Signs Of Your Times

Sitting on a black leather (faux) seat with high arm rests.

One of my favored coffee houses on Long Beach's trendiest street.

I'm enjoying a bottle of Bundaberg's ginger beer.

It's quite tasty... and strong.

Not all coffee houses are created equal.

But this one is very inviting and welcoming to either a long or short stay.

I am an observer.

I learn about the world around me by observing.

A very basic and rudimentary scientific method: observation.

From our senses we can gather enough information to formulate sensible ideas.

With my ears I can hear what my eyes are not looking at.

To my left two women are discussing the latest noise about the President.

It is interesting how from all the other people talking; the cashier taking customer orders, the table to my right, the two women to my left, and two others sitting across from me, we can choose what to look at with their eyes and also choose what our ears will listen to.

Some things and situations are easy to ignore, while other things and situations are not.

The mention of politics sparks my interest and catches my attention... so naturally the focus goes there.

I've already turned on my computer and I'm going through my morning routine, user names and passwords being typed out without my direct attention.

The women are talking about how a grand jury is assembled with evidence being surveyed and compared to current law in order to find out if charges will be issued.

My eyes and ears have been trained to make the effort of looking past the surface.

One of the thoughts that come to mind: a lesson in lawful / due process is being given, free of charge, to the American public.

My second thought is how reflective some popular television programming is of the current political noise of indictments, plea deals, and discovery of things done in secret and behind closed doors.

Crime shows, at least the few minutes of some I've seen, discuss the terminology and concepts of professionals in those fields.

The shows, as do politics, follow the cultural climate.

In those shows far too often a suspect answers questions that leads to their conviction (or having to make a plea deal).

Very rarely does a suspect reserve their right to remain silent, even after being read their rights.

Those television shows are doing a disservice to the rights of people, I think.

The culture of cinema is to heighten the drama, so to have a suspect get into a war of wits with interrogators makes for great ratings and ticket sales, while a person knowledgable of their rights that simply invokes their right to remain silent is boring.

Unfortunately I've noticed the same thing in those factual crime shows that use real audio and video of interrogations; suspects are unaware of their right to not incriminate themselves.

A few minutes ago an older couple come into the coffee shop and I find nothing unusual about them besides what my sense of smell tells me.

It seems one of them is not a fan of deodorant or of showering often enough to stave off the stank of sweat.

Either way, the odor from certain corners of the human body where perspiration has poured out the pores is radiating and wreaking havoc on my sensitive sense of smell.

In some places on earth, this is a scent culturally accepted and is not restrained... but in the culture I currently reside, one accustomed to perfumes covering humanity's natural tendencies, it breaks cultural conventions... and my nose doth protest.

Political discussion can sometimes stink up a conversation faster than perspiration rots the nasal cavities.

A third thought regarding the talk of political noise from the two women to my left is the tone of accusation already fostered against the President despite an indictment or formal charges.

The politics of America seems to have swayed from “innocent until proven guilty” to “guilty because the opinions made popular in the news says you are guilty”.

I'm not a fan of the President, nor of any other politician.

I am a fan of law and order... and the manners of many people are atrocious when it comes to political discussion.

It is possible to have self-respect when discussing what seems like a clear lack of respect in someone, while not disrespecting them and thus losing one's self-respect.

The “land of the free” resembles more the “the home of the debauched”.

This is very telling.

My thoughts cultivate the idea that some Americans have been demanding more transparency in government.

Well, the current President is not as opaque as previous others when it comes to who they are according to their words and actions.

Public figures usually have a very strong public relations team that paint a very pretty picture of the person's past.

The public figure is often very careful in keeping this front, making sure their words and expressions coincide with a public persona.

Rarely do people hear a public person's personal thoughts.

Perhaps the personal transparency is not what the people were asking for.

Perhaps it was more transparency in the functions of government, the transcripts of closed-door meetings, the details of where tax money goes with all companies and names disclosed.

I find this yet another irony of this life.

The individual desires any certain thing, and either asks for it and / or goes about an effort to get it.

It could be something mundane or something of a great value to the individual.

It could be a certain perception of one's self, or desiring to see a certain 'way' in the world.

