Should we start with how the concepts of left and right are nonsense?

It wasn't a thing at the beginning of US politics. It happened a little later, during the French Revolution. Supporters of the king would sit to his right during the National Assembly, and the revolutionaries sat to his left. We would recognize the polarization that set this in action; they changed seats to avoid the slurs and insults of the opposition.

Let's not dwell on the French Revolution too long, it's as fascinating as a car crash.

It makes sense for a society to cleave itself into opposing camps when confronted with a truly divisive question, with only two apparent choices. It doesn't make sense when society stretches to confront more than ten disconnected divisive questions, some of which appear to have infinite solutions.

On this shaky foundation, 'centrism' might mean a variety of things, depending on context. It could be a desire for a moderate approach to one or more divisive issues, such as abortion. It could mean a mix of perspectives from the left and right; whatever quantity is needed to break loyalty to one tribe. It might be an aesthetic aversion to divisive rhetoric. It could be cover for an unpalatable or unjustifiable position (often support for Trump). It could even be an awkward desire for entertainment devoid of smug political messaging.

At best, it is an understanding that the correct path is often unclear and that vigorous debate is needed to discover the way.

If we are trying to draw a line from the French assembly to modern times, the spectrum is an indication of how comfortable one is with traditional structures of authority. Self-described centrists or independents might be loathe to throw in with one party, but they have some comfort with the existing government structure (capitalistic liberal democracy), and probably conform to popular views around religion and relationship structures. This is why, under pressure, centrists tend to veer right. (I'm referring to average voters here, not audience-captured media personalities.)

Traditional structures of authority aren't doing a direct power grab, at least not yet. The current primary objective of the right is to weaken the central government as much as possible, on the assumption that local governments, religions, businesses, and families will rush to fill in the vacuum. This is starting to break down, in response to the leftward swing of big business.

'First do no harm' is a laudable approach to politics. In polarized times, if the right doesn't plan to create new laws, and resists political expansion, well, I can see why they gain the support of the center.

If the right rejects the small government approach and slides towards theocratic nationalism, it's time for the center to bail. The way I read current Supreme Court decisions, that time has already arrived.

*****

I'm not on the left, as constituted these days, because of the bleak religious overtones. Certain words, foods, and other behaviors are forbidden. Society is stratified into a caste system of intersecting combinations of race and gender, some to be considered sacred, others scorned. Everything is broken and doomed, and the best you can do is to be open about the mental illness you are struggling with.

I'm not on the right, because the only appealing aspect it has is the critique of the left. I like freedom. Faith, family, and tradition sound boring to me. If I was walking through the woods and came across Chesterton's Fence, I would blow it up to see if it was hiding a cool secret path.

Although this stance puts me closer to the Libertarians, fully unregulated capitalism seems like a mistake. Tyranny can come at you from any direction.

And I'm not in the center, because I'm not trying to fit my entire perspective into a tweet. As you can see, I'm willing to type out 662 words to really flesh out my views.

Call me 'unaffiliated' instead. Sounds more rebellious.

Worked: Writing a Blog
This has been a fun experience so far. I know that eventually, I'll have to scale back my trend of posting every day, or I'll try tweaking the formula in other ways. Since no one else is reading this (for now), I'm just throwing spaghetti at the wall without even checking to see what sticks.

Played: The Quarry
A gory, formulaic horror movie, converted into a computer game format where you can save or kill all of the major characters. Thoroughly enjoyed it! The plot is a little overstuffed, like three different 'Cabin in the Woods' scenarios are mashed together, but everything is satisfyingly tied together at the latest possible moment. The best jokes happen when someone stubs a toe; the camp counselors have clearly had to censor themselves while surrounded by kids the past couple of months.

Of the actors I recognized, Grace Zabriskie is the only one who gets much to do. That's fine though; slasher movies are one of the few genres that can put unknown actors at the center of the action. The importance of celebrities in film financing seems inevitable now, but as productions move away from Hollywood and costs drop, it would be cool to get away from this trend.

