The Wall

When you pull back and look at meta trends, the frame changes.

For example, European history was shaped for centuries by conflicts between the pope and ruling monarchs over things such as 'who had the authority to appoint a bishop?' or 'who has jurisdiction in this situation?' or 'does the pope crown the king?'

Hard to remember in the present day, with the separation of church and state (which developed over centuries for Very Good Reasons), but you'd have a hard time truly understanding parts of history without that frame.

I wonder if there is a similar meta-frame in the current political imbroglio. Our Founding Fathers created checks and balances between the three branches of the government for good reason, but on a meta-level the last century or so has shown the rise of the presidency to an unprecedented degree. My classes talked a bit about how that happened, about how it's easier to try and influence one president over multiple members of Congress.

There's a heckuva lot to get into on this topic, too much to do justice to the topic. If you're interested, definitely look up the academic research on it.

I brought it up because the standoff between Pelosi and Trump is as much about who truly has the power of the purse as it is about all the other things we see in the news.

Congress is the legislature. It's supposed to pass laws and handle the budget. We've allowed the president to take the lead on such things, in recent history, in part because the sitting president is considered the leading power in his (and maybe someday her) party. As such, the congressional members of that party don't really want to undermine him or air public disagreements.

So the standoff, to most, is the typical Republican vs Democrat shenanigans we're used to, showing in a shutdown that is worse than (but not much different from) previous shutdowns.

Yet I can't help thinking that it undermines the precious checks and balances written into our constitution. After all, the president was clearly NOT given the power of the purse, nor the right to create legislation.

If he wants a wall so badly, he should really be doing his best to make sure more Republicans are elected next time.

But that's not the way our political system is working these days.

Shounen Manga

With Japanese manga, they are generally categorized by who their target market is. Shounen manga, for example, is targeted at young teenaged boys and tends to involve coming-of-age stories with a lot of action. Shoujo manga is targeted at teenage girls, and tends to have a lot of high school drama, particularly romance.

I find it interesting that I'm mostly drawn to shounen stories (Naruto, Bleach, My Hero Academia, Hunter x Hunter, One Punch Man ) and only occasionally stray into shoujo (Ouran High School Host Club, Fruits Basket).

I like the character development in shounen stories, I like the typical blend of action and comedy, and I like that there are often deeper underlying themes (Naruto has a number of them, though not all were developed as well as others - hard work vs. genius, how to make peace when all everyone knows is fighting, etc. My Hero Academia gets into what it takes to be a hero, as well as some interesting insurgency/counterinsurgency plots, and so on and a so forth.) I could do without most of the fanservice, and too much of it actually turns me off of the story... I couldn't really get into Seven Deadly Sins because I kept wondering why the girl put up with so much inappropriate behavior, but whatever.

But I also have some questions about the underlying messages conveyed to the target audience of young, teenage boys. Like, on the one hand I appreciate messages like 'work hard and keep trying'. I mostly think those are good messages. I sort of like how My Hero Academia shows the sort of dedication it takes to be the top hero, and also shows some of the darker sides of that sort of competition (the Number Two Hero's character, and how his pursuit of the top rank affected his relationship with his family is particularly interesting in this regard).

But there are times, as well, when I appreciate these stories make me really appreciate the fact that I'm a girl. Currently I've been watching/reading Kenichi: The Mightiest Disciple, which has some cool martial arts stuff. There's a lot to unpack in the story, though it's weak in some parts and has some messaging I don't actually agree with.

The one that got me writing today has to do with power, and strength, and what people do with that. That is, the main character in Kenichi was getting bullied at school and decided to stop accepting it, so he's training in martial arts. But winning a fight against one bully made others take notice of him, so that he kept getting sucked into fights against more and more skilled opponents. He wants to get stronger in part because he's realized that bullies aren't going to stop bullying unless you're strong enough to stand up to them, that you can tell them it's wrong all you want... but without the strength to back it up nothing will change.

It reminds me of international relations and realism, tbh.

There is some truth to that sentiment, I think. Hans Morgenthau's classical realism makes sense to me, in a way.

But there's more to it than that. (Again, I have a lot to unpack and I'm not really sure how much I'll be able to cover everything here).

First - organized cooperation beats any one person's strength. Sure, one good martial artist can take on multiple opponents, but there really is a time where even the most magnificently skilled individual will lose. This is especially true when you put in guns and modern weaposn.

This is the way armies work, after all. This is why discipline is so prized in the military. It's kind of boring, it's not nearly as dramatic as individual heroes, but a phalanx in formation can defeat a lone swordsman, and so on and so forth. (I can get into some interesting topics on that some other time, as it also relates to the growth of bureaucracy, that dreaded red tape, and some other things.)

