Happy New Year

Well, this is it. This is my last post for this year. Post 336. A total of 2662 page views for the year that averages out to over 7 a day. Paltry when it comes to comparative reach, but enough that it has brought me many hours of thinking, learning, and practicing.

I am certainly a better person for having done this. This has been a great experiment.

My resolutions for this coming year, or better described as the systems for 2017 are:

1. Exercise following the process of BLS
2. Working every day on my book
3. Continuing operation stay in touch from 2016

I will not be continuing my daily posting here. I will still post occasionally if an idea just demands processing, but beyond that my writing time will be taken up. Poke me in 365 days and see how my book has come.

Completion date is targeted to be 31 December 2017.

Have a wonderful 2017 and thanks for reading. Your attention, whether real or imagined played an important role in helping me do this thing. It's one of the top accomplishments of my life. Thank you.

Stick it to the Man

Authority means power. Power to shape the world to better reflect the perspectives of those holding the authority. However, there are two points about this reality that need addressing.

First, no position of earthly authority is absolute. Parents, teachers, police, administrators, bosses, and governments all are limited in their authority and power. Despite the fear they may elicit they can only do so much. Sometimes that is a lot, but often they have a lot less than it seems.

Second, all earthly authority can be wrong. Just because someone is in charge does not mean that what they say and the positions that they take are valid, good, or right. There are obvious examples of this all over. From Hitler and Mao to wrong cops and anti-free speech professors.

The thing is though that authority figures are given a lot of leeway and a lot of respect. I think this is generally good. However, sometimes the weight of their incorrectness demands being addressed. Sometimes we need to stick it to the man and demand that things change.

One area where this is increasingly becoming important from what I can see is in universities. The issues is increasingly important and difficult because it is so wide spread. This video with Camille Paglia goes into a number of issues that are destroying the value of university educations, especially graduate degrees. The video is kind of long, but it is good.

We as people have power. When things are corrupt and broken the light will push things to change. However, it might cost a lot.

I am writing this for myself more than anything. I'm not in a position to call out university administrators or professors for poor behavior, but I am sometimes in positions to call it out elsewhere. I can be somewhat conflict adverse. So it is scary for me to really push when things are out of kilter. It is easy for me to call out issues "out there" that need addressing, but a lot harder to identify them and stand up myself. That is probably true for a lot of people.

So come on guys! Let's stick it to all the mans and call out baddies wherever they be found.

The Benefits of Multiculturalism

Here is a lovely article about the benefits of multiculturalism. If you do not feel inclined to read it it basically says multiculturalism is good because it:

• Increases immigration
• Introduces new ideas
• Brings new types of food
• Brings new sports
• Enhances national unity
• Prevents your country from being boring
• Increases general creativity

They also mention that sometimes if the newcomers have differing values it can cause stress within society, but that's probably not important.

I will say here, that I am not a fan of anything, multiculturalism included, simply for the sake of it. If I do not see a compelling reason for it I am not going to be interested. So let's look at these ideas and see which ones make sense and how valuable they are.

Increases Immigration
Well, yes that is certainly possible. That largely is how you develop multiculturalism in a country. I do now however, see why that is an inherently positive thing. It really depends on who you are bringing in and what kind of support the immigrants need. If the immigrants are highly educated, well to do, or highly skilled then they stand a very good chance of adding value to society.

However, if they are mostly unskilled, poor, and uneducated they can be a significant drag on social services and hurt the poor people you already have.

Introduces New Ideas
This is certainly true. Different cultures have different strengths and weaknesses that can introduce new concepts, styles, and values that can make a society richer. I don't think multiculturalism is inherently required for this though. Especially today with the internet we can connect with people anywhere in the world and pull their ideas and concepts without the need for immigration at all.

Brings New Types of Food
This is true. I don't know how important this is overall. It can be nice though.

Brings New Sports
Like food, not a big deal either way.

Enhances National Unity
...what?!?! Now this is, to be polite, wrong. Unity happens when society has a common purpose and vision. You can have multiculturalism and unity, but you have to work extra hard the more diverse your country is. Diversity in general makes unity more difficult.

Prevents Your Country From Being Boring
Hm, nah. I'll pass on this one too. There isn't a boring country on earth. No matter how monocultured a country is it is not going to be boring. Boring is inside your head so not having a diverse enough culture is a really lazy copout.

Increases General Creativity
Creativity is an interesting concept, and one that has been studied a lot. I've read a little about it and a major factor is exposure to a diverse set of ideas and topics. So while cultural diversity is a part of that you can get a lot of it off the internet. The rest is more about topical diversity (engineering, biology, chemistry, etc.) and not cultural diversity.

Downsides
To address the minor downside of possible cultural differences causing strife I will agree. I will very strongly agree. Some cultures are pretty compatible. For example, during the late 1800's and early 1900's in the United States there was extensive immigration from Europe. It caused issues for quite a while. The Italians were disliked by the French and the Poles didn't like the Spanish. And everyone hated the Irish. But in the end they all integrated pretty well into society, generally lost their cultural identity for the most part, and all got along. The key though was they were all coming from generally Christian backgrounds. There certainly where differences, but the flavors of Christianity, and the Jewish groups, all managed to have pretty consistent values and they worked it out.

That has been less of the case with other cultural groups though. Groups that come from other religious backgrounds (Muslim, Buddhist, Tribal Religions) have had a much more difficult time integrating into American culture. It is possible, but it is harder.

There are also risks when there are large influxes of a very different culture into an area because it means that the cultural balance changes so much so fast that there is little opportunity for cultural absorption.

And when the underlying values are very different between two groups, you can end up with very significant problems. So, multiculturalism is great. Up until it isn't. Cultures are different and not all can get along with all others.

The Terrible Year We Just Had

I have heard a lot of people bemoaning the terrible catastrophe that was 2016. However, when I look back at the things that really got people riled up it mostly boiled down to a bunch of old celebrities dying, and some zoo shooting a guerilla. The fact that those are the top complaints really speaks to me that we had a year full of first world problems. Or in other words, we had a great year.

To more fully emphasize the good year we had here is a list of good things that happened that far outbalance a few childhood icons dying.

