The Inaugural Post
Perhaps the most aggravating feature of the internet is the (seemingly universal) propensity for writers of the culinary persuasion to precede their recipes with an essay’s worth of autobiographical, quasi-related background information that must be swiped past before the famished web scavenger reaches the information they sought out in the first place. It is my objective in the curation of this page to avoid such a strategy at all cost. A bit of background information, in this case, is necessary, however, and it is with the utmost respect for the reader’s time and attention span that I endeavor to get all of this introductory foolishness out of the way in one fell swoop so that subsequent entries to this journal can be devoted to the (maybe also foolish) content that you, the reader who has arrived at this site, is in search of. Let’s get started, shall we?
Ever since I was a kid, I have had an enduring passion for the written word and consequently, I found myself studiously scouring the pages of old history books more often than any child who can stake a legitimate claim to emotional stability would. I recall being particularly drawn to one of my mother’s high school history books that was in effect an atlas of the American presidents. While I am uncertain what it was about these men that commanded my attention as they did, I confess shamelessly that I knew more about the partisan squabbles that led to Andrew Johnson’s impeachment than I did about ordinary childhood things, like… well, subjects unrelated to the procedures of the U.S. Congress. Rather than suppressing these interests, I dove headfirst into them and sought to read everything I could get my hands on about every subject that I could. I was positively stricken with the desire to educate myself solely for education’s sake.
Over time, as one (hopefully) does, I began to observe the history of my country through a critical lens. It occurred to me that many of these men I once naively admired (for no other reason than their portraits adorned the pages of books I happened to have lying around) had undertaken certain political objectives that ran counter to what I had come to believe was the moral way in which a government should operate.
I was naturally led by this recognition to seek out critical voices who were able to articulate my misgivings in ways I was unable to. My Youtube search history must have seemed incoherent at best to anyone who happened to find themselves curious about my online activities. I lacked any ‘ideology’ and simply absorbed information as it came up on my screen, evaluating each idea independent of any cohesive framework that would have facilitated my comprehension. I simply listened to anyone who was available to be listened to about whatever topic interested me on a given day. I suspect the experts in the disciplines I was studying would advise against such an approach but it served me well by exposing me to ways of thinking that would otherwise have been inaccessible.
As time went on, I grew more attached to these figures because they were doing something I had long sought to have the courage to do myself: tell the truth as I see it even if it is immensely unpopular. The more that I engaged with these dissidents’ ideas, the more I came to value free speech and, though it is easy to say that certain subjects should be off-limits for public discourse, I began to identify with the notion that we simply cannot progress as a society unless we have a medium through which to address our problems in an honest and intelligent way. Suppressing anyone’s ideas because we personally find them repugnant or morally objectionable is, in a word, arrogant, and a childish display of hubris that reveals that we consider our points of view superior to those of others. Certain subjects have been endowed with such a taboo that the social stigma alone may dissuade a curious individual from so much as seeking out information on the topic. I view this as a grave loss of intellectual potential that siphons the value out of our public discourse. As I see it, we cannot even begin to evaluate the validity of disparate views unless they are communicated openly. A result of all of this is that I longed to contribute my own perspectives to the ongoing dialogue, knowing full well that I may just be shouting into the void, in the hope that maybe I can encourage someone else to speak their truth, even if it means going against something that I have to say.
The most valuable pursuit I can think of is the free exchange of ideas. Indeed, the progress of our species is contingent on our ability to adapt and address shortcomings in our way of life before they become terminal. The only meaningful way to do this is to remove the shackles we’ve placed on language and put our noses to the proverbial grindstone to seriously come to terms with the conditions in which we are living. As it is today, we are all aware of the innumerable difficulties that accompany being members of a complicated species residing on a planet with a dubious trajectory, and yet some among us have decided that this or that subject are ‘off limits.’ Why this is, I do not profess to know, and I have no intention (here, anyway) of descending into a hastily-written screed inculcating any individual, organization, or ideology in the promotion of these standards. I do, however, intend to convey my ardent support for the free expression of ideas, however subversive, because we can only find solutions to the problems we all acknowledge we are facing if we confront them head on. This deference to social civility, while perhaps well-intentioned, has gotten us nowhere; indeed, it likely is what is holding us back.
While the statements I have made thus far imply a desire to comment exclusively on social and political matters, I also hope to use this space to discuss my own experiences with anxiety and depression, and to speak candidly about the dimensions of these illnesses that tend to go unreported. While I most assuredly will be critical of ideas and individual proponents of said ideas, I also am equipped with enough self-awareness to acknowledge my own shortcomings as a human being and enough courage to discuss the challenges I face candidly, fixing the critical gaze on myself just as often (if not more) as I do on others.
Fundamentally, what I seek to do here is cultivate a space where I can remark freely on the ideas that are most profound and impactful to me in a way that is honest and encourages others to do the same. I am well aware that there will be occasions when I offer an opinion that will contradict the beliefs that you, the reader, hold dear, but it is never my intention to be needlessly offensive and I sincerely hope that all of my arguments can be understood to have been made in good faith. All of my critiques have a purpose and are targeted to the specific area of concern that I am addressing within the text of that particular essay. Any indications to the contrary are purely a result of my deficiencies as a writer, of which there are many, you will come to find. I am also under no illusion that anything I have to say will be groundbreaking. I know that most people would approach this sort of undertaking with an eye for changing the world but given how many voices there are, many of whom contributing quite substantially to the improvement of humanity, the best I can reasonably aspire to is to be understood and, if I am especially lucky, to learn something about myself along the way.
Now that we’ve gotten that foolishness out of the way, what do you say we move onto the first course? I’ve got a lot cookin’.