I enjoy shounen stories, but I'm also glad I live in a world where I, personally, don't have to get into those sorts of fights. Really, the vast majority of us don't.  The fact that so many people are able to peacefully get fat and out of shape is a sign of strength, it shows that we don't live in a society where you have to be physically strong in order to feel safe and secure. (I can unpack that a lot more too, but I don't feel like going on that tangent right now.)

Shifting gears to apocalyptic movies for a moment - the fantasy is that disaster strikes and you can become the hero of the day, kicking ass and taking names. Civilization dies, it becomes a wild world of open competition, and you're able to compete in a way modern society frowns upon... and the fantasy is that you will win. Tbh, if any of those events happened for real I know where I would most likely be - dead. Like trips to a Holocaust museum as a kid, where they hand out the piece of paper showing your likely fate... statistically making it match what happened. The vast majority die, and you only hear/read about the ones who don't because they survived.

I can enjoy those sorts of stories while fully acknowledging that I don't really want to live in such a world, because I'm probably not going to be the 'Number One Hero', or 'Hokage', or whatever.

So many of the villains seem motivated to show how 'fragile' concepts like justice or peace is, and yet I find that a boring motivation because peace has always been fragile. I mean, Edgar Rice Burroughs touches on this with his Tarzan books, racist though they were. He's basically pointing out that when you strip away civilization Tarzan (and others) easily become the animals we are underneath. Hell, you see that when you deploy with the military... how fragile social norms truly are.

Kenichi has this great little bit where his opponent wants him to join his organization, and Kenichi asks what the point of doing so is. Okay, so you get stronger... then what? Okay, you're strongest... what are you going to do with that power?  What world will you create with the strength that you have?

In the back of my head, I recall a random tidbit from somewhere, where it described a young schoolkid who was impressive mostly because of the maturity he showed when it came to wielding his power/influence among his peers. So much of that middle school/high school drama is, in part, from people not knowing how to do that well.

'Well', I suppose, depends on your personal take on that, though.

Do you want to grow strong, do you want power and influence, so that you can lord it over everyone else? Got sick of being lorded over, so you're going to do what it takes to make sure you're on top... and then do the very things to everyone else that motivated you to get stronger in the first place? (I can sort of follow that logic, though I don't really agree with it. Just perpetuates the cycle pointlessly, to my mind. But I get that, if you buy into that way of thinking, then you start feeling like it's okay to oppress anyone weaker than you because might = right.)

We frown on the concept of warlords, consider past history brutal whenever we entered an era where physical force decided who was right, looked badly on Saddam Hussein and all the other wannabe dictators... and so it's worth asking how we got away from that. What parts of society allow us to live in a world where might doesn't equal right? And why do we value that so much, in the first place?

I don't have a solid answer, though I've got some initial thoughts. Why we value it, well... we all are weak sometimes. Whether it's because we're young, or old, or sick... every single person will be weak at some point in their life. The whole 'might = right, strength and power allow you to lord it over everyone else' mindset creates a world where the majority of people are constantly miserable. Even if you are lucky enough to make it to the top for a time, it won't last. Putting in social conventions that mitigate such a brutal world make everyone happier, ultimately. (But it doesn't satisfy that desire to prove yourself and compete, which is probably part of why we sometimes resent it.)

Which is why there are always at least a few people who grow strong in order to change that mentality. The 'heroes' in most shounen. The ones who fight to protect, or save. The ones who try to stop villains so that ordinary, every day (weak, sometimes stupid) people can live their lives without having to worry about such threats.

Spiderman's notion that 'with great power comes great responsibility.'

Of course, such strength isn't always physical. Often times isn't, actually. Since groups can beat individuals, leaders that can organize a group can often beat a single physically strong opponent. (Kenichi sort of gets into this, since his 'very bad friend' is horribly weak and somehow manages to lead an organization... in an unethical way.)

But... leadership is a two way street. People choose who they follow, and who they choose gives strength to that leader's worldview, allowing them to shape the every day world we live in. (Samurai Champloo had an interesting episode that sort of covered this. A 'good' yakuzu leader in a town was being challenged by a more malicious one, and the 'good' leader lost supporters who went over to the more apparently strong one. The 'good' leader never really changed his way of thinking, and ultimately didn't win on a personal level, but his way of leading inspired one of his former subordinates to change sides, so in a way it ultimately led to a 'win'.)

We are often easily taken by the notion that 'strength' is someone like Putin or Trump, and people who want to be on the winning side will follow that sort of 'strength'. But I think it's more important to ask yourself what sort of world that person is creating, and to follow the leaders who create the kind of world you want to live in.

I suppose that's my true grief with Trump, tbh. I don't like the world he's creating. I don't like the way he uses his power and influence. So I would rather do my part by supporting another type of leader.