Listened: Chappell Roan
I don't know how people listen to new music these days. As much as I love streaming services like Spotify, they are usually content to feed you what you have been listening to all your life. There's no huge omnipresent media empire dishing out new music, the way radio or MTV once did. But if you go out of your way to find new acts, you might notice that Chappell Roan is dominating attention spans.

I have a theory for why. Outside of her obvious creativity, talent, catchy production, and the like.

Her music is upbeat synthpop that echoes the 1980s without retreading the styles. Her fashion style is ostentatious, influenced by the drag queen scene. Her lyrics evoke a young, sex-positive, optimistic worldview.

She's like, the exact opposite of the bad vibes the culture has been mired in for years.

Visited: Red Dwarf (Las Vegas)
I have fun every time I visit this bar. It's sort of halfway between a punk dive and tiki bar. They have a giant twenty-sided die if you want to try a random beer and shot. And as a friend pointed out last night, the lack of gaming machines means that everyone is forced to socialize.

I used to have a profoundly gloomy outlook on climate change. Full-on multi-year existential crisis. My first thought on waking up in the morning was the death of all life on earth. I would be sitting at a party, thinking about how it was already too late.

A random internet comment changed my mind.

It was in a private group from years ago, so I can't attribute this, or get the wording right. But here's the gist:

We should always assume there will be a future. If there is, and we haven't planned for it, the opportunity cost is too great. If there isn't, we lose nothing by planning anyways.

*****

In the years since I read that, there have been some impressive innovations in clean energy. We witnessed the rapid overhaul of the world's economy at the beginning of the pandemic. There is a new technology boom based around artificial intelligence (or large language models for now).

The news around climate change seems to be getting worse, but I think that's mostly a result of social sorting. The bad news is written by those with a negative outlook, for those with a negative outlook. Good news doesn't spread and is also difficult to recognize in this field. And the partisan influence means that the sides don't easily communicate with each other.

Intelligent people tend to become snared in philosophical traps of their own creation. If you spend a few hours learning about the carbon deposits trapped in the Arctic permafrost, this could cause you to become a climate doomer. But you could also spend a few hours learning about misaligned AI, or falling birth rates, or global jihadism, and become a doomer trapped in an alternate narrative.

If your friends also believe this narrative, or worse, your paycheck depends on your faith in this narrative, you could be here your entire life.

The alternative is also scary, in a way. It is to admit that we don't know what we don't know. Committing to any narrative, even a self-destructive one, provides the comfort of certainty.

Embracing uncertainty provides a different comfort. The sense that whatever is coming, you can handle it.

*****

We are here to solve problems. It is our core purpose.

Some problems have no apparent solution, but time reveals new technologies and new paths.

Even if hope is a mistake, fatalism is a distraction.

We don't know enough to be afraid.

*****

BONUS CONTENT - Here's some miscellaneous advice on how to adapt to the future.

Although it's useful to resist a nihilistic mindset, there is still a lot to gain from communicating with people you disagree with. Every protester has some element of truth in their message. Balancing these influences is tough, but illuminating.

Give less weight to what influential people say, and more to where they invest their time and money.

Practice creativity. By creativity, I mean anything an AI assistant can't replicate.

There are several ways to create a career that is ahead of the technology curve. Maslow's hierarchy of needs is eternal.

Have a good time! The future is your new hangout.

I'm doing something a little different today. I'm journaling my thought process on which specializations I'll be writing about.

Yesterday I joined the Location Rebel Academy. I'm enjoying the course so far. Although I read a ways past this point, I'm circling back to the lesson 'How to Choose What You’re Specializing In'. I'm not going to retype the whole lesson, but if you are hung up similarly, you should be able to follow my method.

I am very resistant to the idea of nailing myself down to one niche. I even had the motto 'NICHES ARE LEASHES' on my homepage. I took it off when I thought more about who would see my page at this stage. There's nothing wrong with checking out someone's page to see what they can write. (I'll have to do it myself, to complete some networking steps later in the course.)

The first advice in the article is to find an industry, and then specialize in a niche. After this, financial services, insurance, technology, and health are listed as profitable niches.

