Politicians

What is the job of politicians?

Did you know that the expected inflation rate can affect the economy and unemployment rate as much as the actual inflation rate? It makes sense. Reality is warped into our perception of it. Unless we have a clear view of truth then we cannot base decisions off of it. In terms of unemployment, according to the Philips Curve, the best situation is when inflation is high and expected inflation is low, unemployment will be lowest. Sounds great. But that means people have to be completely ignorant of reality.

That is when politicians come into play. They are the great deceivers of society. Why? I suggest that it is the fault of society. We want unrealistic things accomplished, such as having a high inflation without anyone realizing it. And in the short run that would work. No one would see through the lie and the economy would produce a lot more, because more people are working. But eventually the lie cracks. That is where we are now. The lies are coming to light. And we no longer trust the politicians or their appointments. Now, even if they are being honest with us, we assume they are lying.

An example is the 1970's. Paul Volcker was the chairman of the Federal Reserve. America had trouble with inflation and unemployment. It was called stagflation. Trouble was all up in the back pocket of America. So he told everyone that he was going to decrease inflation (the job of the Federal Reserve is to influence the inflation rate by increasing or decreasing money supply by buying and selling bonds by setting the interest rate. Make sense?). And he did it. But everyone had been saying that before so no one believed him. So expected inflation was much higher than actual inflation and unemployment increased a lot in the late 70's. He got a lot of blame. But he knew it was needed for two reasons: people needed to trust politicians and people to lower their expectations of inflation. Eventually people reduced their expectations and unemployment rates went back down.

So here is the problem. If politicians are honest/transparent then society benefits in the long run, but the general populace does not like them, because sometimes they will have to be like Volcker and do something unattractive, even damaging to some people. Then they are eliminated during the next election cycle. A short term in office means they cannot do a lot of good. A political appointment, like Paul Volcker, is able to do a lot more good because his job was tied to the election of other people (Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan to be specific) and only has to account to a few people.
If politicians are dishonest and give society what it wants then they are able have power for much longer. Society is satisfied and benefited in the short run, but suffers more long term. But, by retaining political power, they have the potential to do more good in some ways. Maybe a politician realizes his/her election can be assured if he/she buckles on a social issue, but that means that he/she can influence the economy in a better way. So the politician caves to peer (constituent?) pressure in order to benefit more people in a more pressing matter. Is that moral?

So is the job of politicians to have society in their best interest or is it to appease the masses that elected them? I think I understand better why Plato was opposed to democracies.

"The Name of Thy Son"

The sacramental prayers, and other sources, mention "that they may... witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son." Jesus Christ. But what does that mean? And which name?

Jesus was a man. He healed the sick, taught people a good way to live together, and lived a good life. Four different accounts of His life paint different pictures. I am sure the same would be true of us. Imagine if you had your parents, your siblings, your best friend, and your exes write about your life. Crazy. Awesome too. He is depicted like John Wayne in Mark, a good man who is a little rough around the edges, who can still get angry but always has others in his best interest. Luke's Jesus never even approaches an emotion short of an angelic entity. They are different men. And yet, when we combine the four identities we can find a person we might actually be able to be like. Jesus is a name that we can take upon ourselves. It is the name of someone who has needs but puts others first, who takes time to play with children, who cooks fresh fish on the beach with friends, and who tries to share the gospel with anyone who will listen even if they will not hear.

Christ is a title. Christ is the Messiah, the anointed one. Hebrews had three anointed offices: prophet, priest, and king (or prophetess, priestess, and queen. Please apply all nouns and pronouns to your gender). A prophet teaches by example. They live the life they teach. Their most basic actions can be applied into great lessons. Gandhi, Muhammad, Joseph Smith, and Moses lived lives worthy of emulation. They were prophets.
A priest sacrifices the self to be dedicated to a cause (often a religious one, but not always). Because they are completely devoted to their cause, they are able to teach others when and how and what is appropriate to sacrifice (because it is not always your life or livelihood. Maybe it is an opinion or comfort). Joan of Arc, Martin Luther, Martin Luther King Jr., and Mother Teresa understood the blessings of sacrifice for a cause. They were priests.
A king leads with common good in mind (a king that is self-serving is really only a tyrant). A king might be appointed by common consent or inheritance or circumstance. A king can be a president, a senator, a CEO, a shift manager, a mother or father, or anyone in a leadership position. A king must understand why they are in their position, what they can do, and how they are going to do it. A king works with their subjects for their good, because working against the subject's desires (even in their best interests) will appear tyrannous. Queen Elizabeth, George Washington, and Abu Bakr lead their subjects kindly, honestly, and transparently. They were kings.

