The more I think about it, the more I really dislike the final Battlestar Galactica episode. It had OK moments, but in general, it was a slap-together, haphazard, poorly thought-out, seat-of-the-pants, plot-hole riddled, bad ending to one of the greatest scifi shows of all TV/movie history. One of the best TV shows evah.

The apparent fact that they must have been just making it up as they went along, and had no idea how they were going to revolve anything until like the week before shooting the episode, seems painfully obvious.

So much of it didn’t make any sense, and most of the rest of it strains credulity. I wanted to like it so bad, because of how the series has been in general…. For example, the episodes with the final appearances of Gaiden and Dee were simply, utterly amazing. *sigh*

I miss BSG.

I think that’s the first time I’ve not written “Dr. Burling.” I’d known him since my first day of grad school three years ago and he’s had more of an impact on my life than anyone I’ve ever known, short of my wife and daughter. He was my professor, my mentor of sorts, my scholarly and philosophical model…and he died this weekend from cancer.

I actually first met him a few times at the local astronomy club before I enrolled in grad school. He was the guy who first helped my sight my new telescope in to Saturn, and that’s an incredible sight! Imagine my surprise when weeks later on my first night of English 600, I discover he’s my teacher.

And in that class I was introduced to the concept of questioning ideology. I’d been a born-again skeptic for a couple/few years before that. But Dr. Burling taught me to go even deeper and examine and question the very base of all cultural assumptions and the very concept of “common sense” and “natural law.” It was from him that I learned that “Marxism” was not a dirty word. That I learned about critical theory and cultural criticism, of Lacan and Derrida, and Adorno and Jameson. I learned in that class about the politics of academia, the ideological nature of education, and the value of scholarship. That was literally a life-changing class.

And the next two classes I’d have with him continued that incredible education. I learned that science fiction was not embarrassing genre fiction meant for geek entertainment, but had a special place in cultural criticism. I would never read sf, (which I had always loved simply as escapism but knew just subliminally that it spoke something more to me, but I didn’t know what), the same way again.

He inspired me my first year to write a paper for a conference. I did, and presented it. And would the next year thanks to him. He inspired me to write for peer-reviewed scholarly journals. I have. He gave up his time to help me write at a much higher level than I ever realized I could. He spent a collected many, many hours talking with me in office hours, after class, in e-mails, about everything from the origins of sf to underlying ideological assumptions in current politics.

He was going to have Kim Stanley Robinson, who he had been corresponding with for quite some time and had edited a book about him, come talk to the class he was teaching this semester. This would-be 4th class I would have had with him. Now, whatever synergy of Dr. Burling and Kim Robinson’s time together with us could have gifted us, is gone forever.

I learned so much from him, and I was only just beginning. There was so much more I was planning on learning from him, so much more he could have taught me. It’s a selfish loss, I know. But I’m keenly missing the lost opportunity to confer with him in my future writing and scholarship, to seek his advice and counsel, and continue to learn from him. His wit, his audacity, his brilliance, gone. I’m not ready.

He had on a few occasions called me his peer. That was the greatest honor he could have ever given me.

Dr. William Burling was fiercely intelligent, absolutely committed to his students and the subject of his expertise, dedicated to the ideals of critical thinking and learning which surpassed the confines of organized, institutional education. He inspired me, pushed and challenged me, opened my eyes and changed my life. It’s a little darker of a world without him in it.

Am I talking about the Crips and the Bloods? Nope. A better armed, better funded gang but with all the bravado, arrogance, power-lust, of any street gang.

Posted on BoingBoing: 15-year-old girl beaten by sheriff’s deputy

You tell me, “lippy” shoe-kicking disrespect or no, does a teenage girl need to be body-slammed, punched in the head, and dragged off by her hair? Imagine what kind of behavior doesn’t get caught on camera.

Attorney for the sheriff’s department:

“As we argued to the judge, it will inflame public opinion and will severely impact the deputy’s right to a fair trial.”

Pfft! I wish! The public never gets inflamed! The closest they did was for a week after a BART cop murdered a guy in public view

Classically Liberal does a good job blogging about the culture of violence and brutality and above-the-law mentality of the state-sponsored Blue Shirts.

Update: After I posted this, Classically Liberal made his own post with some interesting background info:

The police report filed by Schene and his fellow officer claimed that the shoe caused “bruising, bleeding and pain” which I suspect is just more police bullshit. What is worse is that Schene was a “field-training officer” teaching the other deputy how to act like a cop. At the moment Schene has been put on paid vacation—they call it “suspended with full pay”. The world is filled with billions of people who would like to be “suspended with full pay.”

The reality is that cops often think they have the right to act this way and that they are above the law. One of the great problems with policing is that individuals attracted to the job are often prone to visions of grandeur, authoritarian in nature, and love violence. It is the authority and right to act violently that they find attractive. In other words many of them are psychologically unfit for the job.

