Why Blogging is Good - the Old Internet

I’ve recently discovered why blogging is good.

Rereading the archives.

I was irked by the NYT article repeatedly showing up on my newsfeed (What Is It About 20-Somethings?) and thought of a letter to the editor for TIME that I wrote back in 2006 responding to an article characterizing our current generation, which described us as the multitasking generation. I found it later – and will respond to those articles again later if I find time, but in looking for the article I found out something else.

Years before I knew the queer community I took a stance in favor of same-sex marriage. Years before I thought I was interested in media I was comparing 3 to 4 news sources for biases in looking to current events. And years before I thought of myself as an activist I was taking the stance of speaking into the void of the internet to declare my opinion.

Selective memory means if you ask me about 2005 I’ll tell you about graduating from high school, starting at Foothill College, getting a job, a camera, travel – but I’ll forget which issues went where. I’ve forgotten which online quizzes I took (Just retook some – results have changed… ). I forgot what a big deal goodbyes were before facebook took off – the email exchange and numbers in yearbooks. How much more aware I was of the news and how it affected me before I could vote and suddenly received political spam rather than just newsprint to educate on the issues. I forgot a lot of the details, the mundane ones with the flavor of the ordinary. And in rereading them I remembered. I clicked old links, found friends' old blogs, and recalled where they were. I meandered through time and in doing so actively reflected with a much greater depth than the current rut of thought I’ve been stuck in.

When I’m passively sitting, ideas used to be bouncing around like bubbles from the wand of a five year old. These notions were erratic and random, yet stemming from a common source. And at some point in the last few years I found my thinking actively declined. If I stopped without a topic in my mind, I’d go blank. Listening to the whir of fans or a breeze, seeing the color of the light, and then after the observation it was like my brain would be put on pause until I actively focused on something – and then thinking became an active act on whatever notion I chose to focus on. Thoughts didn’t just happen, things wouldn’t just occur to me, thoughts were the product of a focused effort. I’d get stuck in a linear progression that lead to a predictable product.

But rereading my own words set off fireworks in my brain last night. Like chipping a frozen waterfall and finding a gushing river underneath I’ve been thinking about everything since then. The traffic patterns, the paint between the lanes on the highway, the DMV, government structures, international politics, the texture of paint best suited for a photomontage, ideas for art, the difference between the same content in different context, flavors and texture in food, the practice of religion, people and their professions, maturation versus mindless conformity – anything and everything was back in play.

I’m not saying rereading old posts or journals or newspapers is always great, I’m sure if one was stuck looking backwards nothing good would come of it, but rather there is a great value to have an archive of one’s thoughts, public stances, the cross commentary of those who read, and the engagement around them. It feels like I’m eavesdropping on the past to explore that which might have not been posted today where people are so conscious of their personal branding online rather than seeing a forum of ultimate freedom. It’s realizing just how much the web has changed in a few short years, and how the dialogs possible alter with those conventions.

But I think the more interesting part is the casualness of it – the coffee table convo of a thought you’d share without researching it. The opinions, speculations, and unabashed biases displayed. It’s wonderful. I wouldn’t necessarily want policy based on it – but I would want that social dialog to happen, to be open for anyone to participate in, be open for future review and accessible across time and space– and those old blogs had that to a degree I find lacking now that every news outlet and pundit is online acting as if sound bites and repetition equal fair representation or debate. Anyways, my two cents on some internet nostalgia… I’ll probably start posting more – if nothing else to try to recreate a small piece of that conversation for myself and friends.

What Would Nature Do?

My friend over at Positive Sustainability, Nick Enge, poses this question and asks for a revolutionary shift in the way we consider our relationship to our planet. What Would Nature Do? By thinking of this answer and using designs and engineering based around the notion of biomimicry (imitating life) we can recreate some of the solutions the natural world has developed and increase our own sustainability in doing so.

This question has been asked many times in a religious context when people ask, “What would Jesus do?” and seek answers of the most moral solution to a conflict. However while the media surrounds us with debates about gay rights, abortion, racial injustice and more - we continue to quietly continue designing products without considering their consequence. I’m by no means saying the other issues aren’t important debates for a society to have - but the lack of dialog on the design we tolerate is allowing it to continue.

Every day people continue and think they’re improving while they are buying “ecofriendly” and “sustainable” products from halfway around the world, and these are likely packaged in paper/plastics that will be discarded the minute we unwrap the product which itself will likely only last a year or two. The entire model hurts the environment.

Today what I ate was not only bad for me but it was horrible for the environment. I’m not going to sugar coat it and say I’m free of blame - because I’m not. I’m a tired and busy college kid who didn’t have the time to cook because even sleep is a luxury these days. I bought a sandwich and pasta on campus which both came in packaging which was then discarded. The soda I drank was horrible for me in so many ways. The coffee I had to keep me awake in class was grown on the other side of the world. For dinner I was in a rush so I got fast food - a hot dog and fries. Not only did I succeed in clogging my arteries and getting far too little nutrition, but I failed to embrace the fact that I live in a fertile area with a huge array of locally grown produce.

I live in an apartment complex that brags about the co-mingled trash and recycling which allows for fewer trips to pick up waste, thus using less gas and having a reduced carbon impact. We also have two flush settings on toilets, low flow shower heads, and refrigerators that beep if open for more than 15 seconds to remind you to close them. But I’m also living in an ugly box that doesn’t take advantage of the natural light that is common in Santa Barbara. The only living thing other than myself (and my roommate) in my apartment is a house plant that was purchased at a local store. This entire living situation is somewhat pathetic. I live in a naturally beautiful setting with lovely flora if I walk a few minutes to the beach or bike towards the hills. And yet as my housing complex heaps on the accolades and self-congratulatory praise encouraging new students to apply here - we’re planting non-native plants. Looking at the water situation in our area it’s clear that our University’s long range plan will have an increase in the number of students far beyond what the local aquifer will be able to support, and we’re already in a drought state that’s had huge fire problems in recent years.

While Nick covers some of these themes in other writings on his site (which I urge you to all follow) I think that the idea of bio mimicry needs to not only be considered by designers and engineers who create products, but by those who will consume the goods. A shift in thinking must occur in the audience for a producer to succeed given that we live in a very self-reflexive society.

In politics many leaders follow the polls and popular opinion rather than paving the way. Experts only speak about their fields, limiting the ability to have true collaboration where larger changes are needed. Workers only respond to orders thus not allowing the practical hands on knowledge to shape the management above them. Managers buy into the systems that allow for their profits without considering the cost to future generations. While I’m sure many are planning to point out that this isn’t always the case, as a general rule of thumb, the status quo has a great deal of momentum behind it; And my point based upon that generalization is that when a change of direction is needed, it takes more than a good idea to lead to action.

Now if I had the answers and could just tell all of you how to change the world - it would be a great conclusion to this post, but sadly we’ve got a lot more work to do than that! We need to redesign how we live! We need to figure out how to get the basics of food, water and shelter in a sustainable way that won’t hurt our local ecosystems and leave us in overly sterilized industrial box environments which fail to reflect the natural beauty of our planet. And for that to happen we can’t just wait for good designs to come to us, we have to seek out those ideas. We must invest in them. We need to create a market for sustainable goods, a niche for sustainability in our ideas and planning, and when sitting down in meetings we need to look not only to the monetary value, but the social and environmental values and costs of our actions. This begins with you and me. I’m currently in the red, but if you have any ideas - feel free to begin a dialog here! I’m listening.