farmers “to do something for themselves that they have been prevented from doing.” (Shlaes, p. 154) Inevitably, though, Shlaes claims these were false hopes. Twenty pages after praising the optimism the AAA created, she claims evidence proved it was not helping small-farm owners at all.


Yet Shlaes additionally breaks from the traditional Depression narrative by arguing Herbert Hoover’s policies were more in line with FDR than Calvin Coolidge. Shlaes had nothing but praise for Coolidge, and mostly criticism for Hoover, whom she blames for worsening the Depression, not because he didn’t do anything, but because he did too much. “Hoover believed that government might help business do better, functioning as a sort of beneficent hand. Coolidge liked Adam Smith’s old invisible hand.” (Shlaes, p. 18) Hoover put pressure on businesses to not cut wages, had full faith in government planning, did not have full faith in the stock market, and intervened in the national economy with the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. To Shlaes, the most important reason to blame Hoover for the Depression was his support for the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, a law creating a giant tariff which many prominent economists criticized before its passing.


Shlaes is most critical, however, of FDR and his Brain Trust. Overall, she portrays them as dreamers with big ideas but little knowledge of how to apply those ideas in the real world. She also is critical of their reactionary and impulsive response to the Depression. “The main tasks Roosevelt assigned himself were simple. The first was that there be a broad sweep of activity; Americans must know Washington was doing something. If there were contradictions between experiments and within them, well, that did not matter.” (Shlaes, p. 149) Shlaes’ analysis the Brain Trust is thorough. She spends several pages examining their travels to the Soviet Union, and the undeniable spell the country cast on them. The Depression was a rare chance for their experimental ideas to shine, for it’s likely they would not have such an opportunity any other time. Though not explicitly, Shlaes ultimately blames the Brain Trust, first and foremost, for prolonging the Depression.


One surprising revelation that adds to the validity of Shlaes’ criticism of the New Deal was the ability of societies across the country to adapt to the harshest conditions of the Depression. Despite being dependent on a modern world, Americans were persevering in ways that demonstrated the strength of the human spirit. One such example was what local communities did in response to money shortages across the country. “Locals reached into their pockets and, finding nothing, began to trade work and objects. Barbers traded shaves and haircuts for onions and Idaho potatoes.” (Shlaes, p. 105) Whether it was the rise of bartering in Utah or the movement to abandon cities and farm in California and New York, Shlaes cited many examples of Americans adapting to harsh times in their own, unique, ways, yet often forming communities in the process, outside of government interference. Again, Shlaes’ emphasis was that Americans succeeded despite of, not because of, the government.



Some question Shlaes’ motives for writing this book, that her primary goal is to create a conservative spin on the Depression. She is, after all, an unabashedly enthusiastic supporter of Coolidge, and does not hide this fact in the book. However, Shlaes persuasively convinces the reader that the primary purpose of The Forgotten Man is to seek the truth. She challenges the narrative that the New Deal helped our country when it most needed it, providing evidence throughout the book that the New Deal instead prolonged the Depression. She also argues it failed because of the fact it caused entrepreneurship to be on the decline and constantly on the defense. While previous historians may have questioned how much the New Deal really helped when the Depression went on for so long, Shlaes revolves an entire book about it. It’s an important and necessary perspective to have a truly balanced understanding of the time period. The Forgotten Man reveals why fiscal policy remains so controversial today, and why there’s a compelling case that the debate must continue.

Sunday, November 23, 2014

Our{Veggie}Life: Genetically Motified Organisms {GMOs}

Our{Veggie}Life: Genetically Motified Organisms {GMOs}: I set out today to find healthy options for my family while purchasing groceries for the week. My husband and I try to put the best food on ...

Sunday, August 17, 2014

Review: "Where Have You Been" by MC DL

Omaha-based DL Diedrich has been releasing material for almost eight years. His catalog is eclectic and prolific, with multiple solo material releases, as well as many recordings with bands like Spiders for Love. His latest EP, Where Have You Been, is under the moniker of MC DL. It is perhaps his most focused yet, with a greater sense of attention to detail and slightly more polished sound- not saying it's "radio-friendly" by any means (that's a compliment).

The EP opens with "You Can Change," a slow tempo acoustic dance sing along that has a clear message- you can change whatever you want about yourself, but just don't change me. "Anything Everything" sounds like nothing like everything Diedrich has released before. It's a song that drags and falls apart at times, which is perfect for its mood.

"See Me" is the first song that really caught my attention. Maybe it's my bias, but it's also the song that picks the tempo up. Strangely, it reminds me of a stripped down alternative rock song from the early 90s ala Soul Asylum or R.E.M. "Ah...Ah...Ah...Ahhhhh" is an arrangement that is also a different rhythmic direction from previous releases for Diedrich.

The strongest track is "Do Song." Not only is it the catchiest track, but it's also the most sunny. For fans of Diedrich's earlier work, it's probably the closest thing to it. Don't be fooled, though. There is still reality somewhere lurking below.

"TJ (For Troy)" and "Beautiful Giant" are quite the contrast for two songs that are back to back. "TJ" is clearly more keyboard based, and "Giant" is a low-fi back porch traditional acoustic number. The one thing that both of them have in common is that they are dark, like many of Diedrich's songs.

Diedrich has always had a special skill of writing dark songs that sometimes are disguised as sunny, though. Someone should call the Coen brothers and let them know they are really missing out on the perfect songs for the soundtracks to their films. Where Have You Been, to me, is about being trapped in existence. Sometimes, it is better to be trapped if you've got no place better to go.

The EP is available for "name your price" here. 

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Monday, August 4, 2014

Why Should We Learn Social Studies?

Every year I have students who go: “(groan)(whine) ugh, why do have to even learn social studies?” Each time, I would promptly give each of them an answer to this common question. After a few years of teaching, I sometimes get tired of saying the same thing over and over. Therefore, I have now recorded what I have told my students in the past.


Why should you learn social studies? First of all, because every single one of you watching this video right now is a human. Ok, ok, there might be some dogs, cats, and aliens watching, but for the most part, you are a human being. I have a hard time understanding why students would find social studies boring when it’s really it’s all about them. If you are humans, then you should learn about other humans, not only to better understand them, but to better understand yourself. You are who you are because of others in your life. What would you really know about yourself if all you had to compare yourself to was...yourself?


Human beings are social creatures. What does that mean? It means not only do we like to hang out with other humans, but more importantly we depend on other humans. We have only got this far- we have only made this much progress- because we have helped each other out.


Ironically, we have also only got this far and made this much progress because we have NOT helped each other out- in fact, we’ve been killing each other, either accidentally or on purpose. This conflict between humans has existed since, well, since there was more than one human. But this conflict has usually led to competition, which in turn has led us to finding better and easier ways to do things, ultimately leading us to more prosperity than ever before. This is also why there is currently more of us on the planet than ever before, and why we’re living longer than ever before, and, I don’t mean to brag, but why we’re the most intelligent animals to ever exist.


