As many of you know, a good portion of my adult, post-college life was spent alone. I lived alone in Milwaukee, not knowing anyone. I lived with my folks in Chicago for awhile without really reconnecting with any friends. Even in DC, I spent a lot of time at night and on the weekends, just being by myself. The thing is, I never really disliked this. It would have been easy to change and it's not like I didn't - or don't - have friends I could have easily spent time with. Used to be that I sort of relished the solitary life and, even when it wore on me, I always knew how to be by myself. I'm talking about real solitude - just you and your thoughts. The first weekend here I was a wreck and subsequently things got better, but even still, on some of the nights I have been at a loss for what to do once my reading was done. Had I forgotten how to be alone?
Nah.
This morning, I got up at 8 (having gotten in around 230a), had breakfast, chatted with Laura (my roommate at the Academy) and then, around 10a, went back to bed. Since re-awakening at 1145a, I have had some quality alone time. It seems that everyone from the Academy has vacated for the day and so this part of campus is very quiet. I sat on the bluff for an hour or so, reading The Federalist and staring blankly at the mountains. Then, after eight papers (more than enough for one sitting), I walked around campus and talked with my sister. I stopped at the campus store and the ATM and then I took my thoughts for a walk through the parts of campus I had not yet seen. It was nice to meander down paths with no real destination and mull over a variety of thoughts about my life, the content of this course, etc. And, as I made my way back to the apartment, I realized that I am still quite capable of being alone and enjoying it.
Now I'm excited to curl up in a chair (my back's bothering me so "curl" is probably not quite accurate) with skittles and diet pepsi and watch SWAT on my laptop (it was $5 at the bookstore - no more XMen 3). Then, perhaps I'll tackle the remaining three Federalist papers, before calling Brian, taking a shower and having dinner with Christine - a former SEED teacher who's out this way now. Should be good times.
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Friday, July 20, 2007
Constitutional boot camp: Day thirteen
A series of short musings
Executive privilege
The Bush administration recently announced that Congress has no power to force a U.S. attorney to pursue contempt charges in the prosecutor firings cases, since the president has declared that testimony or documents related to that are protected from release by executive privilege. A person in the Bush administration was quoted saying, "It has long been understood that, in circumstances like these, the constitutional prerogatives of the president would make it a futile and purely political act for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. attorneys."
I disagree.
To me, this is a pretty broad interpretation of executive privilege, one that can easily be abused now and in the future. Plus, I am not sure that the "constitutional prerogatives of the president" include ducking investigation into what could be a pretty legitimate, and serious, case. I'm pretty sure the "prerogative" given to the president in the Constituion does not include anything, in word or spirit, along the lines of "you (and your undefined privilege) trump all."
In fact, and here's where this seminar comes into play, John Locke argues that it is the legislative that dominates and all others are subordinate to it. The PEOPLE can change, alter or abolish the legislative, but as long as government exists, it remains the dominant force. Given that much of our foundation comes from Mr. Locke, this is something worth considering.
The Anti-Federalists believed that power needed to be blocked up because, if it was not, it would flow, like water, wherever it wanted until it met an impediment. They were talking about this more in the context of the need for a bill of rights, but, again, I think it is a thought worth considering.
Not in my name
I have taught the very basic philosophy of Thomas Hobbes to my students for as long as I have been teaching, but I have never had a very solid understanding of his theories. The basic gist is that Hobbes believed that without government, life would be every man against every man. And not only that it would, but that we would have a right to whatever we needed (need being defined only by the individual) and to get it by any means necessary. Since this is no way to live, Hobbes argued that men would agree to give up some of their powers (NOT their rights) to live in a community where there was more guarantee of peace and stability - the formation of a social contract. And even though he believes man to be a nasty, brutish creature, Hobbes is truly committed to peace and a better life. Hence the social compact mentioned above.
In laying out the foundation of this social compact, Hobbes talks of the people as authors of the community's Laws (based on fundamental rights) and the government as actors of those intentions. Therefore, following Hobbes' argument, whatever the government does is done in the name of the people. It is then the government's responsibility to re-present the people accurately.
I don't even have commentary for this. Just let it sit with you for awhile.