Anyways. In a somewhat similar vein, the grief I have with the ultra-rich is that they are in positions of power and influence, they have resources to do things I can only dream of doing - and yet most of them are, well... to be fair just ordinary human beings trying to live their lives the best they can... but the result is that far too many of them don't use that power/influence in a knowledgeable way to consciously shape the world for the better. (Ugh, that sentence doesn't capture what I mean very well, but it's the best I can do without writing a whole other page... and this has gone on long enough already.)

All that potential to shape the world, and so few with any real idea of how to use it.

What a waste.

(Sucks to add more after what seems like a good stopping point, but I felt the need for this: I don't actually know enough wealthy people to say that they have no real idea how to use their power, and many do try to influence the world. It just seems to me that most of their attempts are in... let's just say conventional ways. It's part of why we seem to live in a world where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Like a martial artist who gets strong in order to do what they want without repercussion.

Some do appear to be using their resources to make a difference, and I don't really want to dismiss things like Bill Gates and his efforts against malaria. I've always thought, though, that if I had the resources I'd try to test out a few specific ideas - one, finding 'tipping points' where the right resources can really help a community save itself, i.e. empowering people to find their own solutions, using  results-based techniques to adjust as needed for success - and two, see how long term engagement on a local level can lead to larger changes on a national level.  I dunno, when you've got people like Harris Rosen showing how much of a difference one wealthy individual can make to a particular community the idea that some wealthy person feels like writing a large check to their charity-of-choice is enough feels somehow... uncreative. Especially since so much philanthropy is used either to - perhaps not knowingly - support your own self-interest like the Koch brothers or to virtue-signal. It's just something to help you feel good about yourself without necessarily being involved enough to make a difference. And whew, there's a lot to unpack with that statement, too. But I'm tired of writing this post, so maybe another time.)

Update

Nothing really new to say, just anxiously waiting to find out if I got the job (final interview was Friday, and although I didn't answer everything perfectly my main argument is that I learn fast and know how to look things up to figure out the answers. The interview did go over the allotted time, which I've been told is normally a good sign?) I could go back and forth reading into the interview to see whether I will get an offer or not, but that's generally a pointless endeavor.

So I am escaping the whirlwind of anxious thoughts by watching anime, which shouldn't come as any sort of surprise, right? Hopefully I hear something good. Hopefully tomorrow.

Oh geez

My Hero Academia has some interesting counterinsurgency themes. Or rather, the episode I just watched sort of shows the development of a villain insurgency, and it's interesting the role defeating a certain villain had in building that.

Driven vs Called, Mediocrity, and Other Things

First, the good news. I had my first in-person interview for a position yesterday (after a phone interview before Christmas), and now have another interview scheduled for Friday. This is apparently the last step, so wish me luck!

I have been alternating between reviewing some of my course material (particularly for the CISSP, as well as some Linux admin) and watching anime/reading manga and finally decided to watch a bit more of My Hero Academia. I had watched the first couple of episodes a while back, since it's a fairly popular anime and seemed suited to my tastes, but I found the main character a bit too annoying at the time.

That is, I know stories like this are all about the development of the main character and they can't start out too awesome, but I decided not to keep watching it at that time.

Now that I've come back to it, well, it's got some interesting themes. (And really, isn't it fascinating how different stories can explore entirely different themes, even when there are superficial similarities? One Punch Man and My Hero Academia have some similarities in that there are superheroes and some interesting takes on what a superhero culture is like... especially as popularity and showmanship can play a greater role than power or morally 'good' behavior in making a superhero... but they also have completely different underlying themes.) I also found some of the more poignant bits the way that the main character knows something nobody else does about his idol *spoiler* His idol - All Might - had been severely injured in a previous fight and can only use his powers for a limited time. In one particular fight scene, all the protagonist's classmates were thrilled and relieved when All Might came to defeat the bad guys, and only the protagonist knew that the last minutes of the confrontation were probably pure bluff on All Might's part. It added a new dynamic to the entire fight scene. *end spoiler*

Anyways. The class of wannabe superheroes are competing (as so many shounen manga like to do), and as usual their all driven in various ways. But it makes me think...

Well, part of the point of the last few competitions was to show how tenacious these kids have to be if they want to make it big. Striving even when all hope seems lost, giving it their all. And on the one hand, it's admirable. They really grow into amazing characters through their struggles. At the same time, only one person is actually going to be the 'winner', and in some ways it seems ridiculous how unwilling some of the characters are to accept second or third.