Am I starting to lose you? Sorry, I was trying to build up to reason #2, which is: you should learn social studies because you live in a society. Not only that, but all of us prefer and want to live in a society. Even loners. Even that dude who lived in complete isolation at the southern tip of Chile invited somebody to live near him. We need each other. Besides, unless you move to the moon or Mars, there is no escaping society. That society can not only be defined as your neighborhood, city, or country, but the entire world. Everything that happens everywhere on this planet directly or indirectly affects you whether you realize it or not.


You have got to realize that it’s not about you. It’s about all of us. There are consequences to our actions that affect others in both positive and negative ways. Everyone and everything you love is at risk and could be lost because of the actions of others. Don’t destroy anyone else’s freedoms. More appropriately to most of you watching, don’t sit idly by while others destroy individuals’ freedoms.


Of course, the most important reason why you should learn social studies, and why you should learn anything, for that matter, is because you need to survive. The more you know about the world you live in, the more you know about others, and the more you know about yourself, the better your chance of survival. A big reason why you’re alive right now is because of the fact that humans learned about their world, about other humans in that world, and about themselves. Their survival depended on them continuing to do the things that worked, not repeating their past mistakes, and adapting and problem solving to make their future better.


Think about why there is a bunch of horrible things going on in our world right now. A big reason why is because many human beings never learned social studies. Each day, these people are putting all of our lives at risk. We are programmed to survive. We cannot survive ignorant of the social studies.


So, to recap, there are three main reasons I believe we should learn social studies.


1. You’re human
2. You live in a society
3. You need to survive


If you were all alone on the planet, then I would discourage you from learning social studies. But until that happens, study history, geography, economics, sociology, psychology, government, civics, religion, law, anthropology, political science, philosophy, archaeology, and all the other social sciences I have not mentioned, so that you and the world will be a much better place, and because the survival of our species depends on it.

Monday, June 30, 2014

Life Update #2

*We changed the spelling of Regan's name to Reegan after about 20 people came into our hospital room and pronounced it like the President.

*We came home from the hospital yesterday to promptly go to Costco to get a birthday cake for Lydia. It was her third birthday on Saturday, but we celebrated yesterday. The sisters are just one day shy of being exactly three years apart.

*Reegan is three days old, which means Shannon and I have been sleep deprived for four days now. If you communicate with either one of us any time soon, we likely will not make much sense.

*Once again, I would like to point that I am extremely happy that I am a male.

Thursday, June 19, 2014

Life Update #1

*Still no baby yet. Last night Shannon and I went to the hospital because she was having regular contractions that lasted for several hours, but as of right now we are both extremely tired and Regan has yet to come out.

*We have new laminate floors in our living room, dining room, and hallway! The cats took out the carpet by urinating and barfing all over it, so we ripped it up to install the new laminate, and it's like we have a brand new house. They look fantastic.

*For those of you who know me well, you probably know that over the years I have acquired a ridiculously gigantic compact disc collection. Many of the records I acquired for free working in radio and promotions for a few years, but I ended up with well over 1,000. Now, I am in the process of getting rid of nearly all of them, which is a pretty big deal. I am only keeping a handful of albums that mean a lot to me. It is a weird feeling- I absolutely never thought I would get rid of them.

Thursday, May 8, 2014

Why Do Women Wear High Heels?

One of the many reasons why I am glad that I am man- I don't have to wear high heels. Everyday, millions of women wear shoes that significantly raise their heels above their toes, despite the fact that the shoes are very uncomfortable and can cause chronic foot damage.

High heels can put a women's pelvis out of alignment. They can cause ingrown toe nails, compression of the spine, stress fractures, athlete's foot, and calluses. They can increase wear and tear in the joints and soft tissue, eventually causing arthritis. Wearing high heels actually shrinks the Achilles tendon, which causes great pain when you switch to flats. High heels are not practical- they get stuck in things. Have you ever tried hiking or driving in high heels? I know I haven't.

Women hate wearing high heels. A survey by the College of Podiatry found that 1 in 4 women found the pain of wearing high heels so great that they danced barefoot at a bar or club. In case you have never been to a bar or club, know that the average floor of a bar or club is cleaned about once a year and often caked with sticky remnants of adult beverages, spit, urine, vomit, and who knows what else.

Yet, women can't help but wear high heels, especially young women. In fact, the younger the woman, the higher their heels tend to be.

But why? Why on earth do women put themselves through such agony? And how long has this been going on? Perhaps a more important question is: Why did men stop wearing high heels?

That's right. The first high heels were worn by men, in the 9th century. Persian horse riders wore high heels to help hold their feet in stirrups.

At the end of the 16th century, the Persian king, Abbas I, sent diplomats to Russia, Germany, and Spain in order to see if they could help him defeat the Ottoman Empire. Europeans who saw these Persian men arriving in high heeled shoes were impressed. In fact, aristocrats were big fans- they believed that wearing such shoes gave men a masculine edge. The Persian high-heeled shoes began to become popular in Europe, so popular that even people of lower rank in society began to make and buy them. In response to this, aristocrats kept increasing the height of their high heels. Thus, the modern high heeled shoe was born.

Aristocrats believed that walking around in high heels was another way to announce their privileged status, as the shoes would be impractical for the working class. High heels were also a great way for them to not step in the poop on the streets! In addition, high heels allowed aristocrats to look down on people of lower rank (pun definitely intended.) Famous king dude Louis XIV of France had a hard time looking down on people, for he only stood 5 feet 4 inches. To help with this issue, he wore 4 inch high heels, which usually were elaborately decorated with battle scenes. The heels and soles were always red. In the 1670s, Louis XIV ordered that only members of his court were allowed to wear red heels. His influence was widespread. Soon kings everywhere were wearing high heels.

Around the same time, many European women were trying to look like men. I'm not kidding. There were women smoking pipes, wearing hats traditionally worn by men, cutting their hair, and...oh yeah...wearing high heels, in order to appear more masculine. Let me repeat that again- women began to wear high heels to look more like men.

By the end of the 1600s, both men and women in Europe's upper classes were wearing high heels. However, as the 1700s began, Europe was now in what became known as the Age of Enlightenment,. During this time, men began to abandon the wearing of jewelry, bright colors, and fancy clothes in favor of a darker, more plain and modest look. Men's clothing no longer signified social class, and thus the popularity of the male high heel declined. By 1740 men had stopped wearing high heels altogether. Women continued to wear them for awhile, but around the time of the French Revolution high heels fell out of style for just about everyone.

However, in the mid-1800s high heels slowly came back into style, but mostly with women. As women usually walk differently from men, high heels were found to help exaggerate the feminine aspect of the movement of their limbs as they walk, making them more attractive to men.

World War II seems to be an important event in high heel history. It was during the war that the ideal of a woman in very high heels became embedded in images of female desirability. After the war, the creation of a delicate, very thin heel that could rise in height but also not break easily helped increase the popularity of the shoe. These shoes, called stilettos, were invented by a man, of course, whose name was Roger Vivier.

Since then, they have fallen in and out of fashion many times, but nearly all high heels have been worn by women, not men.

