The Muscle Behind the Throne

Lobbying is a concerted effort designed to achieve some result, typically from government authorities and elected officials. It can consist of the outreach of legislative members, public actions (e.g. mass demonstrations), or combinations of both public and private actions (e.g. encouraging constituents to contact their legislative representatives). As a professional occupation it is also known as "government affairs" or "public affairs" (see this for more information).

Now that everyone who hadn't already has a better understanding of what a Lobbyist is, I come to my question. Should Lobby ism be allowed to take the course it currently is in politics or should changes be made? In today's society, it is extremely hard to run a good campaign for office unless there is a considerable amount of funding for one's cause. However, most politicians who run don't have easy access to their own little piggy bank for this affair so they have to go to supporters who tend to share their opinions. Speculation of course is that these opinions are rather forceful where insubordinate acts made by the politician equal termination of funds and the loss of their public roll.

It is my opinion that lobbyists believe because they donated the most money to the winning politician, they are somehow entitled to have their opinion heard over the mass majority of America who weren't along for the ride with them. I believe that lobbyists should be publicly "praised" if they donated the most to the politician who won so their name can be raised for good publicity but that is as far as their reach goes. For sake of keeping this first article as brief as possible I will just leave it at that but I'll interject throughout the postings to share the rest of my opinion so please share yours!

Planet of the Apes?

A new study has found a link between modern language and primitive sign-language used by chimpanzee's and bonobos. It points to the use of a specific sign that is used when a male asks for help in a fight and is also used when asking for food that has been stolen. These same gestures used in different contexts allows for the hypothesis that they are not random. The question I pose is whether evolution from apes specifically is believed by all readers, why or why not?

My own opinion as those of you that join us in IR are aware is that of course we have. Most obvious is that of our genetic makeup. We are a mere chromosome away, during meiosis of course, from matching those of the chimpanzees. The loss of this chromosome has been speculated to have been formed when a fusion occured between two of their chromosomes, forming a more human looking ape. Though gradual progression, each new step making them more and more human like we evolved over a period of thousands of years.

Going the way of the 8-Track?

Ok, again, due to some pressing personal matters, I have not been as active on here as I would have liked the past few weeks. Hopefully, that has been rectified and I am free again to contribute to the project. Now, on to this week's topic.

My preferred listening music tends to vary with time. The past few weeks I have found myself on the usual musical/showtune kick. But as I listened I started thinking about the "hey day" of musical theater and vaudeville. Now we all know that vaudeville has all but disappeared in America. Why was that? Because of innovation in radio and personal listening equipment, which lead me to think of today. There are many people who dream of making it big in music, tv and movies (see american idol and the like) But with new developments in the internet, you can get all of those genres online (and with music and movies, you can find ways to get them without paying any fees) This isn't about whether you should or not (but you can comment on that if you like) my question is will the internet send cds and dvds the way of the cassette tape? You can still find cassettes, but mainly blank ones for making copies... I could see a future where the only cds and dvds are blank and used to copy and save files found on the net. Do you think this will happen? Or is there too much money and people invested in these industries to allow it to happen? I mean, sure we all love the movie theater experience... but for $10 a person on average? Most people would rather just get a hacked version online. Feel free to send your thoughts. Thanks for your time.

-The IR Herald

EU, that stinks.

Ok so it was a poor pun on words, but it was the best I could come up with. The European Union has recently had their 50th anniversary, but upon the signing of the document to mark the occassion they have left someone out. Namely God. For the first time they have made a completely secular document to the protesting of the Anglican and Catholic Church.

My opinion is that this is a definate good thing. For one it shows that the rest of the world is finally getting the idea of what America stands for, whether we get it or not. Secularization of the world is slowly growing and is now being shown in politics. Discrimination due to religion is one of the last prevailing threats to freedom. Now slowly that is also being shut down.

Please post your opinions on secularization and whether or not seperation of church and state should exist.

You Can't Handle The Truth

Since Psychopomp didn't bother to post this week, just messing, I shall jump in put forth a topic that I want to see on here. That being the truth. What is the definition of truth? Is it universal?

My opinion of Truth is that of relativity. There is no logical way for their to be an absolute truth in philosophy of course. It becomes problematic when we delve into tautologies and scientific laws. In the scope of idealogy and interpretation through observation, it is rare that any two human beings view things identically. I'm very interested in where this might go and in all of your ideas. Please post and hopefully through my responses I can fully develop my ideas as it is difficult to put together a coherent opinion with so many different possible situations.