There's an Ebola Vaccine now
Child Mortality - Down across the globe
+9% survival rate in pacreatic cancer sufferers
Gene responsible for ALS found
Volunteers in India planted 50 Million trees in 24 hours
Suicide rates down globally
The Ozone layer is repairing itself

MIND CONTROLLED ROBOT ARMS
Leo got dat oscar
Wild tigers numbers up FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 100 YEARS
Giant Pandas - No longer endangered
A solar powered plane did circumnavigated the world
Global Malaria down by 60%
Measels ERADICATED from the Americas
93% of the world's children learned to read and write - the highest percentage IN HUMAN HISTORY
Every major grocer and fast food chain in the U.S pledged to use cage free eggs only by 2025
Manatees - No longer endangered
Wild Wolves - Back in Europe
Wild Salmon spawning in the Connecticut river for the first time since the American revolution
Columbian white tailed deer - no longer endangered
Green Sea Turtles - NO LONGER ENDANGERED
Sea World no longer breeding captive killer whales
Humpback Whales - NO LONGER ENDANGERED
Global aid - up by 7%
Americas most generous year EVER in charity and aid
China's most generous year EVER in charity and aid at $15 billion

So yeah, it was a good year. Lots of good stuff happened. Here's to 2017 being that much better.

What is Success?

You don't have to swing a cat very far to run into a SJW bemoaning the horrible state we are in. The terrible racism, sexism, homophobia, and general prejudice is apparently literally murdering and raping everyone everywhere always.

To be fair to the more reasonable leftists the world is not a perfect place and I agree that there is progress that can be made. That is what leads me to my next question.

What does success look like?

At what point would a SJW look at the world, smile contentedly, and hang up the SJW label to never protest, angrily tweet, or get offended again? It is an honest question brought about by observations that make me question the existence of such a state. The triviality of the issues that SJWs seem to jump on makes me think that they are fighting a never ending war. The are warring for the sake of warring.

I am obviously biased, but I certainly hope it doesn't look something like this.

Freedom of the Press - RIP 2016

Well, I complained before that the press had, through chasing profits and political affiliations, effectively given away its freedom. It is still true. However, it had an effect that I missed, though it is now clear in retrospect.

When a segment of society that has traditionally been tasked with providing a good or service falls down on its job and is patently miserable at it a lot of people start looking around for a solution. This is reasonable and expected. Unsurprisingly during this period of solution seeking some people suggest that the government should toss its hat in the ring and take the responsibility. Who better right?

This happened back in the 1930's. The great depression was in full swing and the Church did not step up to help people, especially older people. Older people really needed (and need) help so solutions were needed. This led to the establishment of the 1935 Social Security Act. The government stepped in and "fixed" it the way the government does. With a centralized, bureaucratic, and expensive solution that is now threatening the solvency of the country.

Well, the press de facto giving up their freedom and doing a lousy job providing us with the truth of what is going on has opened the door to the government coming in and "fixing" it. Oh? What is this fix? Well, simply put the government is now establishing a centralized propaganda office tasked with providing a state approved narrative to the United States and her allies.

It was passed with a rare bit of bipartisan cooperation and signed by President Obama just a few days ago. Senate Bill 2692 very well may represent the beginning of the end of our free press. The press was already spineless so now that the government is going to start presenting an authorized and official narrative it will be even harder for them to counter it.

And when the official narrative is false is when we REALLY want someone to come along and counter it.

A Son is Given

I want to take today's space here to say how glorious the reality of Christmas actually is. Jesus came to Earth to be one of us. The trip wasn't just for sight seeing though. He came to be a blood a sacrifice. THE blood sacrifice. He came to destroy sin and death.

Because He came down as a babe and eventually to die for us we are able to be free. Free not just to go to heaven, but free to live our lives here and now in glorious freedom from the sins that plague us. We have been given the keys, because of the Sacrifice, to end addiction, to overcome disease, to even reverse death.

We as the Church need to embrace this freedom. We need to embrace it in our lives so we understand the gloriousness of it and then proclaim it into the lives of the hurting all around us.

The freedom we have from the ultimate blood sacrifice and the resulting authority we have over death is the most metal thing ever.

Turn it up to 11!

Politics is Not a Team Sport

Just because someone says they are a ______ and you also call yourself a ______ doesn't mean you are responsible for defending any and all actions made by that person. They are not on your "team". If they do something stupid or have an opinion that you disagree with that is ok. Disagree with them. Don't feel compelled to defend their actions or take their opinion as your own.

We use labels to help communicate our personal stances on things, but they should be exactly that, personal stances. If you let the label define your positions you are setting yourself up to look really dumb. Plus, if you haven't thought about the topic who has the right to define your own opinions?

For example, a standard Republican position is small government. However, election after election Republicans elect "republicans" to power who grow the government and do not show any interest in cutting spending.

For you Democrats out there, corporations and their influence in Washington is a hot button topic. The Democrat party is THE party for big donors both individuals and corporations.

So people, stop supporting people who don't actually embrace your ideals. Don't roll over just because they have an R or D by their name.

You Don't Have to Give a Crap

The wonderful thing about freedom of speech and freedom in general is that we are all able to go our own way as individuals. It means I can have opinions and stances and they do not apply to you at all, because you are free.

If you hate nerds, that's ok, because your opinions, aside from maybe hurting my feelings, have no bearing on my nerdiness. And if I hate Cowboys fans, that is ok, because you can write me off and ignore me.

The beauty of the system that we have is that we are free to be opinionated. We are free to be ourselves. We are free to take whatever stance we want without worrying about getting into trouble. That means some of us will use that freedom to be racists, sexists, and generally bigoted and prejudiced. They can be complete and utter assholes. And that is ok. They can be all those things, and they have no way to force those opinions onto us. That is what freedom is.

When we start taking that freedom away though. When people are no longer allowed to have opinions that are not "correct", that is when things get bad. That is when you lose your personhood. Maybe you'll get lucky and what is considered "correct" fits you pretty well. But maybe it doesn't. And even if it does fit you, you still have to be careful that you don't accidentally come off as "wrong" to someone. Or horror of horrors you learn and grow and change your mind about things and all of a sudden you are on the "wrong" side.

There are people out there who say things that really offend me. When I am offended it does not make me happy. However, I would rather be offended every day and still be able to be myself without fear than enjoying perfect emotional comfort up until I get arrested for thinking wrong.