Heels continue to be worn for one apparent reason- to attract males. They're definitely not worn for their comfort or practicality, that's for sure.

According to one study, the average woman owns about 20 pairs of shoes. Of those, they only put five into regular rotation. The biggest reason why? Most of their shoes are uncomfortable. So will this trend continue? Is it really worth it, ladies, to damage your feet in the name of fashion? Will men ever wear high heels again? I think I'll just stick to my sneakers.

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

Franklin Pierce

He is a man who is consistently ranked as one of the worst Presidents in American history. After he left office, the country was more divided than it had ever been up to that point. However, today he still has fans. In fact, one of my viewers requested that I make a video about him. So, here is the story of Franklin Pierce.

Once upon a time, November 23rd, 1804, to be exact, Franklin Pierce was born in a log cabin in Hillsborough, New Hampshire. During Franklin's childhood, his Dad, Benjamin, was heavily involved in politics, eventually becoming governor of New Hampshire in 1827. Benjamin made sure Franklin had a strong education growing up. However, school did not naturally come easy to Franklin, and he consistently struggled.

When he turned 15, he went to Bowdoin College in Maine. There he made many friends, including a young writer who would eventually become of the most famous in American history- Nathaniel Hawthorne. At Bowdoin, Franklin was a party animal of sorts, and his grades suffered because of it. However, by the time he graduated he had applied himself enough to rank fifth in his class.

After graduation, Pierce studied law and entered politics. When he was 24 years old, he was elected to the New Hampshire state legislature. Two years later, with the help of his dad, who by this time was the governor, he was selected as its Speaker of the House. In March 1833, Pierce was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives with hardly any competition in his way. While living in Washington, Pierce had become addicted to alcohol.

Meanwhile, he had become engaged to a woman named Jane Means Appleton. Jane was Pierce's opposite in almost every way. Franklin was a Democrat, Jane was a Whig. Franklin was outgoing, Jane was shy. Franklin frequented saloons, and Jane was big fan of the temperance movement, wishing that saloons were shut down. Even more so than her husband, Jane hated Washington politics, and was definitely not happy when Franklin later ran for President. The couple had a son, Franklin Pierce, Jr., on February 2nd, 1836. Tragically, Franklin Jr. died just three days later.

In March 1837, Pierce became the youngest member of the U.S. Senate at the time. While serving in the Senate, he usually voted with his political party, the Democrats. He wrote no significant bills, and he only seemed to be passionate about one thing- not liking the abolitionist movement. A friend of future Confederate president Jefferson Davis, Pierce became one of the few northerners who sided with southerners on the issue of slavery, which later caused some to call him a "doughface."

On August 27th, 1839, Franklin and Jane welcomed their second son, Frank Robert Pierce. Two years later, the two were sick of Washington politics, and Franklin decided to resign from the Senate. The family moved back to New Hampshire, where Franklin opened a law practice.  It was also around this time that he gave up drinking, and actually attempted to outlaw alcohol from Concord, where his family now lived. On April 13th, 1841, Franklin and Jane had a third son- Benjamin Pierce. This good news was overshadowed by the death of their second son, Frank Robert, who died of epidemic typhus when Benjamin was two. Keep in mind now they had lost two children. This is getting depressing.

As a lawyer, Pierce was a star. He took high-profile cases, and his strong public speaking skills in the court room made him famous throughout New Hampshire.

When the Mexican-American War broke out, Pierce enlisted. Despite having no military experience, he commanded over 2,000 men in 1847 as they led an attack on Mexico City. However, his ability to fight did not last long. In the Battle of Contreras, he fell off his horse, crushing his leg and causing him to pass out.

Soon after the Americans won the war, and Franklin returned home to Concord, now more popular than he had ever been. By 1852, the country was more divided than it had ever been up to that point due to the issue of the expansion of slavery out west. The Democratic Party that year had a difficult time at their convention choosing a candidate, but in the end, they decided Franklin Pierce was their man, mostly because they believed he could appeal to both Northerners and Southerners due to being a "doughface." Remember, a doughface was a Northerner who sympathized with Southerners when it came to slavery.

Seemingly coming out of nowhere, Pierce was a "dark horse" candidate that few outside of New Hampshire had known up to that point. He ran against the Whig Party candidate, Mexican American War hero Winfield Scott, and easily won the election. What helped Franklin win the election was probably the advantages of a lot of people not knowing who he was and the fact that he got along with just about everybody.

Winning election was probably the high point of Franklin Pierce's life. After that, things went horribly wrong. Two months before he took office, Franklin, Jane, and their youngest son Benjamin were in a terrible train accident. Franklin and Jane survived, but their son died right in front of them. In fact, Benjamin was nearly lost his entire head. Their last surviving child, he was only eleven years old. It was a traumatic event that Jane would never recover from. None of their sons survived to see their father become President.

Jane would not attend Franklin's inauguration, where he gave a 3,319-word address from memory, without the aid of notes. Shortly after Pierce became President, two of his closest political allies died. Needless to say, Pierce was distracted during the first part of his Presidency. Social functions rarely took place during the first half of the Pierce administration. Jane lived in the White House as a recluse, likely the most unhappy First Lady in American history.

As President, Pierce felt pressure from both Southerners and Northerners, and was often put in a bad position trying to please both. One example of this was his reluctant support of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which repealed the Missouri Compromise, established the territories of Kansas and Nebraska, and said that anyone who lived in the two territories could vote on whether or not they would become slave or free states. After he signed the law in 1854, the territory of Kansas became a battleground where proslavery and antislavery forces murdered each other.

Pierce also upset northerners when members of his administration came up with the Ostend Manifesto, a document arguing for the United States to purchase Cuba from Spain and possibly declaring war with Spain if they refused to sell it.

One notable thing that Pierce doesn't get recognized for much is the fact that he named the first Roman Catholic cabinet officer in American history- James Campbell of Pennsylvania- during a time when many Americans persecuted Catholics.
Perhaps the biggest success of the Pierce's Presidency was when he sent James Gadsden to Mexico to buy land for a southern railroad in present-day southern New Mexico and Arizona. Known as the Gadsden Purchase, the United States acquired the land for $10 million.

However, by the end of his term, even his own party doubted his abilities. Franklin was not renominated by the Democrats to run again in 1856. Instead, they went with the less controversial James Buchanan. Pierce returned to his home in New Hampshire after his presidency, with the country now even more divided than it was when he first took office.

When the American Civil War erupted in 1861, Pierce was loyal to the North, but he blamed Abraham Lincoln for starting the war and taking away habeas corpus later in the war. Meanwhile, Jane's health declined due to tuberculosis. Hoping the warmer climate would help her recover, Franklin took her to the West Indies. It did not, and she died in late 1863.

After the death of his wife, Franklin sort of faded into obscurity. Sadly, he took up drinking again, and spent much of his remaining days as a recluse, much as Jane had when he was President. However, he was baptized into Jane's church on the second anniversary of her death. He also spent many happy days pursuing his favorite hobby- fishing.