And these are only two of His names, the most literal. What about the dozens of others: Good Shepherd, Living Waters, Bread of Life, Counselor, Wonderful, etc?

I hope you think more about which name you are expressing a willingness to take. As I am beginning to learn, one of the most productive and beautiful parts of religion is ambiguity. It allows practitioners to apply lessons to the self, even with various needs, dilemmas, and insights. Ambiguity allows a message based on truth to reach everyone, regardless of how far they are along their path. So, which name means more to you? Why? 

A Whim of Wheels

A club at my university does an annual event to raise awareness of physical disabilities. I wanted to participate last year but was unable to because of my schedule. This year I opted to experience a couple hours in a wheelchair for their study and to promote campus awareness. One disappointment was that it seemed like such a small effort for me, but I was proven wrong by the challenge and BYU students.

I knew BYU campus was fairly wheelchair accessible because I try to ride my bike around a lot. I knew how I could get to every building, but I quickly realized that I did not know the fastest ways. And some ways seemed dangerous. Long, steep hills are on almost every side of campus. Some elevators are accessible but not convenient. Using the bathroom is terrifying. It is so hard to get in and out. And I do not know if I could put on my pants without control of my legs (I am greatly impressed by others). The hardest feature of any building or landscape was slanted walkways. Even a slight slope to the left or right made traveling very slow and cumbersome. If you push a wheelchair along a sidewalk that is not flat then you drift to one side if you try to go straight. So, to go straight, you have to either only push one wheel or constantly slow down to turn opposite the way you are drifting. It was annoying when sidewalks were not flat. It was frustrating when the floors inside buildings were not flat. They were constructed! Why would they slope?

I do not know how many students knew that demonstrations were going on today. They do happen annually. But there are a fair number of students who have permanent disabilities. And why would anyone assume that I was just rolling around for fun. I received a lot more smiles from people through the day. I was surprised by how often people would try to dart in front of me, forcing me to stop. People that were texting rarely saw me. I had to constantly be on the vigil for those bumbling booby traps. And cars were scary. I do not know if they could not see me as I crossed the road or just did not care. I ran into several friends who were very concerned about me, which was nice. They also became interested in the event so I suppose I fulfilled my role. The highlights of people's reactions were definitely the girl who held two doors open for me. She was the only one how tried to help me at all. And then I had to fill out some paperwork for a job. One of the supervisors came in and started talking to me. Right before I left, she asked if I had come in before and met the boss. She then said that she did not know how to be tactful about it, but she had to know the limits of my disability. I thought it was rather tactful and obviously did not bother me, but I was glad that she was comfortable enough with the situation to ask then instead of passing off a potential trial to someone else.

It was a good experience. I assumed it would be difficult for a wheelchair-bound student to attend BYU, but it was not as bad as I thought it would be, as long as he or she stayed on campus. Traveling off campus would be a nightmare. I would probably require assistance traveling to and from campus. Which would also mean constantly caring everything I would need for the day with me. It would be a constant trial. I assume friends would seek to help me more, but only a stranger offered any help. What it really means is I should look out for what I could do.

Final Bellwether

This was a magnificent experience. Tamarra is amazing. She is a very talented and encouraging editor; it comes from her incredible writing. This is the final edit of my article written last month. I really like being able to see the development of the subject, audience, and style. And it is neat to see my own ideas better expressed with the help of others. Once again, I find myself more converted to the quality and consistency of good writing.

This I Believe
Spencer Campbell

“Persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent.”

