I haven’t updated this site in over a month now and have subsequently concluded that I’ve written my last article as earthlingconcerned. Thanks to some luck, and much persistance, there have been over 85,000 page views to this site.

Thanks for all of your interst and support! Granted, a lot of the traffic came in brief periods (thanks to fark, metafilter, netscape and a few other link sites out there). It was fun while it lasted. I’m still very interested in writing and most everything I’ve written here is still very close to my heart, but my day job has made it a lot tougher for me to keep updating this blog regularily.

So instead, if you care, I’ll be a contributing writer to the Canadian stories site called MyCitySpace.

Check it out if you’re interested. I’ll be contributing under the name of ‘Andre’, as that is my name.

I was waiting for the same street car that always takes me to work, listening to the same music, breathing the same air, when someone new came my way. It was a lady, unkempt and tired looking. My first instinct was to believe that she was homeless and would subsequently ask me for money. She did. Her voice was shaky and on the verge of tears when she did, “My boyfriend just beat me, do you have any money so I can get on the GO train to get home?” I looked at her as she pointed to her partially swollen eye. I noticed scratches on her hands and realized I couldn’t simply ignore this call for help. So I quickly thought about what I had in my pocket. I had $33.00 in my wallet. This was enough money for her to get anywhere she wanted and then some. I looked down the street for my own street car, as if an answer lay therein, before reaching into my pockets. “I can give you $3.00,” I said this and gave her the money before continuing, “you should tell the police about this.” She replied, “I’m too scared that he’ll hit me again, thank you.” Then walked away from whence she came.

So what made this strangers suffering worth $3.00 to me? I’m not quite sure I can answer the question completely but I know I had to have some money for lunch, I knew I had to have some money for more TTC tokens, but most of all, I just wasn’t sure who she was. In the same way that I often hesitate to give money to those on the streets because of a social order imprinted into my psyche that there’s a chance the money will be used for drugs, or alcohol, or any number of other vices that keep the cycle of neglect going. But shouldn’t this have been different? There were physical and emotional signs of abuse found in her appeal. $3.00 was about half of what she needed for the ticket home if she was being honest. I am part of the world and the world is a part of me. I have a fairly good understanding of the suffering that takes place on this planet on a daily basis but know that if I become to preoccupied with it, it will tear me apart. The horrible nature of my own self is this, I have to remain ignorant of many of these things. I can’t save the world with the wave of my wand in the same way that Rome wasn’t built in a day. So there I was, on my way to work, doing my own thing, when I was confronted with a potential victim of physical abuse and I responded. Why $3.00? Subconsciously, I must have known that when I stepped foot on that street car, I would never have to see her again.

Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Adam Gadahn seems to fit these specifications. Levying war? He has most definitely threatened the country with further terrorist attacks, and that could be seen as an announcement of war. If North Korea can suggest that further sanctions would be considered as an act of war, his threats definitely fall into the category. Adhering to their enemies? Considering his most recent video came just over a month ago, and Al-Quada is sworn enemy, I would say he fits snugly into what the constitution sees as an act of treason. What about two witnesses? I saw it, click here and find a video and you can become a witness yourself. Check. What makes this a big deal is that this is the first time an American has been accused of treason since 1952!

That time, it was American born Tomoya Kawakita who was charged and eventually convicted of treason because of torture committed against American prisoners of war during World War II. Go through the treason check list yourself and I guarantee you that this would constitute treason. I don’t have as convenient proof regarding the two witnesses but I have little doubt that is in much dispute. Issues of dual nationality, renouncement of U.S. citizenship and such came into play but they mattered little. He was sentence to life in prison in 1953 (and eventually pardoned and deported to Japan during the closing of Alcatraz). The thing that surprises me the most is the scale of time in between one accusation of treason to the other.

Since 1952, a lot of American history has occurred. There was the Korean War, Vietnam, Cold War, smaller skirmishes in Grenada, twice in Iraq. The list goes on. Then there’s the question of why Adam Gadahn and not someone else like John Walker Lindh, who is currently serving a life sentence for supporting terrorist organizations, or Yaser Esam Hamdi who was accused for similar reasons. There have been similar cases of anti-American Americans out in the last 50 years.

Why now? Why him? Discuss.

Kofi Annan made great efforts to trim down the UN expenditures and save face after some massive failures throughout the 90s. But his legacy was supposed to be one of a more humanitarian nature. It was abundantly clear that the world was facing a crisis in regards to the needs of survival and the resources available to guarantee it. Annan seemed to have a vision. Quoting from Paul Kennedy’s, “The Parliament of Man”:

Annan seemed to be increasingly successful in steering attention to Africa, the continent facing the greatest concatenation of challenges, and in getting public opinion to recognize that efforts to help African societies must involve not only substantial resources, but above all cleverly shared work by all parts of the UN as well as by the NGOs, the churches, and international business. In this large, holistic view of things, the Security Council is but one of the actors—a vital one, to be sure, for every community needs its nightwatchmen and policemen—but much else is also needed to make the world community content and prosperous.