Freedom of speech is not some luxury we are allowed based on good behavior. Freedom of speech is the foundation of our republic. Freedom of speech is freedom of self, freedom for self determination, freedom of thought. To quote Patrick Henry, "give me liberty or give me death!"

(His entire speech is very moving if you haven't heard the quote in context)

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

Why is Diversity Good?

The mantra of diversity is preached everywhere almost constantly. It has become such a common refrain that it has kind of sunk into the background noise for me. However, I realized the other day that despite the constant chant of diversity being so good and important I don't really ever hear WHY. Additionally, I do not often hear an explanation for what kind of diversity is being encouraged. There are lots of different kinds of diversity (diversity of diversity!). Are ALL kinds good and important?

First, I want to explore what kinds of diversity there are. This list is probably not exhaustive, but does give a good selection:

• Gender
• Age
• Race
• Sexual orientation
• Education - level
• Education - expertise
• Education - location
• Culture
• Political
• Theological
• Philosophical
• Ethical
• Career

To skip around a little, the idea of having diversity is most commonly touted as being a positive thing because it brings in diverse perspectives. That means that ideas are approached from a number of angles and better and more creative solutions are more likely. Also, if a company is making women's shoes having a few women in the marketing department would be helpful so that a they can share their customer's perspective more closely. In that regard I think that diversity certainly is good, helpful, and really quite critical.

There are some kinds of diversity that are very much not helpful for basically anyone. For example, I really really really do not want diversity of education levels in the team of surgeons doing my heart transplant. I want them all to be super well educated and with lots of years of experience. For a surgical team, competency rules the day. I don't care how inspiring Jimmy's story of getting his GED was I do not want him anywhere near me with a scalpel.

However, when considering what kinds of diversity are important each organization's mission and goals need to be taken into account. The argument for diversity is that it increases the quality of the groups work as a whole. That is only true if it actually does this.

All else being equal, having a diverse group of people working on a project probably is genuinely better. However, rarely is it "all else being equal". When you are going to hire people for that lady's shoe company marketing team you want the best. You want the most capable marketers you can find and afford. If you pick for diversity, in the real world, that means you are most likely not choosing for skills. As I said before, having some women on the team is going to be a benefit. However, do you need to be sure to have racial diversity? Do you need some LGBTQ representation? Do you need old people? Do you need men?

The answer to all those questions is most likely no. While it may be nice, and make people feel good, other than having a female (read target customer) perspective it really doesn't matter.

Let's flip it around. The men's shoe company marketing department is hiring. Upon interviewing the 100 candidates for the five positions the top five picks are all amazingly qualified and extremely talented marketers... and all women. Is that a problem? I'd say not at all. They are really good at their jobs so they will know to find any perspective they do not personally have (which doesn't require one of them being a man).

How, why does that not matter? How could five women figure out how to enticingly market men's shoes to men?

Well, it comes down to a really tough concept... all of those groups I listed above are not monolithic blocks. Not all men are the same. So if you replaced one of those super marketer ladies with an ok at marketing guy he only has a single perspective on being a man. He of course would share it, but even his manly perspective would be limited.

What really matters is this: diversity of empathy. Who can you empathize with? Lack of diversity and empathy is the problem. How do you know you have a lock of empathy? If you view all the people with a certain characteristic as all being the same.

In conclusion, surface level diversity is more or less pointless. Diversity of mind is critical.

Identity - Tribalism

Being part of something bigger than yourself is a hugely comforting feeling. It provides structure to your life. It imparts some level of identity as well. It is a major factor in why gangs and terrorist organizations ability to recruit. When they give a clear message of what it means to be part of their tribe to youth who are lost and floating it is magnetic.

Being part of a tribe isn't all bad despite my examples above. The reason that appeal is so strong is because of the importance and value there is in community and purpose. I've posted about both all of these topics previously. They are important, and when you don't have them your life loses a lot of its luster.

To go back to the negative side though there is an element of being part of a tribe that is dangerous. You can get sucked into the tribal identity and lose your sense of personal values. An example of this that I have seen recently is people on the political right being criticized by others on the right for criticizing Donald Trump. The Trump critics bring up points and the defenders attack the critics identity of being conservative or whatever.

This is an example of succumbing to tribal identity. Basically the Trump defenders are saying that it is more important to maintain tribal unity than it is to recognize the faults of members of the tribe. Even so far as revoking membership.

This is a problem for the tribe in question. Any tribe that exists is built upon certain principles. For those on the political right or conservative end of the spectrum that means, at least in part, individual freedom, minimal government, fiscal responsibility, and generally conservative ethical stances. It is pretty easy to see that Mr. Trump does not ascribe to all of those things very closely. I don't think he is a bad guy, but you are going to have to argue really hard to convince me that he is a small government guy. So his membership in the "conservative tribe" is not as strong as it could be.

So when conservatives attack people for critiquing Trump for areas where he is a little weak on it is at the cost of losing the tribes entire identity. Holding on to a leader no matter his actions is dangerous for everyone involved. It takes away the group identity that the members joined for and it removes accountability for leadership to stick with it.

So be in a tribe. Stay there and fight to keep the identity true to its core. Even if it means criticizing dear leader.

Snowflakes

Why are snowflakes symmetrical? I really don't know. I have spent a little time researching it and I am frustrated at my lack of ability to find an explanation that is satisfactory.


 Here is a lovely picture of a snowflake. If you notice it has six basically identical slices. Even down to the little bumps and lines. If you look at explanations, like this one, it mentions that the hexagonal shape is due to the structure of water molecules. This makes total sense and is apparent in other places in nature like in minerals. A beautiful example is this Bismuth crystal.



In the Bismuth it is clear that there are some patterns brought on by the molecular structure (it likes going in straight lines and making right angles). However, there is no larger pattern or symmetry.

With the snowflake though each arm of the snowflake not only conforms to the angles dictated by the molecular structure they share additional and unique information (how many branches, how long they are, spacing, etc.).


How is this information passed between all six branches? If all snowflakes were identical I would say it is all based on the molecular structure. But they are not. We know the temperature and humidity affects how each snowflake grows. However, that doesn't explain how six water molecules all align with with rotational symmetry to freeze onto the flake in the same location and at 60 degree angles from each other.

There must be some additional force (input) to cause the exactness of symmetry in conjunction with the vast diversity we see in shapes.