On October 8, 1869, Franklin died from cirrhosis of the liver as a result of years of heavy drinking. He was buried in the Old North Cemetery in Concord.

So what about his legacy? For most historians, Franklin Pierce is seen as a weak leader at a time when the country desperately needed a strong one. However, I would argue that the issues that Pierce dealt with would have been tough for any President to tackle, and he did the best he could despite the insanely horrible events that plagued his life. Pierce lived a tragic life, one that any human would struggle to live. Yet he always held his head high through the pain, and that is something to admire.


Sunday, April 6, 2014

Review: "We Sold Our Souls For Wicked Lulz" by Something and the Whatevers

At a superficial level, Something and the Whatevers are easy to pigeonhole as a "joke band," notably because of their lyrics. The Lawrence-based trio have lyrics filled with wit, sarcasm, and irony. Even their band name is goofier than most. But musically, their first full-length album, We Sold Our Souls For Wicked Lulz, hints at a wide range of influences and styles, and has a high standard of musicianship.

The first track, "We're Not Even Trying," is probably the strongest Something and the Whatevers song I have heard. Singer Ben narrates the song as if it is your prototypical pop radio song. "This is the part where the guitar solo starts....this is the part where the guitar solo keeps going." If it weren't for his narration, the song is so catchy it might actually pass for a pop radio song.

"Note to Self" is a how-to guide to getting stuff done. One of my favorite tracks, "Paranoid Humanoid," has Ben sounding like a psychopath (and Max Bemis from the band Say Anything) trying to explain how everyone, including John Travolta, is trying to kill him. He's pretty convincing, and the song makes me pretty paranoid listening. In the middle of typing this review, in fact, I had to look out the window to make sure John Travolta was not hiding in a tree in my backyard.

"Slacker Blues" sounds like a Panda Circus (the trio's former band) left over. Singer Quinton reflects about slacker life in the style of Say Anything meets Ben Folds Five meets Weezer. It's in 3/4 time, and it's incredibly catchy.

The whole album is solid, but there are two tracks just need a special mention. "Good Job, Well Done," clocking in at 9:17, is an epic masterpiece. It feels like a ballad, and in the beginning it feels like a serious and sincere congratulations to a recent high school or college graduate. But then Ben starts screaming, and his tone gets sarcastic quickly. And then it speeds up. And self indulgently instrumentally carries on for several minutes. The listener wonders...where are we going with this? Is it worth it to stick around until the end of the song? Why, yes it is. Some of the most meaningful lyrics I have ever heard are on the end of this song. "Sometimes being reasonable is an act of rebellion/sometimes using your eyes and ears is just blasphemy/ sometimes telling the truth is unpatriotic/sometimes writing a ten minute song is really pretentious." Ok, the sarcasm is still there, too.

"Party Harder" is the perfect way to wrap the album up. The title might be misleading because a lot of sad things are described in the song. However, the tone is a happy one, with bright and twinkling piano riffs. It's depressing, but uplifting at the same time.

This is not The Bloodhound Gang. Something and the Whatevers are serious, talented musicians with heavy topics to sing about. Sure, they can be hilarious at times, but only because they are being honest. On We Sold Our Souls For Wicked Lulz, Something and the Whatevers find the perfect mix of originally witty lyrics, polished songwriting, and excellent musicianship. Download this album now as "pay what you want" on its Bandcamp site. 

RIYL: Say Anything, Ben Folds Five, Weezer, They Might Be Giants

Saturday, March 22, 2014

Story Time with Mr. Beat - Japanese American Concentration Camps

You may remember them being called "internment camps," but let's call them what they were: "concentration camps." Here is my latest Story Time with Mr. Beat video. If you like it, please share.

Tuesday, March 18, 2014

Japanese American Concentration Camps

What's backwards? My name is Mr. Beat. It's hard for me not to get angry, very angry, when I think about what the United States government did to nearly 120,000 people of Japanese heritage during World War 2. Here's the story of one of the biggest tragedies in American history- the Japanese American concentration camps.

Once upon a time, there was a nation state called The Empire of Japan. On the morning of December 7, 1941, Japan launched a surprise military strike on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. This attack directly led the United States to enter World War 2.

Consequently, it also caused anyone in the United States with Japanese heritage to be looked at suspiciously. Japanese Americans had already faced racism and discrimination for nearly 100 years. Now, many Americans thought that Japanese Americans might be more loyal to Japan than the United States. They were afraid of possible Japanese-American sabotage, or the act of destroying, damaging, or blocking something on purpose. Despite the fact there was absolutely no evidence for sabotage, many Americans simply did not trust Japanese Americans.

Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japanese persecution increased. Many non-governmental "Jap hunting licenses" were distributed throughout the country. Life magazine published an article describing how to tell a Japanese person from a Chinese person by the shape of the nose and stature of the body.

The hatred and paranoia toward the Japanese was particularly great along the West Coast of the United States. A barbershop in California advertised "free shaves for Japs," with the disclaimer, "not responsible for accidents." A funeral parlor advertised: "I'd rather do business with a Jap than an American."

Several people began talking about removing all Japanese Americans from western states. Two people who led the charge were California Attorney General Earl Warren and Lieutenant Colonel John L. DeWitt. If the name Earl Warren sounds familiar, it's because it's the same Earl Warren who later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. DeWitt deeply mistrusted Japanese Americans, and said, "It makes no difference whether he is an American citizen, he is still a Japanese. American citizenship does not necessarily determine loyalty...But we must worry about the Japanese all the time until he is wiped off the map. " DeWitt also irrationally argued that the fact that Japanese Americans had not yet committed sabotage proved that they were plotting to do it in the future.

In early 1942, Warren, DeWitt, and others pressured President Franklin Roosevelt to kick out all people of Japanese decent in western states, and then lock them up somewhere else. Roosevelt agreed. On February 19th, 1942, he signed Executive Order 9066. It ordered the round-up of 120,000 Americans of Japanese ancestry to one of 10 concentration camps, which were officially called "relocation centers." It also said that all people of Japanese ancestry were not allowed to be in the entire state of California and much of Oregon, Washington, and Arizona, except for those in concentration camps in those states.

Over 2/3 of the Japanese who were locked up were American citizens. The vast majority had never even been to Japan. Americans who were as little as 1/16 Japanese could be placed in concentration camps. Even Japanese-American veterans of World War I were forced to evacuate their homes. Ironically, most Japanese Americans in Hawaii were not forced to leave. The reason why? Powerful businessmen figured Hawaii's economy would be damaged if this large community of people were sent to concentration camps because most the carpenters, transportation workers, and agricultural laborers in the state were of Japanese heritage.

DeWitt was in charge of enforcing Roosevelt's executive order. He posted evacuation orders in Japanese American neighborhoods. They had little time to evacuate. Many were rushed out their homes, only allowed to bring what they could carry with them. Many tried to sell all their belongings before they left, because they could not be certain it would all be there when they got back. Because of the rush to sell, stuff was often sold a fraction of what it was actually worth.