In a post Cold-war world, he had hoped to be able to let cooler heads prevail, and worry about the oft forgotten humanitarian goals of the United Nation. But it was soon shown that Cold-war or not, the forgotten continent of Africa would always be overshadowed by those with the wealth. At the dawn of the 21^st century there remained problems that never seemed to go away. From the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, India and Pakistan’s perpetual quarrel over Kashmir, to Saddam Hussein and all of the fresh eruptions of violence in Congo and Sierra Leone, he had a mountain to climb just to bring world-wide attention to his humanitarian goals. However, calling for action against the HIV/AIDS pandemic in 2001, and proposing the Global AIDS and Health Fund, he seemed to be making progress in his ambitions.

And then, September 11^th arrived.

From that point on, the focus on the humanitarian goals of the United Nation were once again overshadowed when a new war on terrorism was waged by the only remaining super power. Africa continued to be an afterthought by those with the ability to help make a difference. Martin Meredith takes the words of a Nigerian academic in his epic book, The Fate of Africa, by saying “the problem is not so much that development has failed, as it was never really on the agenda in the first place.” He then closes with the following:

After decades of mismanagement and corruption, most African states have become hollowed out. They are no longer instruments capable of serving the public good. Indeed, far from being able to provide aid and protection to their citizens, African governments and the vampire-like politicians who run them are regarded by the populations they rule as yet another burden they have to bear in the struggle for survival.

And that is where we stand today. Kofi Annan’s legacy was displaced by the realities of the modern world. The North Korean tests may pave the way for a different legacy for the new secretary-general. However, this passing of the torch may extinguish whatever hope there was left for a dying continent.

Sitting alone, the fire.

The field of scientific research in the DPRK successfully conducted an underground nuclear test under secure conditions on October 9, 2006, at a stirring time when all the people of the country are making a great leap forward in the building of a great, prosperous, powerful socialist nation. It has been confirmed that there was no such danger as radioactive emission in the course of the nuclear test as it was carried out under scientific consideration and careful calculation. The nuclear test was conducted with indigenous wisdom and technology 100 percent. It marks a historic event as it greatly encouraged and pleased the KPA and people that have wished to have powerful self-reliant defense capability. It will contribute to defending the peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in the area around it.

It appears that the fears of much of world have finally been realized. Is the threat of nuclear Armageddon closer today than it was yesterday? Standing by what I wrote in my last post, I would say we’re just about as endangered today as we were yesterday. How can I say this? North Korea has been thought of as the bigger threat, when compared to Iraq/Iran, by most of the western world. But I remain firm in my stance nonetheless.

Not wanting to sound like I defend anything North Korea does, I’ll make it perfectly clear that I think the regime is being run in a fairly horrible way. There is nothing in there that suggests the country is being run for their population (like one would hope a ruling regime would do). Kim Jong-Il came into power by means of dynastic succession, a type of rule that doesn’t require keeping the population happy, as long as it’s controlled. It’s an extremely closed society, in an internationally isolated sense, as well as in the Karl Popper sense (re: The Open Society and Its Enemies). All of this this leads to big-headedness, delusions of grandeur, and in this case, a starving population. Let them eat cake (or grass). I see a potential for a new arms race in eastern Asia. I see some more sanctions, but nothing that would cripple the country. Cutting off the oil flow or the food aid would merely promote the destabilization of an already fragile country. Something will be done, but that something will probably end up hurting their economy ever so slightly, but they will still have nuclear weapons capabilities after the rest of the world begins to forget about what took place today. Think about what happened to India after their last tests in the late 90s (and if you can’t remember what happened, that would reaffirm my point in a way). But I’m barely an expert, browse the web for more detailed news, watch what’s happening live on the news, and ultimately wait for things to unfold and history will write itself. I still don’t believe that this news will endanger the world’s population in the long run.

I’ll refer back to my sketchy analogy about the room with the light bulb from my last post. Pandora’s box had been opened when Hiroshima was bombed in 1945. The information needed to produce the weapon is available, the materials required to put the information to use can be obtained with enough effort. More and more people in the room with the light will whisper or overhear the secret of flipping the switch. One element that remains unchanged with all of the North Korean news is that having the bomb is useless if ever used internationally today. Because the moment its used, the retaliation/response will most likely (no, I can’t predict the future) result in that country no longer having nuclear capabilities and simultaneously with that country not being around in any recognizable form. Then there’s the big argument that not everyone is a rational being and therefore ability to do some pretty horrible things regardless of consequence.