I was first enticed to memorize the “Standard of Truth” by a Snickers bar when I was 14. At 22, I am still uncovering how deeply these words, and others like them, affect Mormon culture.

Powerful statements like this one, though once shouted in the face of violent persecution, seem – at least in the Provo student wards I’ve attended – to act as insurance that in the end we,  conservative Mormons, the embodiment of truth, will win.

To argue against that conservatism is not just some philosophical or religious debate to many Mormons; it is a personal attack on our identity and potential. It would be like telling an Israeli Jew they should give East Jerusalem back to  its Palestinian inhabitants, or telling a Muslim that Muhammad was not the last prophet. We, as people, simply take offense when our concepts of eternal laws, rights, or prophecies are disagreed with.

I lived in California for a couple years and was often reminded of the financial and physical efforts the church put forth to defeat Proposition 8. Our strength and unity is infamous within some circles. It is as the Standard of Truth states: “no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing.” The unhallowed, the unholy, the hateful, the spiteful will never have power to stop the herd. But there is a difference, I believe, between what is truly unholy and what many of us perceive to be unholy.

I love the joke that says, “Catholics say that the Pope cannot make mistakes, but they do not believe it. Mormons say their prophets can make mistakes, but they do not believe it.” We readily acknowledge that we have faults, so why are we so reluctant to identify specific problems? We have needed help to change our direction before: stricter adherence to the Word of Wisdom and diligence in tithing paying, for example. I realize neither of these examples were terribly “hard sayings,” but we, individually and collectively, have needed to be corrected. Yet this does not seem to cause us to ponder our future. We do not seem to sit back and give consistent, honest evaluation to the type of Mormonism we are living individually and collectively and what changes may move us closer to the core of our faith.

In Church we often talk about sheep and the Shepherd. However shepherds know sheep have a tendency to look for a leader among themselves—a practice I do not believe God discourages. A bellwether is a sheep chosen by the flock to initiate movement and direction. It is still within the herd, but the others trust it to lead, to think. We often simplify our lives by choosing areas where we can act more and think less. We assign ourselves bellwethers at work (bosses), in fashion (celebrities), and in entertainment (Oscars). This is not a bad thing: it feels good to trust and follow sometimes. So imagine the impact you could have by being a bellwether within the Church.

The bellwether still has to look, sound and smell like a sheep to fit in, but it does not have to think like the other sheep. Under the influence of the Holy Spirit, its possible to gently lead those in your own circle to the green pastures and living waters we read about in the scriptures, and do so by avoiding the pitfalls infesting elitist Mormonism and self-centered Mormon policies and politics.

If you disagree with Mormon policy or tradition, then imagine what you could do if you became a trusted bellwether within the flock, instead of aggressively, directly and openly opposing the Church and its members. You must remain humble about it. You must be doing it for the Lord Himself. And you must not think yourself above covenants. To be successful you must hold those closer than all other things.

In a way, I suppose I am encouraging you to be part of the Church, to make yourself accepted, so that you can have an influence -- a voice that matters.  As college students, we are the next generation of leaders and thinkers in the Church. We are not going to change doctrines -- those belong to God -- but we can change tradition. We can change perception.

So feel free to empower the women you meet (not just open doors for them), to exclaim your joy that you are saved by grace (not works), or love a gay (or lesbian or bisexual or straight or questioning) friend because they are just as good as people as the rest of us. We can make a difference in how the Church of Jesus Christ is accepted worldwide.

Just stay a while until you can help us because we need more colorful Mormons. And who knows, we might even herald in Zion.

Separate iff Equal

I believe that there is a divine power that wants us to become more advanced beings and accomplishes this by giving us responsibilities, abilities, and possibilities. In other words, I believe in God and that the situations we face are given to us so that we can become more like Him. We do this by learning about and understanding who He is. We do that by doing what He does. We can do that because we can have access to His power. We call it the priesthood, but I have trouble defining what that is.