Until the camps were finished, many of the Japanese Americans were held in temporary centers, such as stables at local racetracks. They generally had no idea where they were being sent. The ten camps were located in remote areas of California, Idaho, Utah, Arizona, Wyoming, Colorado, and Arkansas.

Once they made it to camp, they were assigned to poorly constructed, overcrowded barracks. The barracks were made of cheap material and had no plumbing or cooking facilities. In the winter they were too cold, and in the summer they were too hot.

Nearly all families were kept together, though some were accidentally sent to different camps. Families dined together at communal mess halls. The food quality was nothing to get excited about, and it was rationed out at a cost of about 45 cents a day. The United States government hoped the Japanese Americans could grow their own food, but usually the conditions were too poor for growing crops where the camps were located. The Japanese Americans in the camps had inadequate medical care.

Children, as many as 30,000 lived in the camps, were expected to attend the schools built for them there. Many of these children were traumatized by the whole experience. Adults could work if they wanted to, for a measly salary of $5 a day.

American-born Japanese often had more prestige in the camps than the older generation Japanese who were not native to the United States.

The Japanese Americans at these camps were not allowed to leave. The camps were surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. There are documented instances of guards shooting internees who reportedly tried to leave. However, some camp administrators did allow free movement outside the boundaries of the camps. Some internees even left the camps to live in different parts of the United States (not on the West Coast of course.) The U.S. government eventually allowed Japanese Americans a chance to permanently leave the concentration camps if they enlisted in the U.S. Army. Only about 1,200 Japanese Americans took the offer, and a few of these ended up fighting heroically in the war.

The majority of Japanese American families simply felt helpless living in these camps. They often had nobody fighting for them on the outside, and felt like they had lost all constitutional rights. It was difficult for them to have any hope.

A Japanese American named Fred Korematsu, who had become a fugitive and eventually arrested for refusing to go to a concentration camp, fought the United States government. He argued that Roosevelt's Executive Order 9066 violated his fifth amendment rights because of his ancestry. His case, which became known as Korematsu v. United States, went to the Supreme Court. The Court sided with the United States government, ruling the order constitutional. The Court ruled the same thing in a similar case, Hirabayashi v. United States.

On January 2nd, 1945, Franklin Roosevelt cancelled Executive Order 9066. One by one the camps were shut down, but the last one remained open until early 1946, several months after the war was over. Finally, they were free. The freed Japanese Americans were given $25 and a train ticket to their former homes. Many returned home to find their belongings missing or destroyed.

To compensate their property losses, the United States Congress passed the American Japanese Claims Act, but in reality the law did not compensate much of what was lost.

In 1980, that's right, 35 years later, Congress finally decided to investigate whether or not the locking up of Japanese Americans in concentration camps during World War 2 was a good idea. Their conclusion was that it was definitely not. They condemned it by saying it was unjust and motivated by racism and xenophobic ideas rather than real military necessity. In 1988, Congress passed the Civil Liberties Act, which formally apologized to the Japanese Americans affected and awarded payments of $20,000 to each camp survivor. The U.S. government eventually gave out more than $1.6 billion in reparations (a reparation is making amends for a past wrong), to 82,219 Japanese Americans who had been victims directly or indirectly.

The forced relocation of Japanese Americans to concentration camps during World War 2 is one of the most despicable acts by the U.S. government in American history. Today we remember it as a tragedy, but it's important to remember that most Americans accepted it or even encouraged it while it was happening. After all, a 1944 opinion poll found that 13 percent of Americans were in favor of killing all the Japanese.

Today, minorities of all kinds continue to be marginalized in society, but it's satisfying to know that now all Americans look back on the Japanese American concentration camps as a deplorable and awful mistake.


Wednesday, February 26, 2014

The Panama Canal

The Panama Canal, which connects the world's two largest oceans, has been called one of the seven wonders of the modern world. Nearly 15,000 ships pass through it each year. Without it, ships would have to travel an additional 8,000 miles, and would also have to spend an extra hundreds of thousands of dollars on fuel costs. Still, it was an enormous pain in the butt to make. More than 30,000 lives were lost during its construction. Here is the story of one of the greatest engineering feats of all time- the construction of the Panama Canal.

Once upon a time, if you wanted to travel from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, you had to go all the way around the southern tip of South America, Cape Horn. Because the lovely continent of North America is attached to the handsome continent of South America by the bond of the Isthmus of Panama (formerly the Isthmus of Darien), there was only one way around. An isthmus is a narrow strip of land connecting two larger land areas. The Isthmus of Panama is only about 30 miles wide at its most narrow, but it's dense jungle- hard to travel through and filled with insects that carry diseases like malaria, yellow fever, or cholera, poisonous snakes, and other dangerous animals.


When gold was discovered in California in 1848, many people who lived on the east coast of the United States did not want to travel by land to get there. Traveling by sea, they generally had two choices- they could take a boat to what is now known as the Isthmus of Panama, cross the jungle, and then catch another boat up to California. This trip usually took up to 3 months, and cost as much as $400. The other option was to take a boat all the way around the southern tip of South America and all the way back up to California. Though this option was cheaper, costing as much as $300, the trip usually took up to 6 months, and conditions were usually more harsh. After a few weeks, the fresh food would be gone, with many passengers resorting to eating bugs and moldy bread to survive. Not only that, some of the roughest waters in the world are at the southern tip of South America. Cape Horn is a sailor's worst nightmare, with strong winds, large waves, strong currents, and icebergs.

So yeah, it's no wonder then that the earliest mention of a canal across the isthmus was in 1534 by Charles V, the Holy Roman Emperor/King of Spain/one powerful dude. He wanted an easy route through the Americas to give the Spanish a military advantage over the Portuguese. But over a period of 285 years, for various reasons, Spain was never able to bring this idea to a reality, and they lost the isthmus to what would eventually become the Republic of Columbia.

In the early 1850s, the Panama Railroad Company brought in thousands of African and Chinese workers to lay the tracks for railway lines that would make construction of a canal possible. Most, as many as 12,000, would die from tropical diseases or suicide.

Meanwhile, developers in France, led by a guy named Ferdinand de Lesseps, were successful building a canal of their own in Egypt. Completed in 1869, the Suez Canal, which joined the Mediterranean and Red Seas, significantly reduced sailing distances between Europe and Asia.

Because of his success with the Suez Canal, De Lesseps next turned his attention to Panama. He was backed by an international company called The Universal Company of the Inter-Oceanic Panama Canal. The company was given permission to build by the Columbian government that controlled the area. A huge labor force was assembled. 9 out of 10 workers were from the West Indies. They earned about 10 cents an hour. Engineers were much better paid, and the project attracted some of the best engineers from France.

Construction of the canal began on January 1st, 1881, and it's safe to say that it was poorly planned. The machinery was not strong enough for the work. There was a large turnover of labor because the work was so difficult- only one in five workers would stay longer than a year. The dump areas were too close to where they were digging the canal. Often trash would slide back into where they were digging whenever it rained. The deeper the digging, the worse the mudslides. The large amount of sticky clay in the digging area would often stick to the steam shovels. Sometimes they even had to shovel by hand when equipment broke down.