As mentioned before, and barring a polarized set of serious military alliances on a global level (like during the NATO/Warsaw Pact days), a nuclear attack against a north Korean neighbor would be horrible for that country and also North Korea, but barely anyone else. So irrationality is automatically thwarted in a way. There is the argument that modern terrorism is so scattered and decentralized that things would be drastically different if, let’s just use Al-Quaida as a popular example, got their hands on a nuke. In this hypothetical world of the future, this terrorist group bombed a major city somewhere in the world. It is true that there would be no specific country to retaliate against, but realistically, the middle east would just be bombed. Wrongfully so, maybe, but the stereotypes of the 9/11 world puts the entire region at risk if the initial attack were ever to happen. This horribly unacceptable clumping together of the entire region simply turns it into a possible target. This of course is all hypothetical, just as everything anyone may have to say about the topic. That’s the nature of the beast known as the future.

But these modern terrorist cells as the worst possible enemy is an idea based entirely on what certain governments force onto their populations. I really hate dabbling into that never ending debate but here I am. The war on terror, George Orwell, George Dubya, my cat, and a bowl of cheerios as the new world enemy. The word propaganda has been used to describe the actions by both sides of every conflict in recent memory. Freedom fighter or terrorist. Who decides? I’m slowly falling off my thought train but let’s just say that to this day there have only been two atomic bombs dropped against an enemy in a war. Nearly every day since that moment, the possibility of nuclear armageddon was something that could have happened. But nothing has happened. Maybe I’m just an optimist, but my original opinion remains unchanged. Humanity is stupid, just not that stupid.

I would imagine the same thing that has happened when the other nuclear weapon states learned how to blow the world up. Nothing. As of today, there are nine countries with nuclear weapons capabilities. Depending where you are in the world, most of these countries are, or at least have been, looked upon with great suspicion since they’ve declared themselves ready to play with the big boys. Here they are:

1. United States (5,735 active/9,960 total): The majority of the world has a lot of problems with how the States is being run today.
2. Russia (5,830 active/16,000 total): Largest nuclear threat, other than the United States, throughout the cold war. Continues to have largest arsenal out there and their economy/government isn’t exactly the most stable (not that this has anything to do with nuclear intentions)
3. United Kingdom (200 total): Frowned upon by much of the world because of its ongoing involvement with Iraq. Not exactly a major world power (sorry).
4. France (350 total): French fries weren’t even invented in France.
5. China (130 total): Quickly becoming the next super power in the world. Happens to be communist (sort of) and history shows communists and capitalists don’t typically get along.
6. India (75-115): Worlds second fastest growing economy and population (China is number 1 in both). Just like most of the powers mentioned above, there’s no real danger here. Granted, they aren’t best friends with Pakistan.
7. Pakistan (65-90): Run by military leader, president, and author Pervez Musharraf in a very undemocratic fashion. Yet, cooperates with the US and is therefore seen as being one of the good guys.
8. North Korea (0-10): Isn’t clear if they have nukes. We’ll find out soon enough. Closed off country run by someone who considers himself chosen to rule over his people by God. Supposedly he has to prove himself whenever he can. Insecure? I can’t say for certain, I’ve never met the guy.
9. Israel (75-200): Nothing officially declared yet, but read up on the Vela incident if you have a second. It’s likely they are nuclear ready. Loved by every country in the world, so they pose no threat whatsoever. That last line was something I call a joke (I chuckled to myself while writing it but failed to blow milk out of my nose because I realized the seriousness of not wanting to get destroyed because of an interpretation of God).

Of course there will be concern over another country gaining access to the most powerful weapon ever devised by humanity. Especially when it comes out of closed and paranoid nation like North Korea (I’m still not convinced Iran is any more of a threat then most of the “good guys” on the list of current nuclear powerhouses). But I’m not worried about anything happening because if anything did ever happen, nothing would matter anyways. Thus, the title of this entry.

Imagine the following if you will. The world is a simple room, nothing is in the room but all of humanity and a single light bulb to which there is no replacement for. The light bulb is, and has always been at the ON position. There is however a switch, the proverbial red button, that has an off position. Sadly, for those curious in the room, the switch is one way and cannot be turned back on once turned off. Over the history of this room, the people have played around with the circuitry of the switch and have consequently paid dearly for it. People tried hitting the switch with rocks, and spears, shot at it with arrows and bullets. They’ve tried throwing water and fire at it with mixed results. They’ve even tried gassing it, throwing planes at it, and so on. But the light merely flickered a bit before returning to its beautiful, irreplaceable state of existence. Then one day, someone found a method of moving the light in the direction they saw fit. One day, this person decided to turn off the light for a large portion of Japanese people in the room and they perished as a result. Sadly (or luckily?), the room wasn’t very big and other people saw what this person was doing and soon learned how to do as he did. As time went on, just like gossip in the hallways, everyone knew how to flip the switch, but the switch was never flipped again (except against some birds, fish and possibly desert animals that also supposedly lived in the room).