That fellow officer, by the way, is the guy who can be seen in the video as possibly gesturing to Schene to stop pummeling the girl. WHich might give someone the impression that he might do the right thing and report on the unfit and violent cop–giving hope that maybe a “good” cop will help get rid of the oh-so-rare minority of “bad” cops. But no. Cops protect their own no matter what the crime. Just like street gangs. There are no “good” cops when they protect the bad ones.

So, a week ago my wife’s Sunday School discussed atheism. I wanted to tell the teacher that I’m an atheist and would love to be available to answer questions and dispel any myths about atheism–but he didn’t get my message in time. So, I sat quietly and listened. And sure, as expected, I heard some of the usual comments: Remarks that atheists don’t believe anything, followed by requisite jokes about not believing in chairs or traffic. Comments that they must be joyless and wallow in hopelessness and despair.

I suppose some atheists do, sure. But so do some Christians. Some Christians really take the Christian message of worhlessness and born in sinfulness to heart, and it affects their entire self-image and their behavior. But in general, atheists aren’t any less happy than anyone else in general. Maybe….

Yesterday I attended a MeetUp of some local atheists and freethinkers at a cafe. While the topic of conversation was more in my interest, I found by and large most people there to be just as, if not more, snide and cynical and negative than a usual gathering of Christians. It was actually very annoying. How many times can we complain about the same things over and over. (Well, I guess the honest response would be as long as they keep trying to get Creationism in public schools and creating faith-based government initiatives and exclude non-believers from the social forum. So long non-believers continue to be the most hated people in the country–then groups of non-believers will continue to be negative and whiny and defensively arrogant.)

What I found really surprising about the Sunday School meeting, was that after the initial pre-class joking and offhand comments, when the discussion turned serious, there was a lot of honest questioning and curiosity over what atheists think and how they got there. (Granted, this was a Methodist group which tend to be pretty liberal and open-minded. If it were, say, a Southern Baptist church, I wouldn’t even think about mentioning my atheism. I seriously believe that if anyone had found out at the Promise Keepers rally I attended a few years ago that I was a non-believer, I’d have been roughed up and brutally thrown out. The hate-speech against atheists, socialists, and feminists (in that order) all that weekend was scary! Anyway, back to moderate Methodists….)

I chose to remain silent at the Sunday School meeting because I wanted people to be able to speak freely, but I so wanted to speak up and offer insight. They really seemed curious about the topic and I think most of them would have been polite in listening to me and interested. I doubt I’d deconvert anyone, but I think I could have good discussions with them.

On the other hand, the group of “free thinkers” yesterday, I don’t think they’d welcome any kind of dialogue. In fact, one person spoke of wondering if any Christians may have the idea of “infiltrating” their group. I actually did speak up and say I would welcome a Christian, as I think it’s absolutely vital they see what we’re really about, and we can have an open and honest dialog with them and we can work together. But I don’t think my sentiments were well received.

I hate to say that this group was stereotypical elitist and arrogant atheists, but they kind of were. And it was a downer. A disappointment. I don’t know. I know during the first year or two of my honest acceptance of my non-belief I was very outspoken (to certain people) and very vitriolic. Heck, my blog shows a record of it! In fact, there are some instances where I still get fired up and upset and blog some flame about religion. But that gets it out of my system. Perhaps for these people, living as we do in a community where everyone is assumed to be a church-goin’ Christian and the culture is geared for that, when given the opportunity to commune with like minded persecuted ultra-minority, it’s time to vent and find solidarity in shared anger and righteous arrogance.

I can understand that, and even support it to some degree. But, it’s also very wearying, being that negative. I have to say, what the people talk about at the Sunday School and Bible study make me cringe on the inside and beat my imaginary head against an imaginary wall, I much prefer the happy and upbeat joyfulness of the Christians. If only I can be around a group of freethinkers and atheists who talk about non-theist stuff, but with the same positivism and good naturedness of the believers. (Again, this is a liberal Methodist group…I’ve been to some Baptist groups where the arrogance and self-righteous indignation and vitriol was as bad as the atheists’.)

Does this make me miss being a believer? I’d be lyin’ if I said it didn’t. Oh, I’m not about to throw in my reasoned de-belief in favor of community; but I can see why some non-believers, like Robert M. Price, continue to enjoy church and the ritual and the ceremony. I still find church services to be too much for me: the mindless ritual, the blood-soaked death worship, the abdication of personal worth and value, the painful cognitive dissonance and the veneration of ancient myth…I hurts, I tells ya. But I still really like the people. I’d like to spend more time with them. And you know, when it does come out that I’m an atheist, then maybe they will have gotten to like me as well, and I can be a force for cooperation and understanding.

I just wish more in the atheist community could be as positive and upbeat. Maybe when they’re not constantly being bonbarded by the cultural message of their (our) forced elimination….