The BIG question
What does it mean to live well with other people in a society?
My professor posed this as the big question all political theorists grapple with and he suggested that, as a society, it is the one we should be grappling with as well. Think about how the world might be different if this was the fundamental idea around which our education system was based. I know we say we exist to teach students how to be a part of the community, but do we really explore what that means in any depth? I don't think so, although I don't fault teachers and schools for that really. There is only so much you can do, really, when trying to get the test scores up, meet the standards, make them college/job ready, etc, etc, ad nauseum. I'm not sure how much I can do with this in my own classroom, but I know that, at the very least, this will be the big question I have in my room from day one and I will try, as much as I can to refer back to it. Because, for me, when it comes right down to it, this is the most important knowledge my students can gain.
Wrap-up
We are well past the midway point of this seminar and I cannot even express in words how much I have learned. Not only about the material, but about myself - as a colleague, a friend, a learner, etc. This is truly an experience I will never forget. That being said, I am ready for next week to be done. I am ready to be done reading academic texts for a minute and, more than that, I am ready to be home.
Happy Friday, everyone!
Executive privilege
The Bush administration recently announced that Congress has no power to force a U.S. attorney to pursue contempt charges in the prosecutor firings cases, since the president has declared that testimony or documents related to that are protected from release by executive privilege. A person in the Bush administration was quoted saying, "It has long been understood that, in circumstances like these, the constitutional prerogatives of the president would make it a futile and purely political act for Congress to refer contempt citations to U.S. attorneys."
I disagree.
To me, this is a pretty broad interpretation of executive privilege, one that can easily be abused now and in the future. Plus, I am not sure that the "constitutional prerogatives of the president" include ducking investigation into what could be a pretty legitimate, and serious, case. I'm pretty sure the "prerogative" given to the president in the Constituion does not include anything, in word or spirit, along the lines of "you (and your undefined privilege) trump all."
In fact, and here's where this seminar comes into play, John Locke argues that it is the legislative that dominates and all others are subordinate to it. The PEOPLE can change, alter or abolish the legislative, but as long as government exists, it remains the dominant force. Given that much of our foundation comes from Mr. Locke, this is something worth considering.
The Anti-Federalists believed that power needed to be blocked up because, if it was not, it would flow, like water, wherever it wanted until it met an impediment. They were talking about this more in the context of the need for a bill of rights, but, again, I think it is a thought worth considering.
Not in my name
I have taught the very basic philosophy of Thomas Hobbes to my students for as long as I have been teaching, but I have never had a very solid understanding of his theories. The basic gist is that Hobbes believed that without government, life would be every man against every man. And not only that it would, but that we would have a right to whatever we needed (need being defined only by the individual) and to get it by any means necessary. Since this is no way to live, Hobbes argued that men would agree to give up some of their powers (NOT their rights) to live in a community where there was more guarantee of peace and stability - the formation of a social contract. And even though he believes man to be a nasty, brutish creature, Hobbes is truly committed to peace and a better life. Hence the social compact mentioned above.
In laying out the foundation of this social compact, Hobbes talks of the people as authors of the community's Laws (based on fundamental rights) and the government as actors of those intentions. Therefore, following Hobbes' argument, whatever the government does is done in the name of the people. It is then the government's responsibility to re-present the people accurately.
I don't even have commentary for this. Just let it sit with you for awhile.
The BIG question
What does it mean to live well with other people in a society?
My professor posed this as the big question all political theorists grapple with and he suggested that, as a society, it is the one we should be grappling with as well. Think about how the world might be different if this was the fundamental idea around which our education system was based. I know we say we exist to teach students how to be a part of the community, but do we really explore what that means in any depth? I don't think so, although I don't fault teachers and schools for that really. There is only so much you can do, really, when trying to get the test scores up, meet the standards, make them college/job ready, etc, etc, ad nauseum. I'm not sure how much I can do with this in my own classroom, but I know that, at the very least, this will be the big question I have in my room from day one and I will try, as much as I can to refer back to it. Because, for me, when it comes right down to it, this is the most important knowledge my students can gain.