If you skipped that whole analogy the rest of this entry would still make sense, but I thought it was cute so I left it in. Basically, if anyone uses nuclear weapons in the polarized world we live in, nothing would matter. In 1959, US President Dwight Eisenhower once insisted that if war came, “you might as well go out and shoot everyone you see and then shoot yourself.” There is no rational use for nuclear warfare and both the Soviets and the Americans knew this throughout the Cold War. That’s why the strategy for the US through most of the cold war was one based on the idea of all or nothing. MAD, or “Mutual Assured Destruction” was a policy suggesting that if a nuke was ever launched (in this case, from any Warsaw Pact country onto any NATO member), it would be lights out for everyone. The cold has technically ended, but the cat is out of the bag. The gossip will continue, and the knowledge will spread. There’s no turning back.

But the world is still around and nobody is nuking anyone. There is the idea that things are different now. North Korea or the terrorists (watch out behind you!) don’t follow the same rules as did the Soviets and Americans during the second half of the 20^th century. They don’t follow the same rules? Everyone and their grandmother knows that humanity has the capacity to destroy itself at the blink of an eye. We are all following the same rules. So whoever you are, go about your life like you always have (unless you’ve lived your life in fear from nuclear attack, then you should probably change your approach). It’s all rhetoric, fear mongering, propaganda and the like. Remember, sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me. Those are some wise words I heard some time ago. Live by them.

Growing up, I was always aware of a something called the mid-life crisis. The idea was and remains simple. As people approach their 40s and 50s, they often conclude that everything they’ve ever dreamed of is not being realized, that the invincibility of youth is fading away, and that there’s no better time than now to make the most of it before the platter of experiences empties before their eyes. So go ahead, buy the fancy new sports car, and run away with the secretary (or the pool boy for that matter) is what may be rationalized. But does this crisis actually exist? Studies (Baruch, 1984) have shown that women in their 20s were more likely to be uncertain and dissatisfied than were women at midlife. It suggested that normative developmental milestones such as marriage, childbirth, or menopause were rarely part of any major stress in the life of those studied. Instead, it was found that traumatic, unexpected events that have little to do with age, such as divorce and job transfers were the primary contributors to middle age stress. It’s been suggested that the a midlife crisis may not even exist in the way it’s commonly thought of today; that it is instead a blend of expectations prevalent in the population and general problems of psychopathology that may have always existed within the individual.

So what you have today is a generation of baby boomers growing up with the notion that at some point in their 50s, something will click and a crisis will have to be discovered and ultimately resolved. This expectation may be comforting to some. It’s another piece of predictive information that might assist those less sure of themselves. The idea is that if something is supposed to happen, it might as well. It takes the onus off any dissatisfying aspect of life and puts the blame onto age, on biology, instead of on one’s own self. It clumps a group of individuals, based on age, into a category that seemingly excuses themselves to act in accepted mid-life ways.

In regards to putting people into categories based on age, let me introduce to you one Erik Erikson, one of the most renowned developmental psychologists of the 20^th century. Some time ago, he came up with the eight stages of psychological development. With this, he broke down the life of a human being into the following stages:

The mid-life crisis can easily be seen as a transition from adulthood into old age. Simply put, it’s denying the inevitability of aging. But if the mid-life crisis is indeed a myth, and that it occurs (in the typical pop-culture sense) only too those left unsatisfied in life up until that point, why is there so much talk about it? I would say Erikson’s model makes sense to me (using whatever knowledge I’ve gained in the first 24 years of my life), but I also believe that only a smidgen of it can be accepted universally. To me, and please accept that I am forcibly biased due to my age, I would like to suggest that there is one stage that continues to be neglected as a whole. During the early stages of the adulthood, there is a quarter-life crisis that remains largely ignored.

Up until that stage of one’s life, providing the preceding generation has done their job, there is a guiding hand that promotes a typical growth. The rules and restrictions one is prescribed after birth until their adolescence seems routine, if not government sponsored. Kindergarten turns into elementary school, which is followed by high school, and then, if all remains fine and dandy, there is a post secondary education. Throughout all of this, one receives an adequate guiding hand as to what one should expect next. However, all along, it is suggested that this is simply a training phase for something called the real world. So after 5/8^th of your developmental cycle as a human is laid out for you, it’s up to you to decide for yourself happens next. I suppose this is what youth wants all along. Until the age of adulthood is reached, the desire to be granted the freedoms generally associated with the age of majority is of high priority (teenage rebellion, etc.). Once the moment of supposed independence is reached, however, you find yourself tiptoeing at the edge of a plank looking straight into a dark and endless ocean. You understand that there is plenty of opportunity therein, but also begin to wonder about the urgency of jumping from a perfectly good ship. It’s the choice to live in an agonizing limbo or in uncertain independence. Realistically, and rightfully so, everyone has to walk the plank and take the dive into the unknown. This is the beginning of the quarter life crisis (if there is such a thing).