Related links:

• What is the Future of Atheism?
• What Happens When Atheism is the Norm Instead of the Exception?
• Do You Fit the Atheist “Stereotype”?

Update: Oh, I didn’t see this when I posted this article, but this link is great and perfectly related:

• Atheist Arrogance

.

There are many significant difference between the conservative and the liberal mindset, outlook, approach on life, society, and government. That’s an obvious statement. But I think a way in which the main difference is realized is in exactly how the think of the role of government. The conservative (general Republican) will shout the battle-cry “smaller government!” They believe government is intrusive, nosy, busy-body, controlling. I think any conservative reading this would agree with the description of their outlook. So then, when a conservative is in power, running government, do you think they give up that mindset? Nope, not at all. Now the conservative citizen would expect that the conservative politician, sharing the same outlook on what government is like, what it does, would strive to minimize government and make it smaller—enforce the principles they seem to share which got the politician elected.

But here’s the rub: While the conservative (especially the neo-conservative) politician believes government is controlling and invasive, they’re now in a position to run this controlling and invasive entity they see as being separate and distinct from the citizens. They believe government governs, in that it rules. Just look at the last few conservative administrations we’ve had. Nixon, Reagan, the Bush dynasty…they claimed government was controlling and invasive, and instead of eliminating it, they used it for their own personal and corporate ends. To the (neo-)con, government is the royalty of the feudal society. They don’t like it when it’s not them in power, but when they are, it’s great!

The liberal (by which I mean those that tend to vote Democrat, not the “classically liberal” which is more libertarian), sees government entirely different. They see it as the Constitution declares: “By the people, for the people.” To the liberal, the government is the people, not the rulers of it. When the government runs a program, it’s not (or rather it shouldn’t be) something run by a ruling class foisted upon the serfs. The government serves the people, it is the people. The conservative sees the government as the power, and uses the police as their thugs. It sees taking tax as theft, and so when the neo-cons use tax money, they use it like thieves for their own gain. When the liberal taxes, they see it money to pay for goods and services for the people.

Now, don’t get me wrong, liberal/Democrat politicians are also power-mad and corporatists to a large degree. But the predominate mindset of government as the rulers vs. government as the people still create a striking difference in general legislation and manner of governance. It’s why every Republican including and since Nixon has run up massive budget deficit and have used the government to redirect tax money to corporations, and run their administrations in secrecy and darkness. While Democrat Presidents have balanced budgets and strove for ethical reforms and open government.

The conservative is inherently suspicious and believes people are inherently sinful and bad, and they operate government that way. The liberal believes in the inherent goodness of humanity and believes in positive change.

(Before I continue, let me take a moment to state for the record that I truly believe the best government is not smaller government, but no government at all. No military, no organized police gangs, no tax, no political borders and boundaries. But that form of anarchy will only work when there is no such thing as the abstraction of monetary wealth, and it’s shared by all of the world. In the meantime, I believe in democratic-socialism. Government must be toothless and without its own mechanisms for thug power, and run by the people for the interests of the people. Government must fear the people, not the other way around, someone once said.)

Back to positive outlooks; Rush Limbaugh recently stated at a conservative conference:

Limbaugh used his self-described “first national address,” which ran more than an hour longer than his allotted 20 minutes, to accuse President Obama of inspiring fear in Americans in order to push a liberal agenda of “big government.”

“He wants people in fear, angst and crisis, fearing the worst each and every day, because that clears the decks for President Obama and his pals to come in with the answers, which are abject failures, historically shown and demonstrated.

First and primarily, that’s just a bald-faced lie. Obama did speak truth of the state of the nation: “I know that for many Americans watching right now, the state of our economy is a concern that rises above all others. And rightly so.” But his entire message was optimism and encouragement:

Their resolve must be our inspiration. Their concerns must be our cause. And we must show them and all our people that we are equal to the task before us. (Applause.)

[...]

And if we do — if we come together and lift this nation from the depths of this crisis; if we put our people back to work and restart the engine of our prosperity; if we confront without fear the challenges of our time and summon that enduring spirit of an America that does not quit, then someday years from now our children can tell their children that this was the time when we performed, in the words that are carved into this very chamber, “something worthy to be remembered.”

My goodness that’s a horrific message of fear! Obama was honest, we’re in a pickle. But conservatives, for all their talk about ethics and values, hate honesty–both (especially) the politicians but also the people! Conservatives tend to only want to hear how wonderful things are, how strong of a nation we are, how loved and respected (or at least feared) we are, how everything is roses. Well, sorry to say, but the quagmire of two wars we’re in, the massive recession, the credit/mortgage crisis, are results of “less government” and blowing fine-and-dandy smoke up our collected arses for eight years. Sometimes truth hurts. Sometimes the truth is not pretty. But if something wrong, it’s not going to get fixed by sticking heads under covers. Crises get fixed by honest examination and decisive but thoughtful action, serving the truth. Not delusion and fantasy.