When a new President was (s)elected by certain citizens of the United States of America in 2016, I wonder if those people had in mind what they had asked for.

'Change' always comes, not just with a new President, but with every single moment of every day.

The transparency is a repeat revealing that the world is a business place.

And no matter who is the top resident with a big 'P' before that term in this country or any other, there will always be a critique because a critic's job depends on them being critical, being opposed.

There will always be an effort to popularize another form of government largely feared or doubted to be 'better' than whatever form of government is current.

Concepts of business are being sparked in people's minds because this particular President is a business man of a certain caliber and a certain style.

His character reveals a certain element found in people who deal in torse seeking.

This 'manner' is usually kept behind closed doors, or self-censored among those who seek a public office... but not with this individual.

There still are secular kings, queens, princes, and courts associated... but the popularity of such overt titles defining class, wealth, and heritage are largely unpopular.

What of those who are true children of the King of kings?

This experiment with democracy, to go the way of popular consensus as the definer of law and order, has its moments of good while revealing times of utter destructiveness.

For some people, only the titles have changed... while the mechanism of rule is still in place, only now placating to the populous, the mob mentality that is evidenced in social media and people's low manners.

It is interesting how someone may act as if they are noble, or are of some great worth and value to society, while the moment they open their mouth they are shown for the incompetent depraved peasant they are.

Such peasants demand their worldly possessions, or their back accounts, or their sexual prowess be accounted in measuring their worth.

Such measurements of someone's mettle as their standing among the mob is a facade; not a fact supporting their sense of self-worth nor what they've convinced others of.

I wonder why people don't learn from what is being offered to them... instead of getting upset or act like mad animals as the media instigates them into becoming.

This is a grand opportunity to learn in so many ways.

The 'good' I see is how lessons in civics, psychology, etiquette, business, law, and all the rest of it is being freely offered.

The news is talking about issues that have finally engaged a wider audience due to the unleashing of passive pandering to people's ignorance.

Once jokes, ridicule, disdain, and opinions cease, then thinking can occur... but this isn't happening in media, so it largely doesn't happen in social circles at coffee shops or elsewhere.

Another bit I heard from the two women sitting left of me prior to me putting on my headphones and working on this particular article was their short discussion on local politics.

Earlier in the week this city had mayoral elections, besides local elections for certain districts and the board of education.

Their tone changed a bit when discussing the Mayor, whom they approve of, who won in a 70-20 race against a local unknown and unqualified person.

I caught how they praised the Mayor and overlooked certain things as “politics”.

When one's tastes are closely aligned with the personal attributes of someone, whether in the work place or in politics, character flaws are easily excusable, and sometimes blindly justified or violently defended.

This was evident in the 2016 presidential race and the choosing of sides... what the public largely does every political cycle.

So it is no surprise when the character flaws and outright depravity of a local Mayor is embraced by locals who reflect his particular lifestyle and consider his rhetoric acceptable.

It is also no surprise when the character flaws and outright depravity of a national public figure is embraced by nationals who reflect his lifestyle and also consider his rhetoric acceptable.

But I wonder if people are embracing their nearsightedness.

Are they able to judge the merits of the work and what is being generated collectively without being enamored by the suave style of one man, while being offended by the blunt style of another man.

Both men are (and will forever be) personally unknown to most of the public, yet we have our strong opinions and judgments of them.

What of the lessons that are being gifted to us on a daily basis?

My opinion is that both men, as examples of morality, are deplorable... and neither should have ever ascended to their respective offices due to such qualities (or lack thereof), but the culture has changed long ago where such low traits are not only ignored, but embraced and something to be proud of.

As for their 'work', one's work is being overshadowed by the noise of public sentiment against his morality, while the other's work is somewhat acceptable despite his pride in moral depravity... and the public noise supports his immoral nature.

This President and this Mayor are a reflection of the culture.

Those positions are the highest among their peers (nationally and locally).

In short, this is the 'best' a culture has to produce... since monarchy is by heritage and legacy while democracy is by popular consensus.

The correction is coming, and it may not be as pretty as an election cycle is 'civil' compared to other regime changes.