Warfare.

Ever since the dawn of civilization there has been war over territory and resources. We have waged war at least once every fifty years for our entire existance. Though it is often a much shorter time before we start a new one. I pose a few questions to you about the necessities of war, why did we have it in the beginning? Is it relevant in our world anymore?

My opinion is that of pacifism. Perhaps in the beginning war was necessary for survival and furthering of our species. Competition over resources provided that genes that favoured stronger and smarter bodies to survive and to that we can attribute a greater part of our intelligence today. Consider where most of the technology that we develop was going to be used for in the first place. In our world where travel time has been reduced to a few hours to get anywhere in the world it is irresponsible to continue to fight for resources when free trade is readily available.

Aside from the fact that war can be avoided in all circumstances, how can we possibly reconcile the fact that we are senselessly murdering thousands of people. Perhaps it is the thought process that kill one and it's a tragedy, kill thousands and it's a statistic. It is unfortunate that we waste life so quickly on the battlefield and then those who are for the war say that the pacifists are not supporting the troops. I wonder if it is those that wish the troops to stay alive or those that see them die support them more.

Tolerance

Everywhere you turn on the news, blogs, chatrooms, whereever, you hear about Tolerance. It is a hot button topic. Now I'm not talking about tolerance of alcohol or medications or anything like that. I mean tolerance in social/philosophical/religious arenas. One of the definitions for tolerance put forth by Websters is "a : sympathy or indulgence for beliefs or practices differing from or conflicting with one's own b : the act of allowing something" (that quote was taken from here http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/tolerance)

Now I am a Bible-believing Christian, i.e. Jesus is the only way to heaven, I don't believe other religions to be true, however I do believe it is every persons right to choose what they believe. I believe there are consequences for each choice according to scripture, but it is your right to choose. In fact I have a number of friends with whom I disagree on this topic, but we are still friends because it is their right to choose what they believe and the subsequent consequences. But because of my stand on belief in scripture, many people would call me intolerant, because I don't see their view as valid. On the other hand, I am a supporter of Chief Illiniwek. (If you don't know who that is, it is the indian mascot for the University of Illinois. The university is retiring the symbol causing much debate and national headlines.) It is my belief that the symbol is not degrading, but respectful. However, others who DO NOT SEE MY VIEW AS VALID, have said that I, and others like me, are intolerant of their feelings. I find myself on opposite sides of the coin but still "intolerant" in the end.

My question is what is your definition of tolerance, whether it pertain to religion, race, political views, etc.? Where is the line drawn between tolerant and intolerant, or do we need to be completely tolerant of others views? Is it even possible to be completely tolerant of others views?

Respectfully submitted,
The IR Herald
"600 years of God-forsaken debauchery... THE DARK AGES! only on the History Channel"

Recruiting In Private Schools

The second topic up for discussion is Recruiting in Private Schools. How do you feel about it? Are you all for it? All you all against it? Please share what your personal feelings on the topic.


Now for my opinion on the matter

I personally feel that recruiting is a very realistic approach to life afterwards for those who are gifted in the areas that are people are usualy being recruited for. By this I mean, if someone is really good at football they will most likely get recruited for colllege as well. Some people say its unfair for private schools to wave tuition if a kid is being recruited for football but why? In college it happens all the time. There doesnt appear to be anything inherantly wrong with the situation.

Now as far as private schools being so much better in highschol sports I agree. Thats why I applaud IHSA decision to have a 1.5 X multiplier to any private school. However I dont think it should be a flat multiplier. I think it should be a formula, one also based on geography and the distance that the students who are being recruited are coming from. How many school districts that child has to go through to get to that public school. I think this would help make it more fair.

Net Neutrality

The topic for consideration is Net Neutrality. Net neutrality refers to the internet, and is the concept that a data network should have no restrictions. That the network at its base should allow any equipment to hook up and communicate with any other equipment, it does not regulate how that equipment communicates, nor does it set one type of communication higher than another.

The other position is that due to the increase in large bandwidth traffic and the development of new ways to access some regulations may be needed. For instance the ability for multiple homes to use a wireless connections instead of individual connections could cause the providers to lose large quantities of revenue. Also, with the increase in large bandwidth traffic (i.e. high quality and real time video and audio) the chance of high latency or a complete interruption in service could occur, and with such things as remote surgery being developed, the results could be severe. They propose a tiered services model where certain applications and "high priority traffic" would have a dedicated service in order to maintain quality.