My Hypothesis
I have an idea of how it happens. However, I have not found any reference of this anywhere and I am kind of skeptical of it myself. My idea is that each flake has a local electrical field passing through the center of the flake.




Imagine the flake is lying flat (horizontally) between the green bars above. As the strength of the field shifts it aligns and guides water molecules in specific locations making them merge with the existing flake structure in a guided way. As the temperature, humidity, and field strength fluctuate the snowflake grows increasingly unique but generally symmetrically.

Here is a link to some research being done on electric fields and water ice crystal growth. They don't draw any connections, but it fits with my hypothesis.

Uncommon Decency

First, watch this video (8:40). It is about a black musician, Daryl Davis, who has taken it upon himself to meet with a diverse group of race related groups from the KKK to BLM and try to get to know them and develop relationships with them. Even to the point of being friends with them.

He epitomizes the true American spirit of freedom and inclusion. He refuses to demonize or marginalize people even though they have wildly different beliefs than he does. He seeks to find common ground. It is beautiful to watch.

If we as Americans sought to find common ground and paths to get along instead of looking for ways to be upset and offended we would be a lot happier all around. In fact, it just might make our country a better place.

Thought Vigilantes

There is a lot of coverage of opinions and trends on university campuses. It has struck me as a bit odd why there is so much coverage on such a small sliver of society. I mean really, why should we care what is going on with a bunch of kids running around pretending to be adults?

Well, we should care, and here is why. College campuses, and those pre-adults are in a very few short years going to be bringing their opinions and world views into the work place, government, and culture at large. We will all begin to experience those perspectives and see the world begin to change because of today's college student's involvement.

That being said we have a problem. The problem is that there is a growing rejection of the value of freedom of speech, and a rejection of freedom of thought. "Safe spaces", pushes for acceptance of non-standard gender pronouns, trigger warnings, dis-invitations to certain speakers, and cries of hate speach, are all targeting our very fundamental right to personal identity.

The first amendment of the United States constitution enshrines our freedom of speech. That means that we have the freedom to speak our minds. To say things that other people disagree with, or find offensive. Even to say things specifically to be offensive.

In the era we live in the government is not the threat to that freedom of speech. The threat is businesses like Google, Facebook, and Twitter, as well as Universities who embrace policies that allow for censorship of whatever speech is deemed sexist, bigoted, racist, or generally offensive and hateful.

The threat is that these college kids will enter the larger world and push for, or at least accept, people and organizations to act as thought vigilantes to punishing anyone who might speak out against their opinions or world view.

We must fight against this trend. Regardless of our political affiliations or philosophical stances. If we want to live in a country where we are free to choose our own futures, to have our own opinions, to be individuals, we must fight to maintain unfettered free speech. Yes, even if people are mean to us. Because if we lose that then we can all sit back and enjoy authoritarianism of whatever flavor decides to come along. And we won't get to choose it.

I am a WOMAN

Ok, so I'm not actually a woman. Also, this is going to be a bit more iffy than my "I am a MAN" post. However, for me it is a bit more important in that I am seeking to understand women, their identity, and their associated motivations and drivers. So again, I am going to write this as fact, but I could be wrong.

Women's identity as a woman is different compared to that of men. I am going to do a lot of comparing and contrasting. The primary difference I see is that women's identity is that it is much more existence based as apposed to action based.

Women deal with a significantly higher level of surface level judgement than men. What they where, how they do their makeup and hair. How skinny they are. The judgement (especially from other women) never stops. However, even though there is a lot of surface level judgement it does not seem to hit on fundamental female identity. It can make women feel terrible about themselves of course, but no one says you are not a "woman" because a girl wore something frumpy.

The deeper level, the identity of womanhood as it is separate from being simply female comes into play with motherhood. The ability to be a mother is completely opaque from the outside. No one can look at a woman and know based on some viewable characteristic that she is unable or unwilling to bear children. As such a woman's identity as a woman is not only somewhat biologically intrinsic, it is also relatively unquestioned. At least from external observers.

Therefore, women enjoy a certain level of security in their identity as women. If a woman has children she can go her entire life without ever really having her identity as a woman come into question. The topic just never comes up.

For women who are unable to have children or choose not to though it can be a real issue. On the upside they don't have as much risk of their womanhood being ground down by others. However, they can run into an issue of lack of empathy from mothers who do not understand their struggle. Men, whether sympathetic or not universally understand the struggle of identity.

Probably the biggest difficulty women face here though is there very likely is no clear solution to fix a lack of children. If a woman is infertile there may be no solution. If she is single, it isn't just a simple thing to find a guy and get married. If she is older she might be completely out of luck. If she is remaining childless by choice she can struggle with that decision and deal with the cognitive dissonance of her beliefs and her feelings for potentially ever. Those are all real and very difficult struggles. All of that within an environment where women's identity is poorly discussed or understood.

The second part of a woman's identity is connected to being in relationship with a man. Again, like motherhood it is more or less a true/false thing. Being in a relationship fulfills the desire brought on by the identity. This one is pretty straight forward so I won't say a lot about it. Just having a man to care for and support fulfills the need.

Putting this all together and wrapping up the MAN and WOMAN part shows me that we all have identities that we are seeking to fulfill. Each of us has different struggles and challenges. Ultimately it is very important for us to understand both what being a "man" and being a "woman" means so that we can be empathetic supporters of those around us as well as recognizing when we are feeling the repercussions of being outside of them ourselves. I hope this is helpful for both men and women and that I have accurately described the struggles each group faces.

I am a MAN

Uncharacteristically, I want to preface this post by saying this topic has been on my mind for a long time. I feel that is important to explore. However, it is going to contain generalizations that may or may not be accurate. I would very much like input on it so that I can gain a deeper understanding.

Masculine identity is an interesting and important subject. What it means to be a man touches on the deepest places of a man's identity. It informs almost every decision we make and it plays into every conflict we are a part of.

Being a "man" is not intrinsic. It is a quality that can be lost both in a man's perspective and in the perspective of others. There are two areas where men are evaluated as being "men". One is a more superficial area. This is surface stuff like not wearing pink or looking somewhat effeminate or not being a hairdresser or other "girly" occupation. These things are surface characteristics that can make some people revoke a male's proverbial man card. These things also have an affect on men in so far as they internalize people's judgement of them.