Worst of all, thousands of workers faced horrible tropical diseases and a harsh climate. They faced yellow fever- a disease with symptoms that include fever, chills, loss of appetite, nausea, muscle pains, and sometimes yellow skin due to liver damage. They faced malaria- a disease with symptoms like severe headaches, fever, shivering, joint pain, vomiting, jaundice, retinal damage, and convulsions. That almost sounds like a drug commercial when they list the side effects, doesn't it? Malaria has no effective vaccine to date and still manages to kill around 1 million people a year.

An estimated 22,000 workers lost their lives working on the canal in the 1880s. Most of them were the West Indian workers, who did not have access to the same medical treatment as the French.

Originally, De Lesseps wanted the canal to be built at sea level, like the Suez Canal. By 1885, it was clear that a canal built at sea-level was not going to work, and that an elevated canal with locks was the best answer. De Lesseps, however, was stubborn, and it wasn't until October 1887 that a lock canal plan went into effect.

By this time, The Universal Company of the Inter-Oceanic Panama Canal was running out of money. With about 2/5 of the canal completed, they had already spent well over what they had estimated the entire project would cost.

The New French Canal Company was established in 1894 to try to salvage the failed construction of the canal, but the French effort was doomed for failure from the beginning. Despite the heavy losses of life and money, the French did manage to excavate, or dig out material from the earth, over 78 million cubic feet of material. That's a lot of earth they dug up.

Around the time the French were about to give up on the canal, the United States became interested in leasing the land from Columbia. The United States looked at the possibility of building a canal further north, through Nicaragua. That is, unless the New French Canal Company would sell their canal for only $40 million.

When Theodore Roosevelt became President in 1901, he made it a high priority that the United States purchase the canal from the French. Recently the United States had become imperialistic, acquiring territories like the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. Roosevelt and other Americans believed that the United States controlling a canal would be of great strategic value for the country.

In 1902, Congress approved the purchase of the canal, but the United States first had to secure a treaty with Columbia for the use and control of a canal zone. When Columbia refused to negotiate, the United States took advantage of the fact that a group known as the Panamanian Liberals were wanting independence from Columbia. The Panamanians held control of the isthmus and wanted a country of their own, and they now had American support. Roosevelt sent the Navy ships down to the isthmus in an act of "gunboat diplomacy," or basically intimidation through the threat of naval power. In other words, the United States was telling the Panamanians, "we got your back."

It worked. Columbia backed out, and the country of Panama was created. The victorious Panamanians returned the favor to Roosevelt by giving the United States control of the Panama Canal Zone on February 23rd, 1904, for an additional $10 million. Some United States senators felt guilty about the deal, as if the Canal Zone had been stolen from Columbia.

Regardless, the Americans went to work fast on the canal. Colonel William C. Gorgas was in charge of sanitation of the Canal Zone before workers even arrived. He made sure that yellow fever was wiped out of the Canal Zone by using massive amounts of pesticide to kill the mosquitoes carrying the disease. He also ordered all the swampland, where mosquitoes often laid their eggs, drained or filled. After workers began to arrive again, Gorgas quarantined all workers infected with yellow fever and malaria to prevent the diseases from spreading. In the end, these efforts were a huge success. By 1906, yellow fever was virtually wiped out in the Canal Zone.

Tragically, West Indian workers- the majority of the canal workforce- continued to die at a rate ten times that of white workers in 1906. This was mostly because black workers had to live in tents and buildings outside of the mosquito-controlled zone. In the end, 350 white workers had died compared to 4,500 West Indian workers.

Once the yellow fever was gone, the workers moved in. Work on the Panama Canal was either extremely boring or extremely dangerous. The most dangerous job- usually assigned to West Indian workers, was blowing up stuff with dynamite. There were several malfunctions- dynamite often exploded not when it was supposed to. The worst dynamite accident occurred by a premature explosion in the Bas Obispo cut on December 12, 1908, causing the death of 23 workers and injuring 40 others.

The Culebra Cut was a pain in the butt to excavate. Each day workers moved miles of construction track and filled the trains that ran in and out of the area. There, landslides occurred with little warning, usually burying workers and equipment within seconds and destroying months of progress.
One difficult obstacle to the canal was the continental divide, which originally rose to more than 360 feet above sea level at its highest point. If it weren't for the dynamite and steam shovels, the work might have been impossible.

Finally, on September 10th, 1913, dry excavation ended. Four dams were completed to create two artificial lakes- Lake Gatun and Miraflores Lake. The Gatun Dam was built across the Chagres River. At the time it was created, Lake Gatun was the largest man-made lake in the world, and the dam was the largest dam on Earth. Lake Gatun is 85 feet above sea level, so they needed a way to lift ships that high. The solution was building a series of concrete locks, which are filled to lift ships and drained to lower ships.

On October 10th, 1913, the dike which separated the Culebra Cut from the Gatun Lake was demolished. The canal was finally nearly complete.

On January 7th, 1914, the Alexandre La Valley, a French crane boat, became the first ship to cross the Panama Canal using its own power. By this time, the United States had spent around 350 million dollars, far more than the cost of anything built by the country up to that point.

The canal officially opened on August 15th, 1914. A big celebration was originally planned for the occasion, but the outbreak of World War I forced the cancellation of the main festivities.

After construction, the canal was ran by the United States and the surrounding Canal Zone was controlled by the United States. In 1977, U.S. President Jimmy Carter signed a treaty agreeing to return 60 percent of the Canal Zone to Panama within two years. Another treaty guaranteed that, even in times of war, the canal would be safe for the passage of ships from any country. After a period of joint American-Panamanian control, the canal was handed over to Panama on December 31st, 1999.

In 2007, work began to expand the Panama Canal. Expected to be completed later this year, its expansion will allow ships double the currently allowed size to pass through the canal, dramatically increasing how many goods can pass through. Also expected later this year is the beginning of construction of a brand new canal through Nicaragua that will compete with the Panama Canal.

The Panama Canal took around 34 years to make, from its first effort in 1881 to when it opened in 1914. An estimated 80,000 people helped build it, and an estimated 30,000 lives were lost in both the French and American efforts. Today, the canal remains extremely important to international trade. When I look at the Panama Canal, I am amazed to know it was built by human beings. I'm especially amazed to know it was built by human beings 100 years ago, without the technology of today. Even today, its construction would be an impressive feat.

It will always be remembered as one of the most magnificent projects ever completed in the history of the world.




Monday, February 17, 2014

Review: "Seasonal Men's Wear (EP)" by Seasonal Men's Wear

Illinois punk-pop band Seasonal Men's Wear have consistently refined their sound with each release. Their latest EP, Seasonal Men's Wear, is easily their best release to date. It's hard not to compare their sound to early Piebald- and they'll probably be the first to admit they are a big influence.

The "Opener" track takes us to the 21st floor, which apparently is where the band has practice.
"Theme Song for a Quarter Life Crisis," is an Japandroids-like anthem about realizing, for the first time in your life, that you're getting older, but age is just a number. "Growing up doesn't mean that you need to grow old." I strongly relate to the lyrics of this track- in fact, it might be an anthem for our generation. It used to be people waited until retirement to live their life. Generation Y tends to live their life now.

