Pepperidge Farm Remembers

As many do, I have old people in my life. With meaningful benefits, such as access to their perspective and experience, come certain obligations. My primary old person, for example, is incapable of having a conversation with me without asking me to fix something computer-related. I have learned to accept that this, along with an increased susceptibility to scams, is just part of being an old person. There is another old person behavior, however, that affects the old and non-old alike in a more concrete way than merely frustrating conversations like, “Now, click the hamburger. No, the three horizontal lines in the corner. Because it looks like a hamburger. No, left click. No, single click…”

The Golden Age

I routinely receive emails with subject lines like “Fwd: BLACK & WHITE TV,” “Fwd: The Irish Divorce” and even “FW: FW: RE: Fwd: The Truth about Getting Old.” If you have your own old person, you get these, too. The general theme hearkens back to a simpler time when you did not have to lock your doors, deals could be done on a handshake, and underpants covered your ass. The impression given is that people who grew up in these bygone days possessed more common sense and were just generally more rugged and self-reliant (a riff on the classic noble savage fallacy). For flavor, these messages are often liberally peppered with shitty clip art1 and passive aggression toward Millennials.

The problem with golden age thinking is that it drips with selection bias. For every smug quip about “We used to snag a bite of raw hamburger from the counter where Mom had left it thawing, and we didn’t get E. coli,” it’s easier than pistol whipping a blind kid to counter with “Well, there is a lot more literal shit in the meat nowadays.” Or “…not a single person I knew had ever been told that they were from a dysfunctional family,” with “What in the actual fuck are you talking about? Your Uncle Ernie had his special ‘night ‘night games, your father punched your mother in the gut so the bruises wouldn’t show, your mother had a vodka bottle in the toilet tank, and your brother was as gay as a French horn but entirely lacked the support system or even the vocabulary to do anything about it.”

My intent is not to strip the old of their illusions. I’ve got more miles in the rear view mirror than ahead, and I, too, enjoy nostalgia’s pink glow2. But in order to believe the old days, any old days, were objectively better, one has to dismiss or bury all kinds of pretty terrible stuff. Polio and Jim Crow-level stuff. Worse is when people (and not just the old) elect politicians who invoke these Golden Age tropes. This is simply pandering or, in some instances, a dog whistle3 for, “I will restore your lost entitlement by hassling brown people.” Regardless, it is regressive and myopic and ultimately impossible.

The Golden Age is fool’s gold.


  1. Eight Track

  2. Or, lately, a fully kitted out Oom-pah band.

Sousveillance

David Brin opens The Transparent Society by describing two cities of the near future. In City Number One:

Tiny cameras panning left and right, survey traffic and pedestrians, observing everything in open view…In this place, all the myriad cameras report their urban scenes straight to Police Central, where security officers use sophisticated image processors to scan for infractions against public order – or perhaps against an established way of thought. Citizens walk the streets aware that any word or deed may be noted by agents of some mysterious bureau.

Over in City Number Two, there are just as many cameras. However:

These devices do not report to the secret police. Rather, each and every citizen of this metropolis can use his or her wristwatch television to call up images from any camera in town.

Here a late-evening stroller checks to make sure no one lurks beyond the corner she is about to turn.

Over there a tardy young man dials to see if his dinner date still waits for him by a city fountain.

A block away, an anxious parent scans the area to find which way her child wandered off.

Over by the mall, a teenage shoplifter is taken into custody gingerly, with minute attention to ritual and rights, because the arresting officer knows that the entire process is being scrutinized by untold numbers who watch intently, lest her neutral professionalism lapse.

Brin closes the thought experiment by asking his readers, given a choice between living in one or the other city, is there any doubt which one we would choose?

I see strong evidence that we are heading for a hybrid of the two.

Both of Brin’s cities resemble practical implementations of the Panopticon. Since a citizen can never be certain that hus actions are not being monitored, hu must assume that they are. Going the way of City Number One, the UK currently sports a ratio of one CCTV camera to every fourteen people. The propagation of CCTV cameras in the United States is far less dense, but is growing in reaction to the July 7, 2005 London bombings.