Wrap-up
We are well past the midway point of this seminar and I cannot even express in words how much I have learned. Not only about the material, but about myself - as a colleague, a friend, a learner, etc. This is truly an experience I will never forget. That being said, I am ready for next week to be done. I am ready to be done reading academic texts for a minute and, more than that, I am ready to be home.
Happy Friday, everyone!
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Too cute to pass up!
I have an involved post on politics in the works, but only if I can get out from under the 300+ pages of theory I have to read today/tonight! But I just got sent more photos from the big Miller California vacation and I have to share this photo of my cousins' daughters, Hannah, Molly and Grace, dressed as princesses at Disneyland. 
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Grosser than gross
Anyone else play that "game" in like the fourth grade? What's gross? Biting into an apple and finding a worm. What's grosser than gross? Biting into an apple and finding half a worm. Maybe it's just me. Anyway...
What's gross? Being sick. What's grosser than gross? Bring sick thousands of miles from home with no real comfort available. No comfy couch, no real bed, no tv to veg in front of, no plethora of treatments and treats to soothe and heal. Plus I have this big writing assignment in forty minutes and the coughing, sore throat, feverish thing I have going on right now is not putting me in the scholarly mood.
Grr....
What's gross? Being sick. What's grosser than gross? Bring sick thousands of miles from home with no real comfort available. No comfy couch, no real bed, no tv to veg in front of, no plethora of treatments and treats to soothe and heal. Plus I have this big writing assignment in forty minutes and the coughing, sore throat, feverish thing I have going on right now is not putting me in the scholarly mood.
Grr....
Monday, July 16, 2007
Academia and then some
I have thought a few times in the last week or so that I should write another reflection on what I am learning here, but then there is always something else to read or think about or do and so I haven't. In the future, there may be a discussion of Thomas Hobbes, who I, like many, greatly misunderstood and underappreciated until recently.
The theme of worlds from words continues to play out, which pleases me to no end. I've also enjoyed hearing from a small number of people regarding their thoughts on the subject. (I promise your perspectives are still ruminating in my mind and a response is in the works.) In addition, we have added themes on humanity and natural law and wholeness to the mix. There are times when my head actually hurts from concentrating so hard on the task at hand, but it's a good feeling, to be thinking so much and so deeply.
This weekend I took a break from the deep thought, though, and Brian and I had a great time vacationing as it were. It goes without saying that I was thrilled to see him when he got to campus, but I'll say it anyway: when he got out of the car I was shaking, I was so excited and relieved (for lack of a better word). It was smart of him to plan his trip in the middle of my trip; as sad as I was to say good bye to him (again!) this morning, it helped to think it is only twelve more days until I am home.
Friday we went up to Griffith Park Observatory for an amazing view of the city, which truly sprawls in a way that both amazes and disgusts me and had dinner with friends of his. Saturday we took the top off the Jeep (man it's a good thing we're both college educated and relatively quick - you wouldn't think it'd be so tough) and drove up to Malibu. It sounds cliche, perhaps, or not really worth it, but I think that if you have the chance to take such a drive in any sort of convertible, you should. There is something truly awesome (as in, I was full of awe, not as in "like, totally awesome!") about driving through a canyon, looking up and seeing nothing but blue sky, clouds and mountains. Not to mention the vast horizontal vista it allows you. Seriously, it was probably my favorite piece of the trip. After a sidetrip to one of the beaches north of Malibu, we headed back into LA where Brian introduced me first to the best ice cream sandwich ever (really, why don't more places go into the business of selling homemade ice cream sandwiches?!) and then to the biggest, most expansive music store I have ever seen. Check out Diddy Riese and Amoeba Records, respectively, if you're in the area and either appeal to you. Sunday was kind of lazy - checked out a museum, Transformers (just as good the second time) and had a big dinner - and ended back in my dorm room (poor Brian, the beds here are not comfortable and certainly not if you're over 6 feet).