The third track, "My Life as a River Otter," is my favorite Seasonal Men's Wear song to date. When I first heard it live about a year ago, I was immediately hooked. Not only is the song incredibly catchy, but the lyrics are silly, innocent, and just fun. What other song exists out there about hanging out with raccoons and talking to the moon?

The title of "With Friends Like These We'll Beat Our Enemies" sums it up well. This song is not quite as catchy as the other tracks, but the lyrics really struck a chord with me- keep in mind that I'm not really a lyric guy. "...'cause friends are family that you choose...your family can be your friends too."

"The Wine of Youth" is the perfect track to end the EP. It claims we should not worry about getting older, and that we should continue to live like there's no tomorrow no matter our age.

It is impossible not to head band and sing along when listen to this band. In some ways, the are better than Piebald- they're more sincere and genuine than Piebald. I can say this as a huge Piebald who has seen them in concert multiple times. What's even more promising is that this latest batch of songs indicates that their best is yet to come.

Download the EP for "name your price" on their Bandcamp site.

RIYL- Piebald, Japandroids, MXPX

How to Get Out of Your Bubble

Sunday, February 9, 2014

The Bubble

Nearly every single one of us lives in what I call "The Bubble."

The Bubble is the world we know, and it's a very narrow world. It's where we are comfortable, and it's where change rarely exists.  It's our values, it's our beliefs, and it's our dreams. It's our ideas, habits, lifestyle, and passions. In the bubble, we are insulated from things that do not seem to matter to us, or at least from things we feel like we have no way of controlling. The bubble is a happy, carefree, place- well, most of the time. Sometimes bad things sneak into our bubble and we have to deal with them. The Bubble is normalcy. It's just about as good as it gets, actually. Or is it?

Still don't know what I'm talking about when I say "The Bubble?" Let me get more specific. The Bubble is the human beings you regularly interact with- your family, your circle of friends, your co-workers, the strangers you pass by on the street or the supermarket. The Bubble is all of the places you go on a regular basis- your home, where you work, your favorite coffee shop, the gas station. It's where you live. It's your religion or political ideology.

The Bubble is your hobbies. It's basketball, because despite the fact that you are horrible at the sport, you still watch it and play it because it's been so engrained in your life since you were 4 years old. It's your favorite type of music, which you only listen to because your friend was wearing that Green Day T-shirt in sixth grade. It's playing the piano, only because you started taking lessons when you were 8 years old after you were jealous of your brother always coming home with candy after his lesson. Ok, obviously I'm talking about myself here- but all of our favorite things we like to do came from somewhere.

The Bubble is what you regularly consume. It's your Netflix instant queue, your Pandora stations, and your Spotify playlists. It's the same five TV stations you always watch, or the same five websites you regularly visit. It's the food you buy from the supermarket. It's the clothes you wear. It's the car you drive and the house you sleep in. Or, more specifically, the bed you sleep in.

It's your culture. It's your way of life.

And you may ask yourself...how did I get here?

That really isn't relevant to this. My plea to you is to get the heck out of your bubble. I'm not saying your bubble is not good enough, but I am saying you should never limit yourself to your bubble. There's a great big universe out there, and you're likely missing out on a lot.

How do you get out of your bubble? Quite simply, experience new things. It could be something as simple as trying a new food you've never tried before, taking a different way home, or walking up to a stranger (or as I call them, future friends) and talking to them.

Travel some place new. Anyone who has visited a foreign country- and I mean actually visited, not just hanging out at a resort or a military base- will tell you that it was one of the most meaningful experiences of their lives. You don't have to travel to another country- it could be a new neighborhood in your city.

Learn a new skill that very few people know. Look for a new job even when you don't think you want one. Go to a local band's concert without ever hearing their music before. Watch a film from another country. Stumble upon a new website.

How people use the internet is a perfect example of how we live in The Bubble. In 2010, the average person visited 89 different websites a month. According to this, there are currently around 630 million websites. What does that mean? Well, most people who open up their Internet Explorer are not really exploring the internet at all. I guarantee you that most of my friends visit the same ten or so websites on regular basis. Unless I am researching, I can definitely be guilty of this. In fact, the majority of time I spend on the internet is on one site: Reddit. Reddit makes your bubble even more insulated because the only web pages that appear are the ones who have subscribed to, based off your interests. Any social media site poses the same dilemma- you only tend to see in your feed what you want to see.

Imagine walking around in real life and everyone you encounter agrees with you 100 percent about everything. This, of course, is not realistic, but it is exactly what we've come to expect on the websites we visit. Not only that, but when people are looking for answers on new websites, say in a Google search, they tend to have what is known as confirmation bias. This means they are interpreting any new information to match their already existing beliefs.

Basically, we have never, in the history of the world, ever had it easier when it comes to access to information. We can access anything we want on the internet, and most of it for free, yet we tend to only look at a sliver of a sliver of a sliver of what is available to us. Say you visit 10,000 different websites in your lifetime, which might be a good estimate of what really will happen. Well, there will still be over 1 billion websites you never checked out, accounting for the fact that 51 million new websites are created every year.

So what's the biggest excuse for this? It's just easier to visit the same few web sites you already visit, especially if you're happy with the sites. But what if you're missing out on the greatest website of all time? You would never know unless you start exploring.

Some people say that ignorance is bliss, that sometimes you can know too much because it just overwhelms you so much that you're completely stressed out. I call bull crap. You can never learn enough, and you should never stop learning. Younger people tend to be more curious, and thus tend to learn more. They rarely are as trapped in their bubbles as older people, who become far too comfortable in their bubbles. However, never underestimate the power of The Bubble which is created by the parents or guardians of children.

I was in a very insulated bubble growing up, but then, like so many teenagers do, I began to question things. I found out there was a great big world outside of my little world. The more people I met who were radically different than me, the more brand new experiences I had, and the more new ideas are was exposed to made me so much better of a human being.

But this should never stop. Why do so many people stop experiencing new things? Usually there is a risk experiencing new things, and usually your old way of life is challenged. But I am telling you this a terrible thing.We need stop following the world we know.

Get out of The Bubble. Not only that, force other people out of their bubbles. Are you opening the door for conflict? Possibly. Is it a scary thing to get out of your bubble? Definitely. But it is always worth the risk. Where do you begin? It doesn't have to be a huge step. Start small. How about visiting that Thai restaurant you were always curious about?

If everyone got out of their own bubbles, they might finally begin to understand each other, and realize that we all have much more in common than we think. 

Sunday, January 26, 2014

Review: "Songs From Six Deep" by The Worsh Ahts

I am writing this on the night of the Grammys. The Grammys, in case you haven't heard of them, are awards for the "best music" in the United States. Well, that is a bunch of nonsense. I haven't ever seen the "best music" even get nominated for a Grammy award. This brings me to a brand new release from The Worsh Ahts, aka Steve Loborec from Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. It's called Songs From Six Deep, and it's safe to say that it will never be nominated for a Grammy award. Thank God.