So what characterises this crisis? Wikipedia suggests the following are typical for someone in their mid 20s:

• confusion of identity
• insecurity regarding the near future
• insecurity regarding present accomplishments
• re-evaluation of close interpersonal relationships
• disappointment with one’s job
• nostalgia for university or college life
• tendency to hold stronger opinions
• boredom with social interactions
• financially-rooted stress
• loneliness
• desire to have children

Many of these bullets seem to blend parts 5 and 6 of Erikson’s psychological development chart rather nicely. This may show that the crisis is of a transitional nature. I would suggest that it is a significant simply because it is the first phase of one’s life where the guiding hand is removed (the degree to which this applies is situation dependant).

In the 1961 classic The Lonely Crowd, David Riesman suggested that there exists three types of drive that can be found in a person (all of which depend on the population growth pattern of a period). Within these three types, there exists unique ambitions that may or may not have been present in the preceding generation. There is the tradition-directed person, who is said to exist during periods of large population growth with a relatively short lifespan. As the name suggests, this persons drive is one of following tradition, growing up without question providing the world is as it always was.

The next two types of society, the inner-directed, and the other-directed people are of a more modern caste, associated in this case (granted, the book is a wee bit dated) with the western world.These types differ in ambition to a lesser degree. Here are a few quotes that may, vaguely at best, explain the work ambitions for the inner-directed person:

The ambitious note in the inner-directed person’s attitude toward work in the phase of transitional growth of population was expressed in the schoolbook proverb: ad astra per aspera. The stars were far away, but still he aimed from them, in terms of a lifetime of effort. He could afford such a long-term commitment because of the generality of the aim: he wanted money or power or fame or some lasting achievement in the arts or the profession. He wanted to leave a reputation, a memorial, something tangible.

Further down the page, it continues:

As recently as 1920 an American boy of the middle class was not too worried about the problem of committing himself to a career. If he came of a good family, he could count on connections; if not, he could count on the credit of his social–that is, his visibly inner-directed—character. He could dream of long-term goals because the mere problem of career entry and survival was not acute; that he might for long be out of a job did not occur to him. He could orient himself, if he chose a profession, by his daydreaming identification with the stars in his field. A young doctor might think of Osler, a young lawyer of Choate or Elihu Root or Justice Holmes, a young scientist of Agassiz or Pasteur, a young painter or writer of Renoir or Tolstoy. Yet there is often tragedy in store for the inner-directed person who may fail to live up to grandiose dreams and who may have to struggle in vain against both the intractability of the material and the limitation of his own powers. He will be held, and hold himself, to his commitment. Satirists from Cervantes on have commented on this disparity between pursuing the stars and stumbling over the mere earthiness of earth.

The first of the two quotes is more of an outline of what an inner-directed person strives for and the second, one which is more in tune with the overall topic of this article, discusses a potential flaw in realizing the goal. To me, it definitely describes someone who is at a crossroads in their quarter-life. It’s reaching for the sky, not knowing where it is.

Next up, I will throw out a few lines about the ambition of an other-directed person. This time around, similar ambitions are present but the sensitivities of others and the importance of being accepted by all is paramount (think of the politically correctness that has taken place in recent decades):

The inner-directed man, socialized with reference to an older model, might choose for emulation a star from the heroes of his field. By contrast, the other-directed person does not so often think of his life in terms of an individualized career. He seeks not fame, which represents limited transcendence of a particular peer-group or a particular culture, but the respect and, more than the respect, the affection, of an amorphous and shifting, through contemporary, jury of peers.

In regards to how an other-directed person would run a business:

The older men have come up through the shop or through a technical school with no pretensions in the field of human relations. The younger ones are imbued with the new ethic. They seem still to be concerned about making money, and to some extent they are, but they are also concerned with turning their company into the model which they learned at business school.

Basically the other-directed person requires the support and congratulations of his peers before he can move on. He is less independent but subsequently, due to those around him, just as able. But what does all of this really have to do with the questions one faces during the quarter-life? I would suggest that it matters in the sense that a lot of the question marks surrounding a young adult are based on an uncertainty with which road to follow, but also that every generation has a certain newness to it. As a result of this newness, the road you choose may still need to be paved. And so on, and so forth. Providing these aforementioned groupings exist, I should fall into the other-directed category if I understand myself and my surroundings correctly. With that in mind, here’s a little story.