There it is. What do you think? Feel free to comment on the original post as well as subsequent comments. Enjoy

-The IR Herald
Great minds talk about ideas, Average minds talk about things, Small minds talk about other people. --Unknown

p.s. This topic was proposed by another admin, but we are still in the process of getting everyone "admin" status. Once added his handle will be "Omniscient Fool". I only say this to make sure proposal credit is given where credit is due. Much of my information came from this website http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality feel free to peruse it as needed. Thank you.

What is the IR?

What in the world is the IR? What does it stand for? Who is it? Look no further, for the answers are here. The IR stands for the Intellectual Renaissance. It is the brainchild of The IR Herald (me). The goal was to create an atmosphere and community in which it was not only acceptable to think and ponder ideas, but it is encouraged. We live in a society (in america especially) where so many people simply allow someone else to do their thinking for them. We of the IR encourage all to think, reflect, question and decide for themselves whether they agree with something or not. This is not a revolution, we are not proposing new ideas, nor are we attacking any particular school of thought. We are simply encouraging everyone to find out what their particular "school of thought" might be on each topic.

The IR began by meeting once a week for about two hours to discuss whatever idea presented itself. Soon a core group formed itself. This "core group" is only because they are the ones who chose to get on board with the premise quickly. I did have a familiarity with most of them, but they were not "hand chosen". If you are wondering a little more about us, here's some info. While we are not necessarily an ethnically diverse group, we have quite a varying range of positions on topics. I am the eldest of the group (currently). I am a 28 year old caucasian male. I have a wife and infant daughter. The rest of our core group are dating or single. We have a college student and a number of high school students. Our personal stances are not cut from one mold either. I am an ordained christian minister in our little midwest town, but the core group also contains those who profess atheism, agnosticism, and all ranges in between. We are neither "republican" nor "democrat" but look at each topic individually. Each member may find him or herself leaning toward one particular "side" if you took a general overview, but we choose not to look at it that way. We prefer to take each topic individually and see where we land.

The main rule of the group is simply this. "All views are allowed, but none have to be validated." Meaning, anyone can share their opinion on any topic, but we don't have to agree. I obviously believe in God, and it's my right to say so. But I also have to allow someone to claim that their sock is God, I just don't have to say they are correct, nor do they have to say I am. We both present our views and leave it at that. If a person finds their views changing, that's fine, but it is not mandatory. We also demand that each member be treated with respect. Derogatory terms or belittling will not be tolerated, feel free to challenge an idea, but not attack the person behind it. Everyone has a right to their opinion. Interestingly, the "dividing lines" tend to morph with the topic. One member may find himself in a heated debate with another member on one topic, only to find them defending each other on the next. There is no "us vs. them" mentality. At the end of the day we are still quite civil (we have yet to have friendships dissolve).

The purpose of exposing this group to the web in a blog is to give opportunity for others to engage in these discussions. For those who cannot attend the weekly meetings, due to location, time or some other factor, they can now interact on topics at their leasure. Also, sometimes a person is not as familiar with a point of discussion. In the weekly meetings it is in the moment, there are no resource materials, time to research, etc. These blog threads will allow time to search and ponder. A new topic will be added at least once a week (possibly more depending on how the interaction goes), but one thread does not end because a new one is posted. This will simply be the schedule for new postings. Because the topic threads may become quite involved, there will be a six member governing body to take care of any maintenance, enforce comment rules if needed, and make general decisions. Those six members the core members of the original IR meetings. They will be listed on the main page as they get their logins verified. If anyone ever has a question or concern they can be directed at any one of those six moderators.

Finally, who is eligible to comment on a post? Anyone who would like. There is no age, gender, race, view restrictions. We encourage all to speak as they feel. The point of this entire project is to open the door to discussion and thought. Feel free to sign your name to a comment or post anonymously (if the anonymous post option begins to be abused, i.e. offensive content, derogatory terms, personal attacks on other posters and not their views, etc., changes can be made) The topics will vary greatly. We will approach everything from politics, religion, science, society, and anything else we can think of.

We of the IR encourage and welcome your thoughts. We hope that you will join us in our goal of making "thinking" a popular thing again. Feel free to direct any questions or comments on this blog, the group, or the project to this particular post as a comment. Thank you for your time.

-The IR Herald
Think like a wise man but communicate in the language of the people. --William Butler Yeats