Tomorrow is our big writing assignment. We had to select an excerpt from one of the texts we've already read/discussed that we believe is "world making." That is to say, a piece of text (no longer than 400 words) that offers either a fundamental idea/theory or a shift of perspective/seeing of the political world. We will then spend three hours tomorrow recreating this text into three new forms (we have thirty forms to choose from, none particularly easy). After much revision and discussion and thought, I have selected a section of The Federalist No. 39 by James Madison wherein he gives a new definition of "republic" and explains how the United States' Constitution conforms to this new model. I'm thinking my new forms will include a concept map, a juxtaposition with Cicero (if I can find the right selection in Cicero) and an illuminated text, but who knows how that might change tomorrow. I'll let you know.
For now, I'm afraid, it is time for bed. I probably have so much more to say, but I'll leave it at this for now. Oh, and, new photos are up on Facebook. Check it out! If you don't have your own account, click here to see them; you'll miss out on the comments people make, but I suspect you'll survive.
The theme of worlds from words continues to play out, which pleases me to no end. I've also enjoyed hearing from a small number of people regarding their thoughts on the subject. (I promise your perspectives are still ruminating in my mind and a response is in the works.) In addition, we have added themes on humanity and natural law and wholeness to the mix. There are times when my head actually hurts from concentrating so hard on the task at hand, but it's a good feeling, to be thinking so much and so deeply.
This weekend I took a break from the deep thought, though, and Brian and I had a great time vacationing as it were. It goes without saying that I was thrilled to see him when he got to campus, but I'll say it anyway: when he got out of the car I was shaking, I was so excited and relieved (for lack of a better word). It was smart of him to plan his trip in the middle of my trip; as sad as I was to say good bye to him (again!) this morning, it helped to think it is only twelve more days until I am home.
Friday we went up to Griffith Park Observatory for an amazing view of the city, which truly sprawls in a way that both amazes and disgusts me and had dinner with friends of his. Saturday we took the top off the Jeep (man it's a good thing we're both college educated and relatively quick - you wouldn't think it'd be so tough) and drove up to Malibu. It sounds cliche, perhaps, or not really worth it, but I think that if you have the chance to take such a drive in any sort of convertible, you should. There is something truly awesome (as in, I was full of awe, not as in "like, totally awesome!") about driving through a canyon, looking up and seeing nothing but blue sky, clouds and mountains. Not to mention the vast horizontal vista it allows you. Seriously, it was probably my favorite piece of the trip. After a sidetrip to one of the beaches north of Malibu, we headed back into LA where Brian introduced me first to the best ice cream sandwich ever (really, why don't more places go into the business of selling homemade ice cream sandwiches?!) and then to the biggest, most expansive music store I have ever seen. Check out Diddy Riese and Amoeba Records, respectively, if you're in the area and either appeal to you. Sunday was kind of lazy - checked out a museum, Transformers (just as good the second time) and had a big dinner - and ended back in my dorm room (poor Brian, the beds here are not comfortable and certainly not if you're over 6 feet).
Tomorrow is our big writing assignment. We had to select an excerpt from one of the texts we've already read/discussed that we believe is "world making." That is to say, a piece of text (no longer than 400 words) that offers either a fundamental idea/theory or a shift of perspective/seeing of the political world. We will then spend three hours tomorrow recreating this text into three new forms (we have thirty forms to choose from, none particularly easy). After much revision and discussion and thought, I have selected a section of The Federalist No. 39 by James Madison wherein he gives a new definition of "republic" and explains how the United States' Constitution conforms to this new model. I'm thinking my new forms will include a concept map, a juxtaposition with Cicero (if I can find the right selection in Cicero) and an illuminated text, but who knows how that might change tomorrow. I'll let you know.
For now, I'm afraid, it is time for bed. I probably have so much more to say, but I'll leave it at this for now. Oh, and, new photos are up on Facebook. Check it out! If you don't have your own account, click here to see them; you'll miss out on the comments people make, but I suspect you'll survive.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
I have title control again!
Lame start, I know, but I haven't been able to write a title for the last few entries and that upsets my sense of order. This is not a reflective commentary on what I've been learning in class (although it has been amazing and, in many ways, transformative), so no need for a more official title.