I’ve been feeling the weight of the world pushing down on me in recent months (re: everything I’ve written above) and am more uncertain about what exactly my future holds than I have ever been. Regardless, life goes on. My parable begins with me at a local pub with some friends when a chance encounter puts me face to face with an old high-school acquaintance. He rambles on about how he remembers me as being really smart and how he now regrets putting too much effort into fitting in with the “cool” crowd. He regretted not going to university and seemed rather worried about where his life may be heading. After reassuring him that my university experience had given me little in terms of a direction in life, he mentioned that he had started a landscaping business with a friend. I told him that I was currently only working part-time and that my personal monetary situation had seen better days. We continued on, assuring each other that whatever we were doing was fine and dandy and that was that. What pray tell, is the moral of this rendezvous? Simply that this was an example of other-directed reassurance. If the mid-life crisis is a myth, and that it depends entirely on the state of the person existing in that period, it makes sense to suggest that the quarter-life crisis is in the same boat. Assurances like these may just need to come from the outside to keep the modern adult content. Many of the characteristics taken from Wikipedia (see above) about the quarter-life crisis can be resolved with a little bit of outside assurance. In the eye of the beholder, that sort of thing. Granted, this sort of praise won’t answer any of the larger questions, but they do take a lot of the pressure away. A remedy for the glaucoma that is life.

So I think of Erik Erikson and his 8 stages of life and realize that I’m in one of them. Possibly, one of the tougher ones. I scan through the quarter-life crisis characteristics and see myself. But realize, based on interactions with others, that I am no more alone, or insecure, or stressed, or bored, or nostalgic, or confused than any one of my peers. I am just part of the lonely crowd. There will always be someone who is more accomplished in certain aspects of life, someone who is less, someone who seems to have it all figured out, someone who seems to have given up. There will always be some aspects of all of that within everyone. If advancing beyond young adulthood is like learning a new language, so be it, time to learn it.

In 1957, Ghana became the first black African country to gain independence from the shackles of colonialism. This was the beginning of the eventual independence of the entire continent which since then had gone through growing pains that are barely improving today. Not wanting to enter into the discussion about the mistakes that have transpired since those early days of independence, I will like to bring you back to the hope and joy that were present early on.

After Britain pronounced the country’s independence on 6 March 1957, messages of congratulation came in from leaders around the world. Delegations arrived from fifty-six countries exuding warmth and goodwill. Britain sent the Duchess of Kent; the Chinese sent a general in a turquoise blue uniform; the Russians, a junior minister, with a fistful of invitations to Moscow and South Africa sent a delegation (albeit, an all white one). The United States made one of the largest gestures of respect by sending then Vice President Richard Nixon as a representative.

It was said that his enthusiasm was shown through his consistent handshaking, hugging local chiefs, holding babies while posing for photographs and so and such. At some point during all of this commotion, he slapped one man on the shoulder and asked him how it felt to be free. To which he replied, “I wouldn’t know, sir, I’m from Alabama.“

What a world it was, and still is.

Fanboy: (n) Technocratic zealots; evangelicals of geekery. Characterized by irrational advocacy of a particular OS, console, company, or franchise. (urbandictionary.com)

I’ve been a Digg reader for well over a year and consider it one of, if not my favorite websites (along with Wikipedia). As of late, however, I’ve noticed a steady increase in fanboyism in some topics that should be quite obvious to anyone who reads Digg regularly. Diggers are obsessing over Nintendo’s Wii (and conversely, hating on Sony’s PS3), they’re suddenly in love with every single Apple rumor ever published and to a much lesser degree, making the site a Youtube portal. However, everything does happen for a reason. Not allowing Digg conspiracies to interfere with my point, if the majority of Diggers are hugely fanatic over certain topics, so be it, but I’m going to continue writing regardless.

Let’s start with PS3 and wii shall we? A quick 7 day search for all stories submitted on Wii will come up with 46 pages of results. The same search for front page stories comes up with 5 pages of results (meaning just under 11% of Wii stories make it to the front page). On the other hand, the same 7 day searches for “ps3” (searching for “playstation 3” has nearly identical results) for example, come up with 12 pages for total submitted, and a measly 1 for front page stories (just over 8% chance of making it to the front page). But if you take a look at what those front page articles are about, you’ll find that most of them are either bashing Sony, or are really just a pro-Wii story in disguise. The results are nowhere near what one might expect in coverage from the largest tech news site on the web. So what’s causing all the fanboy commotion? What are people writing about Wii?