Like, you showed some amazing skills and worked your hardest, any of the recruiters watching could see you'd be pretty good at what you want to do, and in life there's pretty much always someone stronger and better. You'll win some, you'll lose some, and you'll learn and grow along the way, and that's pretty much life. (Oh, and then you reach peak performance, only to start aging and weakening along the way.  So even if you grow to be amazingly strong, eventually you'll lose to someone younger... or, perhaps, be lucky enough to die undefeated of old age.) Someone once said that in writing, good characters are obsessed. They will go to unrealistic lengths to achieve a goal. Like Orpheus, grieving the loss of a loved one and willing to brave the underworld to recover her. Everyone grieves, everyone loses loved ones, and shouldn't we want to bring them back if there was any way possible? And yet... isn't it also, well... there are so many (completely fictional!) stories of people doing something risky or unethical in order to bring a loved one back to life, and in some ways it's not normal or healthy. Understandable, but not really a good sign.

But I digress. Striving to succeed is good, developing yourself to your full potential is good, and competition can help spur people to take that extra step... but it can also make things very unpleasant when you (inevitably) face failure. If you want to waste a large portion of it feeling angry and resentful over every loss, that sort of seems like an unpleasant way to spend your life... but it can produce great results, so who am I to judge?

It makes me think about the real world, though. About how driven people are to succeed. About what pushes people to become pro-baseball players, or CEOs, or President of the US. It reminds me of articles I've read, about how so many rich people see the world as a competition that they have to win.

I'm not so sure they're really happy, you know. Seeing the world like that. Oh, sure, it's nice to have financial security. I am definitely envious of that (especially in my current state of uncertainty). But people take for granted what they have, they get used to it. Don't think about it. And from what I've seen too many people who are well off and financially secure get caught up in comparing themselves to others, and realizing that they're not at the top. It's the whole 'keeping up with the Joneses' thing, who cares if they're making six figures when they can see and interact with people making a lot more than that?

In some ways, it also makes me... sad. As they say, it's about the journey and not the destination... and people can be driven to such a degree that they miss out entirely on the journey. Like the classic trope of a businessman too busy to spend time with his son, or having his wife walk out on him because he's never home. (And the trope is almost inevitably about a man.)

These (completely fictional kids) are driven, and at this point in their development it's kind of a good thing. They're building bonds and making memories and whatnot. But there may come a time when it's not. Or rather, if they were real kids rather than fictional, they would. This particular show is pointing out some of what it takes to be number one, showing how during the competition even your friends may not be your allies. How drive and tenacity can make all the difference between mediocrity and being in the top tier.

But... is that necessarily a good thing?

I titled this 'driven vs. called', but I haven't really touched on that yet. It goes back to something an aunt of mine said, years ago, that I like to think is an important distinction. I acknowledge that to be really good at something you have to put in the time and effort. And even something you thoroughly enjoy will sometimes require doing 'work' that you don't.

However...

I also think there's a difference between being passionate about something in a positive way (i.e. 'called', because if you are really passionate about whatever-it-is, you enjoy it so much that you think about it in your free time, are driven to master the skills needed, and the push to perform comes almost natural as you do something you love) vs. being motivated in a negative way, whether it's fear of being a failure or fear that you're only loved so long as you're a winner, or whatever other negative emotion pushes you to perform. (i.e. 'driven' like a sheep being herded with painful nips by a cattle dog. Maybe you don't really want to go in that direction, maybe you'd be happier elsewhere, but those damn nips are so painful that you're going to run as hard and fast as you can.)

I also wonder, sometimes, how many people are competing in areas that aren't truly their passion simply because of such drives. You know... like power, fame, and fortune. A lot of people want to feel like they have some say over their world. Want to wield power and influence.

And history consistently shows that any time such things come into play people inevitably start gaming the system to make sure they are the ones on top. I wonder how much of the rise and fall of nations is tied to that? It's all too predictable, and I keep wondering why it's so hard to see in real time. You know... like how did the French aristocrats not see the French revolution coming? Why do those who originally seemed to rise meritocratically inevitably turn into a corrupt and decadent class? It's not just the French aristocrats. There were also the Janissaries and Mamluks, and plenty more.

It's like... something about establishing a path to power, fame, and fortune draws people who destroy the very things that made it a success in the first place. And I think some of that is because the people coming are 'driven', not called by a passion for... I dunno... good governance, but driven by their desire for power, fame, and/or fortune.

And so they care more about winning than they do about actually doing the job they're supposed to.

Hmmm. Well, this wandered in an odd little direction and I don't really have any hard conclusions about the things I've pondered here, but that's probably enough for now. 

Good Twitter Thread on Talent and Opportunity

Check out @mekkaokereke’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/mekkaokereke/status/1081619342377156608?s=09

Machine Learning Proves Yet Again - Garbage In, Garbage Out

I always find it fascinating when computers do as they're instructed, and the results aren't what was intended.