Tonight there was an impromptu party in one of the apartments after our session on Federalist 37. People brought wine, beer, cheese, crackers, etc and sat around talking. It was nice, although one of the women talking to me a little later in the evening mentioned that I never seem to say much. Yep, that seems about right. At one point, we went around sharing our porn names (using the name as your first pet and the street you grew up on), which was an interesting moment. There were some funny ones, but the best part of the night was when we naturally broke off into smaller groups and just talked about whatever. I may still not have talked a lot, but I felt a lot more social than I have the last few nights.
Tomorrow we wrap up with Aristotle (thank goodness) and discuss Cicero. Friday is more Cicero and Deuteronomy. Tomorrow night is also our second group dinner, which should be a good time. Lots of fun characters at this seminar and everyone is really thoughtful and intelligent. I'm glad to be here bc I am learning so much, not only about the content, but about myself as a learner and thinker.
Brian flies into LA tomorrow, but I won't see him until Friday afternoon. I have a strong suspicion that tomorrow and Friday are going to be LONG days for me. I've been gone for nearly two weeks and I don't think I could express in words how much I am looking forward to seeing him. I almost can't let myself think about it bc I think it's the only way I'll get through the next two days with any sort of focus.
Finally, today (and it is still today in CA) is my good friend Cole's birthday. I wish I could be there to share it with you, but know I was thinking about you often today. You are an amazing person with a great capacity for love and kindness and I am blessed to have you as a friend. Happy birthday, Cole!
Tonight there was an impromptu party in one of the apartments after our session on Federalist 37. People brought wine, beer, cheese, crackers, etc and sat around talking. It was nice, although one of the women talking to me a little later in the evening mentioned that I never seem to say much. Yep, that seems about right. At one point, we went around sharing our porn names (using the name as your first pet and the street you grew up on), which was an interesting moment. There were some funny ones, but the best part of the night was when we naturally broke off into smaller groups and just talked about whatever. I may still not have talked a lot, but I felt a lot more social than I have the last few nights.
Tomorrow we wrap up with Aristotle (thank goodness) and discuss Cicero. Friday is more Cicero and Deuteronomy. Tomorrow night is also our second group dinner, which should be a good time. Lots of fun characters at this seminar and everyone is really thoughtful and intelligent. I'm glad to be here bc I am learning so much, not only about the content, but about myself as a learner and thinker.
Brian flies into LA tomorrow, but I won't see him until Friday afternoon. I have a strong suspicion that tomorrow and Friday are going to be LONG days for me. I've been gone for nearly two weeks and I don't think I could express in words how much I am looking forward to seeing him. I almost can't let myself think about it bc I think it's the only way I'll get through the next two days with any sort of focus.
Finally, today (and it is still today in CA) is my good friend Cole's birthday. I wish I could be there to share it with you, but know I was thinking about you often today. You are an amazing person with a great capacity for love and kindness and I am blessed to have you as a friend. Happy birthday, Cole!
Monday, July 09, 2007
Constitution boot camp: Day Two
On leadership, indiviual v. communal & the Declaration
In Scipio's Dream (Book Six of The Republic), a true statesman is described as someone who can see the whole and not lose sight of the parts. Someone who resides both on earth and in the heavens. Who has a sense of eternity and of the here and now. Further, a true leader is someone who guides us towards what we want to be in the best way possible and who is not hung up on personal glory or legacy, but who is truly invested in providing the most happiness and security for the community.
There are candidates for President that I like, some much more than others, but if I look at the pool honestly, I have to admit that not a single one fits this classical notion of a statesman. And I wonder, how would politics - how would our world - be different if we held our elected officials to these requirements? Is it even possible - or good - to do so? And regardless of both those questions, how did we get so far gone from this idea of a good leader being a wise guide and not a coercive navigator?
The more I study foundational documents and theory of the United States, the more I worry that we have long ago past the ideas on which this country was formed. And I wonder how, and if, we will ever reclaim them. But then the modernist (and perhaps the pragmatist) in me wonders if we need to reclaim those ideas or if this is natural and welcome evolution. Of course, then the classicist in me is reminded of the fall of similar republics due to seemingly natural evolution.