In the last week alone, there have been 5 front page stories on the expected, and ultimately the confirmed release date of Wii. Four on the same day, saying the same thing, getting far more Diggs than your average front page article (three were in the 700 Digg range with one breaking the 2000 Digg mark). Then there are other front page stories that border on ridiculous. There’s the exclusive photos of the Wii retail kiosk that look like they were taken by the same guy who brought you those pictures of Nessie or Big Foot. A story with the title “Will Wii $150?!!! Vibe Magazine thinks so”, received 611 Diggs based some random scan of some random magazine. Finally, and most importantly of all, when the Wii packaging (aka. the box) was revealed, 1607 deemed it Diggworthy. The majority of the other Wii articles are based around screenshots or videos of upcoming games, how Nintendo stock is up and Sony stock is down and most constant reminder that Wii won’t ship with a DVD playback. All of this hype reminds me a little bit of myself when I was younger. Starring at the toys section of the Sears catalogue or dreaming about the day I would be able to feel the awesome power of 64bit when GamePro had a full-page spread of its Jaguar (thankfully, I never ended up getting the system). Younger indeed. According to a recent, highly scientific (cough) study, 50% of Digg users are between 17 and 24 years of age. That encompasses everyone from the youngin’ who is experiencing the online hype of an upcoming console for the first time (spunktacular!) to those who are becoming nostalgic during their quarter life crisis for the days of Nintendo yore.

Then there’s Apple.

Going back to my very unimpressive search results statistics, there have been a whopping 74 pages worth of submissions with Apple in the title in the last 7 days, with 7 pages worth making it to the front page. That’s about 9.5% of all Apple submissions making some money for duggmirror. I understand that there have been some big announcements in the world of Apple in the last week, but just about 100 front page stories (1099 total submitted!) on a very similar topic is a bit much for such a short time span. As for what these stories are about, a similar trend can be seen to that which was mentioned above with the Wii stories. There are countless rumors ranging from the confirmation of 6th generation IPods, Touch-Screen IPods, Apple Phone and how Apple’s recent price readjustment has caught Microsoft by surprise (think of the Wii = Good/PS3 = Bad stories). A lot of these rumors are started by sites who’s only bit of credibility is having a registered domain name. Sadly, as I am using a lowly WordPress sub domain, nothing I have ever written should be taken seriously and is most definitely blog spam. It all feels like the National Inquirer section of Digg. Then there are photos of IPod Nano docking stations, what an IPod looks like from the inside, and similarly irrelevant (how dare he!) stories. Granted, there are several other quality stories out there, but even many of those (Re: all of the repetitive stories on glitches/memory issues with iTunes 7).

What’s left? Well, there’s Youtube of course. Of the 88 pages of youtube related submissions (most of them video links), 6 pages worth made it to the front page. That’s a mere 6.8% front page hit rate. It seems like Digg is simply acting as an unnecessary middle man when it comes to these videos because the search feature on youtube.com seems fairly accurate. Is this Pointcast 2.0? But hey, I’m a Youtube fanboy myself so I’ll leave it at that.

So what does this all mean? . There’s also the idea that the fanboy has ongoing illusions of grandeur. Wii might crash and burn when people remember that Playstation 2 was good not only for the graphics, but because the games were in fact fun to play. Remember, it’s possible to have your cake and eat it too. The recent Wii hype seems to suggest you can’t have it both ways. Similarly like what everyone who thought so much of the “Snakes on a Plane” hype only to see the movie bomb at the box office. I also have a feeling the trends mentioned in this article will increase in the coming months. Partially because release dates are nearing and so and such, but also because the community is growing. Just like the peoples of any given country have a similar culture, so too will future Diggers. You’ll find more Wii and Ipod talk on Digg then you ever would on Slashdot in its long and storied past. But if you really hate Microsoft and love Linux, Slashdot may be your cup of tea. So what am I doing on Digg in the first place? To be honest, I’m looking forward to Wii just as much as you are. Sometimes I just like writing. I hear that’s what makes people cool.

On September 7^th, Melinda was interviewed on Grace’s CNN show and was hounded to be clear about whether she had taken a polygraph, and where she was shopping when her son before he went missing. During the interview, Nancy continuously pounded on her desk demanding, “Where were you? Why aren’t you telling us where you were that day?” It’s this kind of respectful tone and professionalism that has helped promote her to that of a royal bitch. The mother was never officially considered as of a suspect until after her death (although she was questioned by investigators as would be expected in any open kidnapping case) but Nancy sure made it appear that way. Melinda’s grandfather disputed that she had any involvement in the disappearance of her son (also to be expected) and seemed to place some blame on Nancy regarding the suicide by saying, “Nancy Grace and the others, they just bashed her to the end. She wasn’t one anyone ever would have thought of to do something like this. She and that baby just loved each other, couldn’t get away from each other. She wouldn’t hurt a bug.” Ultimately, she did worse to herself. So what does Nancy have to say about what happened? She’s guilt free of course! On Monday evening, she said that, “I do not feel our show is to blame for what happened to Melinda Duckett, Melinda committed suicide before that interview ever aired.”