When I hear "separate but equal" quoted in any context it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It is a too obvious reference to the opposition to the Civil Rights movement. It references racism. But I have heard it recently in reference as to why Mormon men have the priesthood but women do not. It is usually used along the lines of, "Men have the priesthood, but women bear children. We have separate but equal responsibilities in the family/home, in the community, and in the church." If you ever have the urge to use that phrase to explain anything to anyone (that is an American. I suppose it may not have the same guilt associated with it in other cultures. Probably) stop. Just say no. It will weaken your argument because people (at least my mind does) associate that phrase as a justification for unjust elitism. Your intentions may be good and your reasoning may be sound, but your audience will associate anything you say after "separate but equal" as bigotry.

What makes this situation terrible is that some things do have to be separate to be equal. I might try to defend that most things have to be separate if equal. If two things perform the exact same function in the same way and at the same rate, if they are equal, then they spread out. They inhibit each others potential and production by being too close. Think of two burger joints next to each other, neither receives as good of business. The gases that make up our air spread out until evenly dispersed. Economics encourage specialization so that people perform different functions and increase social production, because if everyone did the same job than we produce less as a whole. If two things are equal then they will perform best if separated. If two things are separated then they can be equal (without the force used in fictional dystopias for the same effect).

So, I am not arguing against the explanation that men hold the priesthood to make them as equally useful and purposeful to women. I only suggest that we avoid ever using the phrase "separate but equal." Try separate and equal or separate iff equal or come up with a creative and catchy phrase that can be shared to illuminate the need for people to perform different roles in close social settings, especially in a family or church.

Mormon Bellwether

I hope to publish this in BYU's Student Review, but with obvious editing for length and possibly language. This is the first draft, written after reading several replies to posts (that I found quite respectful and moderate) by Mormons in online journals. I realize it is rather forceful and that is why I hesitate posting it, but this issue is very close to me. If someone wants to change, improve, repent then you should forgive and forget. Whisper words of wisdom: Let it be.

“Persecutions may rage, mobs may combine, armies may assemble, calumny may defame, but the truth of God will go forth boldly, nobly, and independent”

I was first enticed to memorize the “Standard of Truth” by a snickers bar when I was fourteen. Years later I realized the depth statements, like this, have within Mormons. This standard states that an absolute truth of God will be shared to everyone everywhere until God says it is enough and that nothing can stop it. Ever since Joseph Smith originated the document in the Wentworth letter, Mormons, especially missionaries, identify themselves as the truth going forth.

So how can someone not aligned with mainstream Mormons (member or not) manage disagreeing with the conservative Mormons, the self-proclaimed embodiment of this truth? Powerful verses, such as the Standard of Truth, are used to indoctrinate the flawlessness of the future for Latter-day Saints. To oppose ideologies like this is not just some philosophical or religious debate to many Mormons; it is a personal attack on their identity and potential. It would be like telling an Israeli Jew that they should give back East Jerusalem or telling a Muslim that Mohammad was not the last prophet. We take offense when our concepts of eternal laws or prophecies are disagreed with.

 Yet, direct and disagreeable opposition to Mormon doctrine and culture seems like the only option for dissenters. I have seen Mormons give in to Sunday School doctrines and ignore any misgivings they receive from other members, friends outside of the church, and the Spirit. I really disagree with that method, because when you close yourself off from further light and knowledge you lose what you have already (and not everything I learned in primary is true doctrine. Sorry). But a far worse option I see many people choose is to leave the church or never learn about it because they are offended by some phrase in a talk or line in an outdated book, once treated as a source of doctrine.

I see the church described in the Standard of Truth as a herd of buffalo. It is big. It consumes the very earth beneath it as it moves toward its goals. No amount of force can do much to alter or stop the path of the herd. Its momentum is too great. It is made up of too many individual members. False thoughts shared decades (or months) ago have shifted our path and it seems no outside force can reverse the change. But that is one point the Standard of Truth makes, “no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing.” The unhallowed, the unholy, the hateful, the spiteful cannot stop this herd from moving and growing. And it is just as Joseph Smith said in the Wentworth letter, “Persecution has not stopped the progress of truth, but has only added fuel to the flame…” If you remove yourself from the church, from the herd, and then try to alter its course then you shall fail. It is not that we are not wrong sometimes but that we are so proud to be opposed to the world, even if the world is our friends or family.