Take, for example, the notion of individual rights versus the common good. I would argue that this is the fundamental crisis facing America today; we cannot find the proper balance between the two. My professor might argue that that is because we are failing to ask the appropriate questions, but, whether or not that is true, the crisis remains.
Looking at the Declaration today, it is evident, to me at least (with the help of my professor), that this document is not about the individual and his rights, it is about the communal right of the people to form a new government and break free of the oppressive government under which they were ruled. In fact, most of the document speaks to the collective. So, how then, did we get to a place where our country is so focused on the "me" and not the "we"? Here, I allow for no debate: to me, it is imperative that we reclaim some sense of community in this country (but, again, I worry a bit about stripping individual liberties).
Along those lines, the last thing I want to reflect on (I hope you know that I use this blog as a way to process my thoughts after a day of lecture and discussion) is the life of the Declaration. Our professor made a point that all teachers of government make, that the Declaration is a living document. As such, he argued, it must be maintained. Just as we maintain our bodies and our children and our plants and pets, we must maintain our foundations of government. What a novel idea in this day and age, that we talk about and debate over the very words which created our world (going back to yesterday's theme). We have to continue to struggle with the words, figure out their relevance to our lives and work to make those same words true. (MLK said something to this affect during the civil rights movement, that all blacks wanted was for the principles and ideas of our foundation of government to be enforced or enacted.) How you do that and how I do that and how the government does that...all of those will look different, but the idea is that, as a collective, we must continue to do it bc the Declaration, which was a huge risk when written, continues to be in danger of failing still today.
On leadership, indiviual v. communal & the Declaration
In Scipio's Dream (Book Six of The Republic), a true statesman is described as someone who can see the whole and not lose sight of the parts. Someone who resides both on earth and in the heavens. Who has a sense of eternity and of the here and now. Further, a true leader is someone who guides us towards what we want to be in the best way possible and who is not hung up on personal glory or legacy, but who is truly invested in providing the most happiness and security for the community.
There are candidates for President that I like, some much more than others, but if I look at the pool honestly, I have to admit that not a single one fits this classical notion of a statesman. And I wonder, how would politics - how would our world - be different if we held our elected officials to these requirements? Is it even possible - or good - to do so? And regardless of both those questions, how did we get so far gone from this idea of a good leader being a wise guide and not a coercive navigator?
The more I study foundational documents and theory of the United States, the more I worry that we have long ago past the ideas on which this country was formed. And I wonder how, and if, we will ever reclaim them. But then the modernist (and perhaps the pragmatist) in me wonders if we need to reclaim those ideas or if this is natural and welcome evolution. Of course, then the classicist in me is reminded of the fall of similar republics due to seemingly natural evolution.
Take, for example, the notion of individual rights versus the common good. I would argue that this is the fundamental crisis facing America today; we cannot find the proper balance between the two. My professor might argue that that is because we are failing to ask the appropriate questions, but, whether or not that is true, the crisis remains.
Looking at the Declaration today, it is evident, to me at least (with the help of my professor), that this document is not about the individual and his rights, it is about the communal right of the people to form a new government and break free of the oppressive government under which they were ruled. In fact, most of the document speaks to the collective. So, how then, did we get to a place where our country is so focused on the "me" and not the "we"? Here, I allow for no debate: to me, it is imperative that we reclaim some sense of community in this country (but, again, I worry a bit about stripping individual liberties).
Along those lines, the last thing I want to reflect on (I hope you know that I use this blog as a way to process my thoughts after a day of lecture and discussion) is the life of the Declaration. Our professor made a point that all teachers of government make, that the Declaration is a living document. As such, he argued, it must be maintained. Just as we maintain our bodies and our children and our plants and pets, we must maintain our foundations of government. What a novel idea in this day and age, that we talk about and debate over the very words which created our world (going back to yesterday's theme). We have to continue to struggle with the words, figure out their relevance to our lives and work to make those same words true. (MLK said something to this affect during the civil rights movement, that all blacks wanted was for the principles and ideas of our foundation of government to be enforced or enacted.) How you do that and how I do that and how the government does that...all of those will look different, but the idea is that, as a collective, we must continue to do it bc the Declaration, which was a huge risk when written, continues to be in danger of failing still today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)