However, the surface level is just that, surface level. what really determines it to a much larger extent is action. Surface stuff is highly culturally specific, but there is a deeper quality that is much more universal. Being a "man" ultimately is a characteristic that is earned through action.

Here are some of the things that most importantly play into being, or not being, a man. These things are pretty well universal, and a man will feel emasculated when he crosses these things whether or not someone says anything.

Standing up for yourself. A man who does not stand up for himself is viewed as weak. Even if he stands up for himself and fails in whatever it was, that doesn't matter. The act of taking a stand establishes his masculinity. No one respects a doormat.

Providing economically for yourself and your family. There is little that can shake a man's view of himself more deeply than to fail to bring home the bacon for his family. Regardless of the circumstances, a man who's family is struggling is a man who is struggling with identity.

Pleasing women. This can mean a number of things. There is the sexual side of it, where a man can diminished if he is unable to sexually please a woman/women. More fundamentally though being able to gain the respect, admiration, and pleasure of women is a huge boost to a man's self respect and identity as a man. A man who puts a twinkle in a dame's eye can ignore any amount of men's insults.

Protecting yourself and those around you. When a man steps into the role of protector, especially in the face of personal risk, he epitomizes masculinity. Conversely, there is no quicker way to lose respect (internally and externally) as a man then by putting self-preservation over defending those weaker than himself.

None of these things are intrinsic. If these things are all in action, as they should, a male human can feel incredibly secure and confident. If these things are not being done he can feel like a waste of resources and lower than low.

Fathers play a major role in establishing these qualities in boys as they grow. That is certainly not the only factor, but fathers have the ability to demonstrate and teach their sons how to do these things. These are not things mother's can do as good of a job developing.

Mothers, girlfriends, and wives play a massive role though in maintaining and nurturing a man's identity. If a girlfriend is critical and naggy she can grind down a man's ability to stand up for himself. If wife complains and whines and raises the bar of "adequate provision", even if the man makes good money, she can make him feel like a failure to her and his family. If a woman scorns her man and belittles him he will feel inadequate.

I don't want to be too harsh on women, a man is responsible for doing the things necessary to be a man. No one can do it for him. However, women are very much capable of destroying a man's identity and self worth. Also, women are able to do a lot in building up a man's confidence. This is, I believe, what G-d meant when He said “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Genesis 2:18). Women play a unique enabling role within men's view of themselves as "men". Women are like the foundation of a house. It is not lesser than the building part of the house, if the building is crummy it can't make it better, but if the foundation is crummy the house is toast.

The Great Commission

The Great Commission (Matthew 28:16-20)

¹⁶ Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. ¹⁷ And when they saw him they worshiped him, but some doubted. ¹⁸ And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Ok, so here is a question. Have you ever been to a church that takes the this passage seriously? The answer is probably yes, but I bet it is a very small number. It certainly has been the case for me. Don't get me wrong, I have been to a good number of great churches. However, they almost exclusively have not taken to the idea of discipleship within the church seriously let alone outside of it.

When churches en mass are not discipling their people, and when they are outsourcing their evangelism to foreign missionaries (not that missionaries are bad), why are we surprised that the Church is stagnant, not growing, and not unified? How can there be unity when there is no movement? No progress? No common purpose?

If we want to see the Church come alive it boils down to two simple things. Jesus happened to mention them in passing in Matthew 22:36-40.

³⁶ “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” ³⁷ And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. ³⁸ This is the great and first commandment. ³⁹ And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. ⁴⁰ On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

What is this talking about? What is a commandment? A commandment is something that you need to do. And the answer to what He was talking about was this: prioritize our relationship with G-d first above all else, and then prioritize our relationships with those around us.

This is simple, seek a deeper relationship with G-d, and seek to help those around you love G-d more. That is the great commission, that is revival. If churches actively developed that kind of culture they would grow, they would find unity with like-minded congregations, and their local area would change.

Game Face

Men are different from women. That's a shocker I'm sure, but it is in fact true. One thing that guys do, and often times do very well, is developing multiple personalities. This isn't the disorder kind of personalities, but intentional personality groupings to accomplish specific tasks.

This ability is often referred to as having a "game face". Men have lives as women do and sometimes those lives involve things that make playing sports well harder. For example, Johnny just broke up with his girlfriend. He is pretty torn up about it and angsting all over everyone because of it. He gets to his high school football game and they coach yells at him to pull it together and put his game face on.

Is his coach being mean? Is he telling him to squelch his feelings and not have them anymore? No, no to both. The coach is telling him to put his feelings into his romantic relationship brain box for later and pull out his football lineman box. Johnny gets the message and does it. He goes out and smashes heads in for 90 minutes and hardly once thinks about his ex. He performs well and once the game is over he puts lineman Johnny back away and pulls out angsty ex-boyfriend Johnny and grouses some more.

I have seen this and variations on it many times in my life and in my own personal experience. The effect is most pronounced in athletes, pilots, and soldiers. They shut down whatever life distractions there are and immerse themselves in the moment at hand. I have seen guys who are normally peppy goofy dudes zip up a flight suit and sit in a pilot seat and become super serious no-nonsense sticklers. Then a couple hours later they hop out and boom, goofy all over again.

It happens more broadly in different environments. When I am at work I behave differently than I do when I am at home. I behave differently at church. I behave differently when I am with some friends vs others. It isn't an issue of me not being "true to myself" or disingenuous with anyone. It is simply that different environments call for different focuses of my broader personality.

I realize women do it too, but I have seen it much more strongly in men. It's just a kinda neat trick we do.

Self Esteem

The past few decades has been filled with books and general blather about how important having good self-esteem is. How to build it in kids and how to ensure you have good levels of self esteem. In fact unpacking a box a few days ago I found a trophy from my first season of baseball that I got for "having a good attitude". Woo. I still distinctly remember the frustration as a six year old when the adults refused to keep score of our games and would refuse to tell us who won.

Their is an issue with this whole question of whether someone has "good" self-esteem or "bad" self-esteem. The issue is the question is flawed. The issue is not good vs bad, but whether you are focusing on self vs other. If your focus is on self, you by definition have already lost and are going to have problems. Even if you manage to develop a good level of self-esteem all you have managed to do is add yourself to the generation of incredible people this self-esteem focus has led to.