I can cross two off the list right away. I don't believe in insurance, so I won't be able to write effectively to those who buy or sell it. I also don't enjoy writing about health. I know a little about dieting, but I outsource my workout plans to an app, and I can't even watch TV shows about doctors.

My relationship with technology is more complex. I struggle to stay awake in conversations about cars, or smartphone capabilities. But any time that technology overlaps with my core interests in business, politics, or entertainment, I'm intrigued.

Wait a sec. How did I figure out my core interests? I placed the question in the back of my mind for a few weeks. I paid attention to the media I was drawn to consume. And I asked myself what I could contribute to these spheres.

Business is obvious. Anyone who is drawn to the idea of going into business for themselves has an interest in the meta-discipline. Entrepreneurship in particular is a lucrative but crowded field. I think my political stance sets me apart. Since I come from a political tribe that is skeptical of capitalism, I know how alienating much of the space can be to this tribe. I think I am more willing to navigate that resistance, and to ignore the audience that seeks wealth while ignoring politics. This only works because I'm crazy enough to talk about both fields at the same time.

Politics is not obvious. I don't want to spend much time advocating for a party or cause. (This should be easier when Trump leaves the stage.) However, the past few years convinced me that society needs ways to communicate around political chasms. Also, the political space profoundly needs more participants who aren't outrage farmers. I'm not sure if there is much financial incentive to this approach. My theory is that I will gain the trust of a few by communicating clearly, and inadvertently angering the rest might help with traffic.

Entertainment is just a great secret sauce. It's my excuse for writing about whatever I want. It's another crowded field, but I know how to focus on obscure trends and media that haven't hit the mainstream yet.

A cool byproduct of narrowing down to these three interests is that they combine in interesting ways. I hope you're this lucky.

*****

You can tell that I write these blog posts with no outline. Here comes an awkward transition back to the lesson.

When choosing freelance jobs, you have to choose between pay and prestige. Easy enough. I wasn't planning to apply to high-competition sites or magazines anyways. Maybe a ways in the future, but it's not a personal goal.

For choosing a type of content, I might have already done this. I'm demonstrating that it is easy for me to crank out blog posts. But in the future, I would like to write scripts (for YouTube influencers and films), maybe a handful of books, and some copywriting gigs just for the filthy lucre.

Next is taking an inventory of current skills. Let's go through each of the prompt questions:

Where do you have the most experience?
I worked in transportation for twenty years, but I'm not sure how actionable the knowledge I gained is. For over a year I coordinated electrical needs at conventions, where I learned some things that could potentially save a lot of people money and frustration. I worked at the county election department in a few roles; though what I learned there isn't as valuable, the knowledge supports my interest in politics. I've learned so much recently by training AI models. And in other jobs, I picked up all kinds of things, like what door-to-door salesmen notice about a house before they knock on the door. This doesn't even touch what I have learned outside of employment, or how many podcasts I listened to during that twenty-year data entry stint.

Where do you have the most expertise?
I don't know how to answer this one, but the answers around it are strong enough that I probably don't need to.

Do you really enjoy anything on the list?
Yes. I enjoyed the creative aspect of crafting AI prompts, which I know I can divert into writing. A common thread through some of the other jobs is that I appreciated helping others navigate difficult topics.

Can this industry pay? (some industries pay better than others)
As I mentioned earlier, I have some hunches. I need to do more research.

If I had to pick one thing to write 700 words on today, what would it be?
I feel like I'm writing it now. But if I had to narrow to one industry, writing ties everything together. AI is a close second. And third, convention work likely has the most untapped potential.

The next step in the lesson, 'researching your potential ideas', will be too lengthy to include in this post. So is 'make a big list of places and people in your niche', which suggests a minimum of 100.

The last step is 'just start'. With that in mind, this is the first post I'll link to X, disordered as it is. I'm expecting my specialties to narrow a lot over time, just because writing creates the path.

I'll be voting for Kamala Harris in the general election. Quick turnaround, considering how long this blog has been active.