To sum it up- it's a disturbing, low-fi, dance/punk guitar-driven indie rock that's somewhat similar to bands like Guided By Voices, Beep Beep and early The Faint. Most of the songs are less than a minute and a half. The vocals are generally distorted and obscured, and most of the singing seems to be secondary, although the lyrics are featured for each on his Youtube page. 

The album begins with "The Formula for Life," a haunting echo chamber of sounds, sprinkled with a sample from the old film "The Bride of Frankenstein." The third track, "Lunatic Soul," lives up to its name well, and it's frantic pace and "Dracula" sample make it one of my favorites. "I May Have Been Franklin Pierce" is a depressing little ditty about a depressing life of a depressed former President. "The Voyage (Reminiscence)" starts out like it's going to rock you for four minutes, then promptly dies out. "Extending" has some of the most unique sounding guitars I've ever hear.

Probably my favorite two tracks are "Grim Fairy Tales" and "Songs For...." "Grim Fairy Tales" is dark twisted take on fairy tales, of course, that has jagged minor chords and a Beep Beep-like lead guitar that is serene and freaky at the same time. "Songs For..." might be the most "normal" song on the album, actually- it's just a nice guitar instrumental that has a nice warm sound.

Two things that are very cool about this release that give it a personal touch for Loborec are the facts that the album art is an etching his mother made when she was about five, and the words featured in the song "The Program" were recorded by his grandfather, Perry R. Westlake.

Songs From Six Deep is a disturbing, yet delightful, insight into the life of Steve Loborec. If you want to hear it for yourself, visit his Youtube page. If you want to download it, just email him and I'm sure he will hook you up. 

Story Time with Mr. Beat - The Caning of Charles Sumner

Sunday, January 19, 2014

The Caning of Charles Sumner

I couldn't imagine turning on CSPAN today and seeing a Congressman beating up a Senator in the Senate chamber. But that's exactly what happened on May 22nd, 1856. Here's the story of the caning of Charles Sumner.

Once upon a time there was a Republican Senator from Massachusetts named Charles Sumner. He was strong abolitionist, and a leading voice in Congress for the anti-slavery movement. He saw the expansion of slavery out west as very, very, very, very, very bad.

The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 further divided the American people in regards to the expansion of slavery out west. One of the things it said was that the people who lived in Kansas and Nebraska territories (aka the white men who lived out there), could vote to determine if slavery would be legal there or not. As it turned out, this was a very, very, very, very, very bad idea. You see, this caused a mad rush of people to the territories to settle so they could determine if Kansas and Nebraska would be either a slave state or free state. Kansas would be called "Bleeding Kansas," because of the fact that pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers there were resorting to violence to get their way.

Charles Sumner was horrified by what he read about Bleeding Kansas. He hated the Kansas-Nebraska Act, and decided to write a speech attacking the law. He called the speech "Crime Against Kansas."  On May 19th and 20th, 1856, he gave his speech to the Senate. That's right, the speech was so long that it took two days. He argued Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a free state, and attacked the political power of the Southern slaveholding class, known as "Slave Power."

If he would have stopped there, perhaps things wouldn't have turned out so bad for him. However, next he began to talk trash about the authors of the Kansas-Nebraska Act- Senator Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Senator Andrew Butler of South Carolina. Although Douglas was in the audience during the speech, Sumner called him a "noise-some, squat, and nameless animal . . . not a proper model for an American senator." Listening from the back of the Senate chamber, Stephen Douglas reportedly said, “that damned fool will get himself shot by some other damned fool.”

No other person was attacked as much in the speech as Andrew Butler, who actually was recovering from a stroke at the time and not present to hear the attacks. I won't go into detail about what Sumner said about Butler, but let's just say Butler's character was greatly attacked. Not only that, Sumner talked trash about the entire state of South Carolina, hinting in his speech that its history be "blotted out of existence."

Reactions to Sumner's speech were mostly negative. Even abolitionists thought the speech was harsh, although many northern newspapers praised Sumner's words. As you could imagine, Southerners were outraged. One Southerner, South Carolina Congressman Preston Brooks, who also happened to be the the second cousin of Andrew Butler, was very, very, very, very, very angry about the speech. Brooks wanted to challenge Sumner to a duel, but fellow South Carolina Congressman Laurence Keitt advised him not to because he believed duels should be between those of equal social standing, and any man who attacked someone recovering from a stroke, such as Sumner did, was not worthy of a duel. The two agreed it'd be better if Brooks just beat the heck out of Sumner with a cane.

On the morning May 21st, Preston Brooks arrived at the Capitol, carrying a cane. He hoped to attack Sumner, but could not find him.

The next day, Brooks again arrived at the Capitol, carrying the cane. The Senate chamber was nearly empty, as he walked in shortly after most of the Senators had left for the day. Brooks hesitated at first, as several women were present in the Senate gallery. After the women left, he approached Sumner, who was writing at his desk. Sumner's head was down and his legs were trapped underneath his desk, which was bolted to the floor.

As Brooks arrived at his desk, he reportedly said something along the lines of, "Mr. Sumner, I have read your speech twice over carefully. It is a libel against my relative and my state." As Sumner began to stand up, Brooks repeatedly beat Sumner severely on the head before he could reach his feet. The metal end of the cane caused Sumner to get knocked down, where he was trapped under the desk. While under the desk, Brooks continued to strike Sumner until Sumner ripped the desk from the floor. By this time, Sumner was blinded by his own blood. Sumner staggered up an aisle and passed out.

Most of the Senators who were still around did not intervene, but a few did attempt to help Sumner. However, they were blocked by Laurence Keitt, who reportedly had a pistol pointed at them, shouting, "Let them be!" Despite Sumner being passed out, Brooks continued to beat Sumner. Finally, after his cane splintered into several pieces, Brooks decided that was enough, and left the chamber. The entire attack lasted no more than one minute. Sumner was carried into another room and attended by a doctor, who gave him stitches to close the wounds on his head.

Sumner became a martyr in the North and Brooks became a hero in the South.

After the caning, Brooks was arrested for assault, but soon released on bail. He was later fined $300 and expelled from the House of Representatives. He returned to South Carolina, where they through parades and rallies for him. Many southerners were proud of his attack, and he received hundreds of new canes from supporters. One had "hit him again" inscribed on it. Brooks was immediately re-elected, but died soon after at the age of 37.

Sumner suffered traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder. He spent three years recovering before he was able to return to his Senate seat. After returning he picked up right where he left off, with another fiery Senate speech in 1860 titled "The Barbarism of Slavery." He was again threatened, but no one ever physically attacked him again. He would go on to serve in the Senate for 15 more years. Due to his injuries from Brooks, he suffered from chronic pain the rest of his life.

The caning of Charles Sumner illustrated the mood of the United States at the time- it was a country that was deeply divided over the expansion of slavery. The caning was a symbol of the collapse of communication between Northerners and Southerners in the years leading to the Civil War. It made it seem that secession or civil war was now inevitable.