According to a study of one million high school seniors (circa 2004, so my age): 70% rated their leadership skills as "above average" (only 2% rated themselves below average). Additionally 60% rated themselves as being in the top 10% in "their ability to get along with others" and 25% rated themselves in the top 1%.

Having very high self-esteem is bad because you become delusional about your abilities and prideful. "But wait" you may say "isn't low self-esteem super bad?" Well, yes, yes it is, but not because of the reason you'd think. Both high and low self-esteem are bad for the same reason. Pride.

When someone has low self-esteem they are there because of a deep seated belief that they are "better than this" that they are "a disappointment" or "underachieving". It is all pride. It is all focus on self.

The solution is to stop asking the question entirely and start looking outside of ourselves. Seek ways to serve others. Seek relationships for the others sake. Seek G-d and His kingdom. That is where our esteem needs to be.

The Zero Sum Fallacy - Part 2: Feminism

Feminism, and women's rights activists more broadly, have shone the light on things that make the world in general, and women's lives specifically worse. That is a positive contribution to society, and I am grateful for their hard work.

However, in their fight for equality they have pushed a perspective that is damaging. The perspective is this, the world's systems were tilted against women in favor of men, and by improving women's position all is right with the world. This sounds fine, but it's not. Very much not.


This assumes that we live in a world where men's and women's rights sit on either side of a nice shiny scale. So by lifting the women's side up everything is balanced and good. Further, this is taken that when men (or anyone) advocate for men's rights they are fighting the progress made by women and are inherently chauvinistic bastards.

The reality is that men and women both have rights and issues that while certainly related are not equally balanced like that. For example, men, despite being half the population make up 80% of suicides. Men are the victims of rape significantly more frequently than women.

These are issues that should be discussed and dealt with. But when these topics are brought up they are met with disbelief, scorn, and accusations of sexism against women. This false choice that making things better for men makes it worse for women hurts us all.

Feminism and masculinism ism should walk hand in hand to make the world a better place for everyone.

The Zero Sum Game Fallacy

The idea of a zero-sum game comes from game theory and describes a situation that for one player to advance the other player must retreat. Like a teeter totter, only one person can rise above it all, and that at the expense of driving the other to the ground.

When applied to real life it births the view that any success comes at the cost of someone else. That the rich are rich because they have oppressed the poor. That the poor are poor because they were oppressed by the rich.

This view fosters victim mentality and encourages targeting those viewed as oppressors. The idea of taxing the rich at a higher rate and general redistribution of wealth comes from this zero-sum mentality. By cutting down the "winners" we will by definition raise up the "losers".

The flaw here is that economics, and life in general, are not zero-sum. The creation of wealth is exactly that, the creation of wealth. It comes from collecting resources and building things. People can gain money and power on top of the backs of others and at their expense. However, most wealth is created from the collection of resources by which everyone gains.

We can work together, we can all succeed, we can make the world a better place. The rich can get richer and the poor can get richer at the same time. We can all win.

Why I Don't Follow Sports

When I was a kid I played everything from soccer and football to tennis and basketball. If it was a sport I did it.  However, as I got older I didn't get involved in sports in a bigger way. I didn't have a favorite baseball team. I didn't follow who might be the first draft picks for the NFL. It just didn't connect with me. Today I don't follow sports, and I don't even have any favorite teams.

Why?

First off, I don't have any philosophical issue with being a fan. That's not why I eschew the March Madness brackets. I thought I might, but as I am thinking about it I see no legitimate universal truth that would argue against the value in sport mania (within reason). The reason for this post is for introspection and not explaining why everyone else who is a sports fan is some kind of heinous and immoral scumbag.

My dad is a baseball geek. Specifically a Mets fan. However, growing up we lived in an area that didn't have any top level sports teams. What teams were around and popular my dad specifically rooted against. To some extent I guess I got a bit of an anti-establishment streak from him that made focusing on a single team harder. It also meant that there was no passing of the fan baton from my father to me. I got his disparaging view of whatever everyone else's favorite was (hence I'm a Yankees fan or at least claim to be), but not the lineage of love for a particular club.

Possibly related to that, but different is I have pretty much always viewed the time and money spent on being a fan of a sport a bit of a waste. Knowing a lot about college football doesn't contribute to getting better grades or performing well at work. Knick knacks and memorabilia for a team you simply like is excessive and a waste of space and money (for me). It just seems frivolous.

I have never had a TV or cable. So watching sports on TV has never been easy. The internet makes it easier, but why spend money on something I don't care about? The bar to access games is low but it is still too high.

I HATE commercials. The 5 second skippable commercials on youtube annoy me, and the fifteen minute commercial breaks during football games drive me nuts.

And so I don't follow sports. It's not worth the time, money, or effort to be in the know.

Dear Future Me

Dear Future Me,

Thank you for cleaning out the garage this weekend. Past me is a total bum and keeps not having done it. Even when he had nothing to do last Saturday he just sat around on the internet looking at cats.

Thank you for going to the gym four times next week instead of three to make up since that bum past me skipped yesterday. You are a real champ.

Thank you for running a little extra tomorrow to pick up the slack for past me eating that third (THIRD!) doughnut this morning.

Thank you for making time to spend with the kids even though you had a long day at work. Past me keeps just herding them off to bed.

Future me, you are just the best. I can always count on you to be there and make the tough choices past me punts on. You are the man.

Sincerely,

Present Me

From Threats Foriegn and Domestic

The United States, and really the world is facing a threat to our economic stability and solvency. This threat comes from China. Despite how strong our military is it is no match for this threat. We could very well be blindsided and left with no recourse.

Unfortunately for China though, they are threatened even more than we are. We here in the US have been inoculated to the threat at least to the point of having experienced it before. The threat? A housing bubble. Even today China continues to build massive swaths of property that is getting bought up like hotcakes by speculators. So despite entire cities sitting mostly uninhabited for years they continue to build and the speculators continue to buy.

Now, if these speculators were just newly rich Chinese fat cats it might not be a big deal. However, these speculators are common every day Chinese people. Not just a few of them though. Basically everyone who has any money is investing it all in the housing market. So despite the high vacancy rates prices continue to rise, reinforcing the belief that this is a sure thing. So much so that they are getting into extensive personal debt en mass to cash in.