I'm not excited by her policies. However, she didn't instigate a violent coup as a distraction to steal the presidency with false electors. She wasn't found liable for sexual assault. She's not obviously too old to do the job.

We can worry about electing candidates with good political platforms once the incompetent ones are out of the way.

I blame Trump's fan club for the debased way politics has been discussed in the last decade. But the class of 'centrist' commentators that simply spent the years talking around Trump are starting to let the mask slip now. I thought of myself as on the centrist wavelength because the online left and right are alienating milieus. It made sense to avoid talking about narcissists; attention is their oxygen. But if this was a rhetorical arrangement to enable Trump supporters to avoid making an intellectual case for their candidate, it's time to remove the veil. (I'm not referring to centrists that refuse to vote.)

I'm sympathetic to the critique that Harris is a cop. As district attorney, she had far too many convictions for nonviolent drug offenses. But there is still no alternative within the two major political parties. Republican talking points on small government have always been hollow when on the subject of drug policy. Convictions for sex work follow the same reasoning.

It isn't great that Harris helped to shield the public from knowing the extent of Biden's mental decline. I won't defend that. I also don't expect anything more from those in Trump's orbit, where any principle beyond loyalty would get them tossed. We already know that they would shield the public from knowledge of Trump's mental decline.

Aside from concerns that are too sexist or frivolous to address, the only remaining argument against Harris that I see is that she is a 'DEI candidate'. This phrase isn't a coherent critique. It is a way to remind partisans of where their loyalties lie.

I don't want to create my entire media identity railing for or against 'diversity, equity and inclusion', though there's money in that back and forth. To me, it makes sense to put a thumb on the scales to correct for historic injustice, IF there is planned obsolescence incorporated into the action. I don't like the left-wing view that the problems of discrimination are intractable, any more than the right-wing view that they are all in the past. Politics might be the worst realm to try to hash out these questions.

Taking a side is not as cool as sitting on the margins, hoping that both candidates lose. But I'm a dog owner. Sometimes you have to reward good behavior and punish bad.

This was a lengthy polemic on the necessity of US governmental oversight on the development of superintelligence over the next decade. There was a particular emphasis on the influence of China as a potential rival best suited to reach AI dominance during this time, due to lax security standards currently at AI labs. The existential risks of AI development were a backdrop to the thrust of the argument.

The premise is compelling enough for me to agree with. Sort of. The line between AI applications that require military command and civilian uses becomes blurry or nonexistent on many parts of the map. I'm not totally bought into the allegory of the Oppenheimer moment (the paper contained several references to Los Alamos) because the trajectory of the technology is reversed. The positive applications of nuclear power were downstream of the bomb. The negative applications of AI are downstream of a benign process of step-by-step learning, iterated at speed beyond human reaction. It seems clear to me that some directions AI takes will require immediate government involvement, but many other paths will be contested. For example, at what point does medical research become dangerous enough to require DOD oversight?

China's dominance is not an optimal outcome. But if they have a decisive edge in the next decade, this doesn't seem irreversible. I'm not convinced that the dominant AI model would be tied to geography, via power demands or any other bottleneck. It's not even clear what dominance would look like. What if the fastest superintelligence had blind spots that could be exploited by an opposing AI force? What if China had a superior power grid that was exploited by one or more invisible US models?

This was a useful corrective to doomer and accelerationist narratives.

I have always thought that the 'alpha wolf' idea was nonsense.

The meme has floated around the culture for as long as I can remember, but it's based on faulty research. Decades ago, research on captive wolves misinterpreted their behavior. In the wild, wolf packs are generally a breeding couple and their pups. Removed from their families and thrown in an unfamiliar setting, you get the cruel dominance games that can be seen in human prisons.

I don't know if humans are innately meant to exist within a dominance hierarchy. I imagine that some vibe with that arrangement, based on personality. (Jordan Peterson fans seem to prefer it.) The variable is the option to rebel against or escape the hierarchy.

(The current political climate could be viewed as a desperate struggle between two groups rebelling against perceived hierarchies, while a much smaller number try to seize dominance. These groups aren't trapped in a prison together, but they are conceptually bound together by both a federal government and social media structure. Neither works very well.)