I will say that the mothers actions were quite suspicious. It’s possible that she is guilty of something much more horrible than her own suicide. Finding out those truths, however, should be left to the investigators. During the September 13th episode, the two major ”breaking developments” that were discussed about the case was that Melinda and her 2001 Mitsubishi Eclipse were seen near a construction site and also that she had attempted to sell the child seat from her car days before his disappearance. Suspicious indeed. My favorite moment in investigative reporting came when a caller suggested that, “since she was trying to sell the car seat, was it possible that she was trying to sell Trenton?” Nancy replied that she had thought of this on a number of occasions and quickly asked the waiting, former FBI agent, Mike Brooks, “What can you tell us about the idea that this child was actually sold?” Thanks to all the hard evidence which included the apparent sale of an infant car seat, a random caller, and a few supposed previous thoughts by Nancy, Mr. Brooks replied, “The possibility of him being sold, that’s something that should be looked into if it’s not already.” Case Closed! Actually, the world already has one James Frey. Furthermore, Joshua Duckett, the estranged husband, came to Nancy’s defense by claiming that no one made her appear on the show in the first place.

And now for a brief history lesson on Nancy Grace and the realities of television.

As mentioned earlier in this post. Nancy has been surrounded by controversy before. She fabricated many of the details of her fiancé’s 1979 murder. She continuously proclaimed that Richard Ricci (a suspect in the Elizabeth Smart case who later died in prison) was guilty, regardless of how little evidence was available against him. If you want an example of her in your face approach, please take a look at the following video:

This cheap, insincere approach at getting a good story regardless of the consequences defines Nancy Grace perfectly. Furthermore, during an interview on the Larry King Live, she continued to blast Scott Peterson’s father for coming to his defense long before he was found guilty of the crime. She also repeatedly made light of the Michael Jackson by showcasing the book, The Boy: A Photographic Essay, that was found in Michael Jackson’s bedroom during his most recent molestation trial. Regardless of whether or not her comments that he was found not guilty by reason of celebrity were humorous, she continues to step over the line. Not that I am a member of the Nancy Grace goon squad, but to suggest that no one made Melinda appear on the show seems a bit ridiculous to me.

In Chapter four of Laura Grindstaff’s, The Money Shot: Trash, Class, and the Making of TV Talk Shows, she discusses the efforts television producers go through to make great television. Dealing primarily with daytime television shows such as The Jerry Springer Show, Diana, and Maury Povich, the chapter discusses how the producers spend time with the upcoming guests, treat them like royalty, hint at what is expected and ultimately discard them as old news after taping wraps up. Supposedly there is a well known industry saying that goes, “Bring’em in by limo, send ‘em home by cab.” To suggest that Melinda Duckett woke up one morning and said to herself, “I’m going to give Nancy Grace a call, she’ll rid me of all my worries” is simply preposterous. The producers of the show surely wrangled her on with promises and reassurances that it was the right thing to do. In Laura Grindstaff’s book, she tells her readers that talk show guests are treated like Gods prior to tapings. Private dressing rooms or trailers (complete with name tags) are set up so that the aura of television is truly felt. The truth is always sought after but the exaggeration thereof is what producers are paid for. Considering we’re all brought up around television, and Melinda is no exception, when her telephone interview was conducted, she must have felt the pressure. With what is known about television production (it is after all a studied profession), what she was told to expect and what Nancy Grace dropped onto her are presumably completely different. Similarly with the video above, it seems obvious from Elizabeth Smarts reactions, that if she had known she would have been drilled about the kidnappings, she would not have come onto the show in the first place. So the interview ends, then what?

Then the producer finds the next story, Nancy Grace prepares her make-up and Melinda Duckett hangs up the phone in an even frailer state. Raw human emotions cannot be shut off at the end of a taping or the click of the phone. After the taping of a segment about gang violence on Maury Povich, a mother whose son was killed by a gang member remained so agitated by an argument with an audience member that she picked a fight with her friend who accompanied her to the taping. People are not props. Other times, guests will stay in the studio long after the taping, chatting away with the audience and signing autographs. I’m not saying producers are all heartless. Laura Grindstaff quotes one of the producers of the failed television show Diana with the following:

“I found producing too gut-wrenching, I just didn’t have the thick skin or whatever it is other producers seem to have. I’ll never forget this one show — this lady’s child was abducted right out of the home. Her pain was so great that it tore me up into pieces and I had to walk out of the studio halfway through the show because I was so emotional.” – The Money Shot: Trash, Class, and the Making of TV Talk Shows (Laura Grindstaff)

How relevant is that? But the fact remains, everything about the television you watch is rigorously being produced behind the scenes. Sometimes the reality of humanity is forgotten. Regardless of the innocence or guilt of the mother, for Nancy to suggest that her interview had nothing to do with the suicide is complete and utter garbage. One thing remains crystal clear in this story, that is that Melinda Duckett was alive every day during her 21 plus years on this planet, and that one day after the interview, she was not.