City Number Two answers Juvenal’s question “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” Who watches the watchmen? We all do. And camera phones and YouTube are making it possible.

Over the past few months we have seen powerful examples of the potential for Sousveillance. Camera phones captured three separate incidents of excessive force on the part of Los Angeles police. A camera phone made Michael Richards’ hate-filled tantrum available for all the world to see. George Allen’s career in politics is probably over because of a single word, and the video camera that recorded it.

In a short while, only the lowest-end mobile phones will come without the capability of recording video, and Jupiter Research estimates that there are 195 million American mobile phone users today.

That’s a lot of eyes and ears.

I am not wild about the prospect (I’d rather we all just let each other the hell alone), but if we’re going to live in a society where the government and the private sector insist on training cameras on us, I prefer for them to know that we’re Shooting Back.

Why I Don’t Say The Pledge of Allegiance

In my last post I mentioned that whenever I’m at a venue where the Pledge of Allegiance is recited, I stand with my hands at my sides. I only mentioned it because when I wrote that post I was initially jotting down impressions and recollections while they were fresh. I included it as a detail. One of my gentle readers pointed out that without providing an explanation as to why, people would be left to fill in their own conclusions. Well, we mustn’t have that.

Why I Stand

This started in homeroom my Junior year of high school. Every morning before we went to our first class, we said the Pledge. For reasons that I’ll get to, I decided that I wasn’t going to do it anymore. When everyone else stood, I did not. The homeroom teacher was furious with me, and sent me to the office.

Neither the principal nor the vice-principal was in, but I was a regular and received assurances that one or the other would be in touch. I was on my way to get a smoke over at Chez Boys when I felt a hand on my shoulder. It was Ms. Henderson, the vice-principal.

Donna was an older, handsome blonde woman whom I had learned not to piss off. We were at present enjoying a shaky detente. She politely asked me what had occurred, and why I no longer wanted to say the Pledge. I explained it to her (I swear, I’ll get to it). She didn’t say anything for several moments and then – it was probably the first time someone addressed me as if I were an adult – said, “I understand. What I would ask for you to consider is that the Pledge is something that some people believe in very strongly. Out of respect for what they believe, maybe you could just stand?” A light went on as I learned that it was possible to be true to my own beliefs without being unnecessarily confrontational.

Thank you, Donna. You taught me something which still helps me to go my own way.

Why I Don’t Sing Along

It would be disrespectful for me to recite it.

Allegiance – The obligation of a subject or citizen to hus sovereign or government.

None for me, thank you. I consider my contract with the United States adequate in its current form. I pay my taxes fair and square and, in exchange, I enjoy access to infrastructure and public safety – no need to get all gushy with a bunch of talk about allegiance. I want government involved in my life as little as possible. I wouldn’t swear allegiance to my bank, so why on earth would I swear allegiance to my government?

If I were to put my hand over my heart and say the words, believing as I do, I would be showing disrespect to those who genuinely believe. It’s the same reason I don’t take communion on those occasions when I attend Catholic Mass. I do not believe in Transubstantiation, so I have absolutely no business taking communion. It would be rude.

It scares the shit out of me.

If you’re a believer, the next time the Pledge comes up, close your eyes and just mouth the words (it’s okay, the Flag will give you a pass) so you can hear what a room full of people reciting the Pledge sounds like. It sounds like a bunch of zombies saying grace before tucking into the buffet. “With liberty and *braaaiiiinnnnnnss* for all.” I’m not kidding, it freaks me out.

Deeds Not Words

Which is more important: That I recite a Pledge in which I do not believe, or that I engage (without irony) in civic-minded activities like being an election volunteer?

Origins of the Pledge

The Pledge is not the Declaration of Independence, is not the Constitution, is not the Bill of Rights. Our founders never heard of it. Wikipedia has a fascinating article on its origins. My favorite bit of history about the Pledge is the Bellamy Salute (pictured below):

Bellamy Salute

Hooboy.

Reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in a group setting imbues the gathering with a solemnity and sense of occasion that works just fine for some. I cannot engage in this ritual honestly, so I simply pay respect and leave it at that.

You got a problem with that?