Still, some guys love the wolf metaphor. I just saw a thread breaking down various film characters into 'delta wolf' 'sigma wolf' and other wolf categories. Of course, it was hawking a guide that would turn every reader into an alpha wolf. Everyone gets a trophy, I guess.

The narrative is wrong, but it might improve your life anyways if you believe in it.

This goes for any belief system (or BS).

Every religion is wrong. At least, we can agree most of them are wrong. But religious people tend to have longer, happier lives.

Every political ideology is wrong. At least, we can agree most of them are wrong. But ideologues tend to have more friends and better social cohesion within their spheres.

In the 2011 film The Grey, survivors of a plane crash face off against a stunningly unscientific wolf pack, led by an alpha the size of a grizzly. This is not what the story is about. As the survivors realize that they are about to die, they interrogate the internal narratives that led them to this point. They know what will happen next, and question whether these stories serve as a suitable companion for the journey.

In that sense, the alpha wolf is very real. And we will all have to fight it someday.

​I hope you go down swinging.

Before I created this website, I wrote about two weeks' worth of posts. This morning, I planned to fish one out of the hopper to meet my schedule. I didn't like any of them.

My greatest shortcoming as a writer is the tendency to be hypercritical. In the past, this meant that the novel, screenplay, or whatever other project I was working on would eventually end up in the trash. Resetting to zero always seemed like the safer option.

To meet my schedule, I've decided to be less embarrassed by what I have written, and more embarrassed by what I haven't.

People tend to change for two reasons. They either take incremental steps, or they have been backed into a corner and need to make big changes fast.

This is direct advice for people that have been backed into a corner.

If you are in physical danger right now, get to safety.

Next, grab a pencil and paper, so you can visualize your situation. Write down how many systems are in crisis, with space between each entry.

For example, someone doing this exercise could write down 'close to getting fired', 'intense anxiety and related mental health', 'debt', 'can't talk to spouse', etc. Don't worry about getting it exact. In this example, maybe the person doing this exercise didn't write 'suicidal' or 'addicted to painkillers' because they weren't ready to admit these problems to themselves. Or they wrote 'close to getting fired' even though, if they had a moment to think about it, their situation would be improved by leaving their job. This list doesn't need to be accurate, because you are simply prioritizing what to focus on next.

Now, write numbers next to each entry, in order of most to least pressing. In order of importance, jot down a potential course of action for each step. If needed, expand an entry into multiple steps. 'Debt' could become 'rent', 'credit card debt', 'owe the mafia', and 'other debts', which you would prioritize now by physical safety, and later by a debt reduction plan.

If one of these steps requires immediate action, take it. Pay the bill. Have the tough conversation. Do it now.

Next, review the most pressing item that does not require immediate attention. If it needs to be done by the end of the day, do it.

At this point, you may want to reach out to someone, like a therapist or impartial friend. You have enough clarity to explain your problems and get a different perspective. If you don't have someone you can talk to, that's okay. You still have someone in your corner that is looking out for you. Yourself.

The most immediate steps are taken care of. You likely need to rest. Even if anxiety keeps you awake, lying down can give you energy for the next step.

The next day, review the list and see if it still makes sense.

A silver lining to crisis is that you don't have your standard excuses not to change your behavior. You might have to do something different, right away. If you create a new problem for yourself, try to observe this behavior as neutrally as you can. Add a new item to the list, if needed.

It is up to you to decide the point when the crisis has passed. If it helps you proceed, you can burn the paper.

Note for July 2024 - If you are in crisis and need someone to talk to, email me.

Most people who give life advice have something about their personality that is a little daunting. Whenever I read, watch, or listen to someone describe how to get ahead in life, there is always a part of my brain that thinks 'Easy for you to say'. 
  
Let's indulge the shadow for a minute. The content creator you admire has reached a kind of success that you will never achieve. They all have certain advantages that were determined at birth, an intertwining of nature and nurture gave them specific characteristics that you will not be able to exactly replicate. Even if they didn't draw on a resource like inherited wealth, they used creativity to add value. If you took the exact path they did without creativity, you are joining the cycle deep in the diminishing returns phase. 
  