The government periodically implements new policies to try to slow things down or even things out, but China's entire economy is built on this development and there is only so much they can do.

I don't know how long this will last, but I am positive that it won't be forever. Someday, and probably sooner than later, the Chinese housing market is going to collapse. When it does China will crash harder than the US did by a long shot. And given how tightly we are connected to China that will hurt us. That will hurt the world economy overall. We almost tanked our economy in 2008 and the world along with it. China has that same potential now.

I don't know what, if anything, can be done to resolve this, but I can at least talk about it, and warn people it is coming. We got caught flat footed last time, let's not have that happen again.

Duties and Rights

The feminist movement has championed increased rights for women for many decades, ever championing the slogan of "equal rights". Many of the reforms brought about through these efforts are laudable and important for the strength of our society. The ability of women to vote brings important and needed perspectives into the political arena.

However, during this period of change a dichotomy was missed. The feminists sought to make rights equal, but they failed to recognize the fact that there were duties associated with those rights.

In the past, and even to some extent today, men and women played very different roles within the family and society as a whole. Because of those different roles men and women had different sets of obligations both legally and socially. For example, in England during the 1800's women who were married were covered by something called coveture. The idea was that women were one with their husbands and part of that oneness meant that they were limited in their ability to make money and what money they did make was the husbands property to do with as he wanted. Obviously this is a large restriction and lends itself to abuse by less than honorable husbands. It was subsequently ended giving women freedom over their assets. However, the missing part of this is that husbands, in conjunction with that privilege had a duty, an obligation. They were legally bound to take care of their wives and children financially while the wives were not under any such obligation. So while it was certainly not an example of equal rights, the men had the privilege at least in part due to their need to comply with the legal obligation. Something that broke when women received the freedom to make and spend was that men were still responsible for the taxes on their wives income while the wife was still not required to contribute to the upkeep of the family or even of herself. This issue carries on today in requirements of men to provide alimony and child support to women after a divorce even if the wife was the one initiating it.

Going back to women getting the vote, they did not, despite getting the right to vote, take upon themselves the duty of military conscription which was traditionally associated with voting. That is still something that today remains as a tilted right/duty. Men are required to sign up with the selective service in order to be on call for drafting if needed while women are not. This despite the recent opening of combat positions to women.

One final example takes us to China. In China sons are legally obligated to provide for their aging parents. If they do not provide like the parents think they should the parents can sue to son for the money. Girls are not under any such requirement legally or culturally either. So even if a daughter has a job and makes good money there is no expectation that she help her parents out. For parents this provides a stark decision when they are starting a family. Do they abort or abandon or in some cases murder their female babies in order to wait until they have a son as their legally required one child in order to provide for their own old age? Or do they accept the girl and hope they can save enough to live after they get too old? It is a terrible choice and one that has significantly contributed to a distinctly biased gender proportion in China.

Rights and duties go hand in hand. Rights are often given in order to equip the receiver to deliver on the responsibilities thrust on them. By giving rights to those who have no corresponding duties it can lead to imbalance and very messed up oppression going the other way. So if you want equality fight for equal duties as well. Don't just pick all the fun stuff.

The Issue with Hate

I watched an excellent video from the amazing people at PragerU. Please give it a watch.

The issue with hate is simple. It blinds us. When we hate we make the difficult challenge of understanding others and make it pretty well impossible. It shuts down our willingness to sympathize let alone try empathize.

That wilful lack of perspective then leads to more hate. If you hate Jim, and Bob defends Jim or even does something nice for Jim, the hate bubble grows and absorbs Bob too. The bubble can grow quickly. Especially if someone comes along to blow it up for you. It can grow to encompass the whole world even.

Be willing to look for the other's perspective. Be willing to try to understand why they do what they do. You may find that they are hurting as much or more than you are. You may find that you were just wrong to begin with. You may find you were being lied to by people who wanted you to hate.

Jesus said love your enemies in Matthew 5:43-48, and in Romans 12:20 it says to show kindness to your enemies which will be like heaping burning coals on his head. Why does the Bible say these things? It is because it is a beautiful way to protect ourselves from hate and push others out of hate. When we love our enemies we are not hating. We are seeking to understand and serve them. That means our hate bubble gets popped and can't swallow the world. Then by serving our enemies we throw them into potentially terrible bouts of cognitive dissonance. If we are worthy of hate, how can it be possible for us to do nice things for them? Those two things do not go together. It will either drive them crazy or pop their hate bubbles.

So love and serve your enemies and save the world.

"My" Truth

Everyone has a perspective that is at least slightly different from everyone else's. When people refer to it as "my truth" or "their truth" it really bothers me. It is true that it is in fact my perspective, truly, but that does not mean it has any bearing on the truth at all. There is one Truth, and one series of events that is in fact reality. Unfortunately as finite humans we do not have very large perspectives so we rarely understand what is going on in a complete way.

This lack of completeness exists for things we are present for as well as the other 99.9999% of the world. The part of this that I am particularly interested in is how to engage with people who have different perspectives than I do. When they are on the other side of the room that isn't too hard, but when they are from a different race/religion/community that makes it a lot harder.

Is it possible to learn enough about a radically different perspective to be able to understand in a real way people who have it? I can be sympathetic of others and their struggles, but I am not sure how far I can extend my empathy.

I have strong opinions about a lot of things in government and politics. Things that impact everyone in our country. I recognize though that my perspective is limited and it is distinctly possible that I have opinions that are not only impractical, but dismissive and offensive to some people's experiences. Where, were I in their position I would actively fight against those ideas, and justifiably.

Like I said, there is one truth. But to fix many of the problems we face as a nation we need solutions that take into account the perspectives of many different people.

Star Wars - The Force Awakens

I watched the Force Awakens a while ago, so this is kinda behind the times, but I found an article that so perfectly encompassed my opinion of the movie that I had to share it. The article.

Long story short, given the funding behind the movie I would expect them to have the best writers and direction available. I would expect the movie to be tight, well written, and perfectly formulated. For the masses of Star Wars fans out there they should provide nothing less than perfection.

They fans were not so lucky.

The movie was 1. A total rehash of past Star Wars movies, and 2. So full of plot holes that I couldn't even enjoy the movie.

The special effects were great... but so have the special effects of almost every major film for the past decade so I. do. not. care. The article I linked to above lists the holes. There are a lot.