Since I am talking about cattle and Mormons, I think sheep is an appropriate matter to bring up. A bellwether is a sheep that is chosen within a flock to initiate movement and direction. It is still within the herd, but the others trust it to lead, to think. People of all sorts simplify their lives by choosing areas where they can act more and think less. We assign ourselves bellwethers in the workplace (often our bosses), in fashion (celebrities), in entertainment (Oscars), and throughout our lives. This is not a bad thing, because no one can control everything. So imagine the impact you could have by being a bellwether within the flock. You would still have to look, sound, and smell like a sheep, but really, you would not have to think like the other sheep. But really, you are leading the flock to green pastures and living waters. But really, you are avoiding the pitfalls that infest the elitist lands of Utah and the self-contained Mormon policies and politics. If you disagree with Mormon doctrine, policy, or tradition imagine what you could do if you became a trusted bellwether within a flock, instead of aggressively opposing the church and its members.

For me, one moment that helped me move in a better direction was in the spring of 2012 when “It Gets Better, at BYU” videos were published on youtube.com. I recognized a lot of friends in those videos. I have never hated homosexuals. And I cannot say I did not make some assumptions about a few of the people I knew who shared their stories in those videos. But those videos moved me to stop being complacent as friends and family members insulted homosexuals and their desires. I was changed by people in my flock to be more supportive of love and more understanding of individual’s challenges.

(these are the two endings I came up with)

In a way, I suppose I am encouraging you to be a part of the church, to make yourself acceptable, so that you can have an influence, a voice. Would you rather be allowed to look differently or think differently?

So, to those insisting on insulting the attempts of Mormons to empower women or support homosexuals or see both sides of international conflicts,  maybe if you spend more time with the herd being a bull (or heifer), you’d have to deal with less of the s*** you wallow in by measuring our every step and mistake. Please, help us move in a better direction instead of throwing the crap at us that some of us are trying to move past.

Jerusalem, I won't forget you

Strong emotions run through these veins. Maybe they come from the remnants of my exhaustion. Maybe I miss the people. Maybe it is the Civil War era cannon I can see behind my computer in the library. I hope that stages the level of internal confusion.

I miss dancing, people, food, classes, the color green, swimming, Natalie, Spiritual Sunday Cinema, attending church on Sunday (even though I still think Saturday is a better day for it), music, family, Prescott, mountains, shorts, and many much things. But the problem is I'll always be missing things I suppose. I miss the Dome of the Rock, the call to prayer, trash in the streets, buffets at every meal, classes on religion that I enjoy and satisfy my need to think as part of my study, a new group of people, knowing that every street holds a historically significant place, falafel, missing things in the states, exploring one of the most fascinating places I'll ever live (seriously, the center we lived at has more secrets than I could hope to find in three months), and having unique adventures every day.

Getting to Provo involved 46 hours awake and 31 hours traveling. Which was actually 6 hours more than it had to be, but I might have gotten myself lost between Salt Lake City and Provo. This morning I woke up at 4 am. My first thoughts were, "It's dark. Too dark. I'm not where I think I am. I'm not in Jerusalem. Where am I? Oh yeah, I'm at the Moore's :) (I wasn't thinking in emoticons, but I did smile). You know this room. Map it out. Alright. What time is it? 4 am... You should say 'good morning' to Natalie. No, it is way too early. Yeah, too early. Go back to sleep." It has been a slow day. I've really needed to recover. But it was wonderful to walk around at noon and notice how cool 95 degrees feels after this summer.

Despite living in a city layered in Jewish history and caked with Christian sites, I think what I'll miss most are the morning and evening calls to prayer, seeing the Dome of the Rock any time I look out a window, and the green lights from minarets reminding me of The Great Gatsby (light on the docks) every night.

I love Jerusalem. I do not think I changed the city (as I hope someday to have a chance), but I know it changed me. It's like a love affair that I want to share with everyone. On that note, there are hundreds of stories to share if you would ever like to hear. As a warning though, give yourself time to listen if you dare/care to ask. Also, I'll love you more for it.