I don't know your life. But I know that if you have an internal monologue, part of it is afraid of success. Success is change, and change is scary. Your mind will serve up one excuse after another as to why change is impossible. 
  
The most powerful excuse your mind has is based on evidence. Change is impossible because you haven't changed yet. 
  
But another part of you wants to start somewhere. 
  
People tend to change for two reasons. They take incremental steps, or they have been backed into a corner, and they need to make big changes fast. 
  
This bit of advice here is for someone who is mostly comfortable, but curious about the smallest incremental steps they can take. 
  
We're not going to start a journal and map out our true purpose today, or anything scary like that. We're reserving that for the 'backed in a corner' advice. 
  
Today, you spent your day doing what you are adapted to do. You are very skilled at the strategies that you use to get through your day, however you do it. That is the first thing you have to grasp. You have a skillset. If your situation changed, you would develop new skills to navigate that new environment. 
  
The second thing to understand is that there are a limited number of hours in a day. You will be asleep for part of them, and sleep is vital. You likely have a job, or school, or something that you have to spend a lot of time and mental energy on. And the time you have left might default to some kind of mindless entertainment, because you don't have the energy or inclination for much else. 
  
You're not going to hear this from many other people, but it's okay to multitask. 
  
The research is pretty clear that the human mind can only focus on one task at a time. If you are studying for a test, you will get better results the more distractions you can shut out. 
  
But the amount of time you can spend on deep work in a day is only a few hours. You can't spend all your waking hours focused on studying. Your job, school, or family might already leave you too mentally exhausted to do much more. If you are already too drained to focus on anything, or you only spend your time on mindless entertainment, multitasking won’t make anything worse. 
  
Let's say that you often spend several hours a day playing video games. I'm right there with you. I love gaming. But if I'm playing a game that isn't driven by narrative, I am shutting off the game music and listening to a video or a podcast. Most recently, I absorbed two four-hour courses on copywriting and technical writing. I wasn't fully focused on them, so my retention isn't going to be great. I can't recite chapter and verse on these videos. But I know more about these subjects than I did. I have a general sense of how to break into these fields, who would be interested in doing them full-time, what kind of money can be made in them, etc. I also know how to proceed with follow-up research, if I want to do a deep dive. 
  
If I am spending a chunk of time commuting or washing dishes, I sometimes throw on a podcast on something I want to know more about. That might be an addition that works for you. 
  
The third kind of multitasking is when you are mostly focused on one activity. You want the task to take up most of your attention, but you are throwing on some background music to stay engaged. Or maybe you grab a snack while still mostly engaged. This is probably fine. Experiment. See what works for you. Try different music genres and lower volume. 
  
If multitasking doesn't appeal, another option is the ten-minute dip. Find ten minutes in your day to take a walk, meditate, or research a subject. As the days go by, you can accumulate a lot of gains from repeatedly doing something for ten minutes. 
  
These suggestions are not meant to be a camel nose in the tent. I'm not trying to realign your entire life so that you spend ten hours a day in the gym and ten hours meditating and ten hours cold calling sales leads. Fuck all that. I am trying to spark your curiosity about what could happen if you make the smallest possible changes. 
  
I mentioned taking a walk before. This is the easiest exercise to fit into any schedule. If you're intimidated by the idea of opening the door to a gym, try taking a walk. Figure out what you need for safety and sun protection, and try it. 
  
Maybe you want to change your diet. When I did this, the first thing I changed was breakfast. It used to be sugary cereals and soda, and now it's black coffee and Greek yogurt. What I figured out is that I don't have the energy to make decisions first thing in the morning, so a long-term habit would stick. If you're trying to change up dinner, you have all day to talk yourself out of eating the healthy option. 
  
I focused on the span of one day in case, like me, you have trouble with anxiety. It's easy to get overwhelmed when you think about the future. But if you focus on how to get through the day, you'll be fine. ​