At this point the Star Wars franchise is one film away from losing my interest entirely. If Rogue One is anything less than great I will more or less write the franchise off and not waste my money on lazy writing and management.

Civil War Repost

Today I had the honor of speaking to the men at my church's men's breakfast. This is the text of what I shared with them. It is my previous writing about the risk of unpleasantness, but this time followed with a little less depressing ending.

The Depressing Part

This is a serious message for a serious time. I wrote this message out long hand in order to be sure of my words and emphasize the importance of what I am saying. There is a strong spiritual point to this, but I need to set the stage to get there. So please bear with me.

After the election of Mr. Trump there was an immediate and strong emotional reaction from Hillary supporters. This is certainly understandable. No one likes it when the side they support loses. However, the reactions went way beyond partisan disappointment. There was not just crying, but weeping. I saw many people who were downright mourning. The reaction went so far as to devolve into rioting in places.

My heart goes out to those people. Their reactions were and are clearly genuine and I do not take joy in seeing people scared and in mourning. While I am not thrilled with president-elect Trump's election I am not despondent about it.

The thing that I am seeing is that the perspectives of Trump supporters and Hillary supports is fundamentally different. Not just politically and ideologically, but down to the very level of their view of how they interpret the world around them. The differences are deep, fundamental, and too numerous to list. I believe it is representative of how different leftist and conservative ideology is.

Ours is an increasingly divided country. We live in a very diverse country. There are differences in race, culture, socioeconomic standing, religion, philosophy, favorite sports teams, favorite sports, favorite TV shows, favorite media sources, perspectives on our country. There isn't a single universal unifying thing that even cuts across a super majority of Americans today. We are a fractured society.

This is a real problem. Regardless of who is "correct" or "moral" or "good" the disunity in our culture is a deep and existential problem for us. When rifts form as they are increasingly doing, relationships break down. Our level of social progress is being degraded. I heard from many people in the news and on social media who said they didn't know a single supporter for the other side in the election. The two sides are clearly not completely separate, but they are dangerously so.

If our nation continues along this path, towards increased fracturing we are headed to a really bad place. Here is what will happen:

1. The number and strength of relationships between groups (race, religion, party, socioeconomic status) will drop.
2. Trust and empathy between those groups will weaken.
3. Disagreements between those groups and individuals in those groups will begin to escalate in frequency and severity further pushing them apart.
4. Violence will begin to be seen with increasing frequency resulting in a sharp decline in dialogue even from previous levels.
5.  The United States will break up politically and geographically as different groups seek to insulate themselves from the violence and instability. This could lead to a civil war.

I am not overstating the risk posed by this social fracturing. I don't know how long it would take, and it can be prevented, but it is a real risk. There are two ways to prevent a civil war. The good way and the bad way. I’ll come back to that though.

The Slightly Less Depressing Part

2 Chronicles 36:22-23 records king Cyrus of Persia, declaring, under inspiration from G-d, that he would rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. Cyrus was a gentile king ruling over the exiled people of Israel. Despite this, G-d used him to provide the Israelites with an opportunity to return and take back Israel and rebuild the temple. Cyrus did not do the work, he just created the environment where it was possible. The Israelites still had to work hard and do the work, but it enabled them to get there. They had to fight the nations surrounding them, they had to fight pagan Israelites who did not believe in their mission of restoration, they had to fight political backlash from Cyrus’ eventual replacement Artaxerxes, and they had to work against the neglect and destruction of their land.

I believe Trump is a modern recurrence of King Cyrus. He is not a pastor or a moral reformer. Trump is a foot in the door—a stay of execution. He is an act of God to buy the church time to repent and return to her rightful role in American. He will not save us, only G-d can do that. I’m not sure Trump will even help us, but I do not believe he will get in our way.

At least for the next four years the people who are fighting the most to make the divisions in our nation worse do not have front and center stage. That gives us four years. Not four years to sit back and enjoy things not getting worse, but four years to prepare and act.

Where That Puts Us

Back to the good way and bad way to prevent civil war. The bad way is authoritarianism. A super strong central government can provide the unifying force necessary to provide a somewhat peaceful existence by forcing homogeneity on us. That has obvious downsides.

The good way is revival. If the people of our nation turn to G-d in large numbers we will see a level of unity and oneness of purpose not seen since WWII.  G-d is the only one who can save us from ourselves and the threats of evil in our world.

There is a very important role for all of us to take in order to see the good way taken. We need to actively and passionately develop our relationships with G-d. We must make the time to spend with Him. We must stop letting our pride and fear get in the way of loving and serving Him. We must run away from the sins that keep us from being able to be close to Him. We must do the things He is asking us to do.

THAT is revival. It starts as a small thing. In your attitudes and actions. This thing requires all of us though. We need everyone to jump in on this. The alternatives are horrible for us and for our nation.

The Encouraging Part

If I just left it there it would be a pretty depressing finish. However, I am not only hopeful, but excited to see what G-d is going to do in this time. The men’s ministry leaders have been discussing and praying how we can help us all to have deeper and richer relationships with G-d. We are passionate about inspiring, training, and leading you into deeper spiritual maturity.

We are flawed, we are broken, and I very much include myself here, but that does not matter. Jesus said in Matthew 11:28-30, “Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. ²⁹ Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. ³⁰ For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” We are damaged, we are busy, we have a million reasons not to prioritize our relationship with the most powerful being in the universe, but we must not put Him in second place. 

We can’t change the world, our country, our state, our community, our families, or even ourselves on our own. But through our dedicated and passionate individual relationships with G-d we can change all of it. If we come together as a brotherhood, as fellow sons of G-d, we can achieve mighty things in Him. Unimaginable things.

John Wesley said "Give me 100 men who love God and nothing else, who hate sin and nothing else, and I will change the world." My challenge for you today is to be one of those 100 men. Jesus said in Matthew 16:18-19 about us, the church that “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. ¹⁹ I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” later in Matthew 28:18-20 “¹⁸ And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹ Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, ²⁰ teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

Guys, it is simple. The world is broken. G-d loves the world. G-d loves us. G-d wants to change the world. He wants to use us. He has already given us the tools, the authority, even the fellow workers. We have EVERYTHING we need. Let us step into that authority together as men, change the world, and shake the gates of hell.