photo credit: graymalkn

I’m an idealist. I don’t believe the ends justify the means, and I am a big fan of concepts like “doing the right thing,” “personal responsibility,” and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

I’m also a pragmatist. I think this is partly personality, partly profession, and a good deal of being married to Daniel.

Normally these two personality traits co-exist reasonably peacefully. They temper each other and keep me from going too overboard in either direction.

But then political questions come up, and suddenly I’m the host of a little mini-war of the mind and heart.

There are a few issues that my idealist-half cares deeply about, and then a wide range of issues that my pragmatic-half insists on worrying about.

The problem is that the idealist issues are really not likely to actually matter in practice. For instance, abortion: I am absolutely pro-life, and consider the issue of abortion to be a huge spiritual battle, but when it comes down to it, electing a pro-life candidate is highly unlikely to change any of the legislation.

And that’s where the dilemma comes in: is it worth ignoring all of the pragmatic issues in favor of one unlikely-to-change-anything commitment, because it’s “the right thing to do”? Or should I embrace the pragmatism and focus on “doing what we can, where we can”?

I took some “find your ideal candidate” tests this morning and apparently, I’m really a Bob Barr supporter. Of course, no one’s ever heard of Bob Barr, and that might prove a bit of a complication for him. My pragmatic site absolutely forbids me to vote for the man, given that it would accomplish nothing, but idealism says, “The two-party system is a crock, and you should vote for the candidate who is best, regardless of his chances.”

I think the pragmatic side will win that one.

But my question is, should it? Where would we be if pragmatism was always put first? One of our household heroes, William Wilberforce, was ridiculously idealistic, and that’s a good part of the reason the slave trade was abolished. It took almost 50 years, though!

I think the abortion issue today has some significant correlations to the slave trade in Wilberforce’s time. It’s one of those things that most people would agree isn’t really an ideal solution, but people are generally happy to live with for reasons of convenience. I think in historical retrospect, though, more enlightened future generations will be astounded, just as most of us are today when considering slavery. I also think in both cases there is substantial behind-the-scenes spiritual influence.

But the point of this isn’t to convince you that abortion is wrong. My pragmatic side assures me that trying to argue that belief isn’t going to work anyway.

The point is: given that I hold these beliefs about abortion, is it my duty to vote accordingly, even with the realistic expectation that no candidate will be able to change things? Or is it my duty to look at all the issues, even though I don’t feel that most of them are nearly as important, and balance them all to figure out my support?

Daniel thinks I should become a politician.

1. Wide reading outside one’s special area,

2. Cultivation of associates and friends outside one’s special area,

3. Varied recreational and cultural participation,

4. Travel,

5. A cultivation of broad interests,

6. A persistent relationship with the world of nature,

7. Activity that lifts one out of self and narrow self-concern, e.g. service or worship.

From HELLO FROM THE TOYMAKER!

I’ve been reading Bill Clinton’s excellent new book, Giving. It’s stuffed full of inspiring stories about people who are making a real difference in the world—everyone from kids to celebrities—and it’s reminded me of just how much one person can do. (I also think I’m going to have to get my own copy so I can dog-ear all the pages of organizations I want to learn more about…)

I’m an enthusiastic subscriber to GOOD Magazine (where your subscription price is entirely donated to a charity you choose from their list). While occasionally they publish a piece that has a strong political slant, it’s the only magazine where I feel compelled every page to tell Daniel about something incredible I’ve read. They are believers in using capitalism to improve the world, not just the checking account.

Tim Ferriss launched LitLiberation this week in an attempt to to raise $1 million in the month of October for education, domestically and internationally. This caused me to dig into the DonorsChoose.org site and start a challenge of my own (go donate right now, people! ).

Here’s what gets me. The dollar, devalued or otherwise, can do a tremendous amount of good in places where it’s scarce. Realistically, it’s pretty easy for me to earn money. I have skills which are in demand and which people will pay me for. Just a small amount of the money I earn could change the education and standard of living for literally thousands of people. With just $75, I’ve been a part of the success of six entrepreneurs in the developing world, and that will continue indefinitely on that initial $75 investment. That amazes me.

When I think about what motivates me, and the conflicts I’ve had about making money, this seems like the obvious solution: make money to give it away in ways that really matter. How can work be worship? When the result is doing exactly what Jesus asked me to do.

At least that’s my thinking this week.

Clearly people don’t really get the whole supply-and-demand thing. Demand is still demand, regardless of what day it is or where you do your demanding. The market is not going to reduce costs of a limited-supply commodity unless demand goes down.

Though it certainly wouldn’t be popular, I think the best long term outcome for the US would happen if gas prices continue to rise. I’d be in favor of pretty drastic measures to get people to stop using so much gas. So much of what we do use is wasteful (seriously, why do you need an Expedition for a commuter vehicle?), and maybe we could positively impact one of our other “great outrages”, the cost of health care, if people actually started walking and biking more (not to mention reducing the long term effects of city pollution).

Enough ranting for me. If you’re bored, go replace your incandescents with CFLs.

I do not like open-ended projects. I like finite tasks, things that can be checked off a list and marked “done.”

Any chance I’ll remember this the next time someone proposes something ongoing forever? Probably not, but I can always hope…

Look them up: humbled vs. honored

Funny, to me they seem to be kind of… um… opposites. And yet…

The response has far surpassed our expectations and we are extremely humbled by the huge interest.

That quote seems typical lately of the kind of stuff I see by developers of exciting software, by bloggers who’ve been dugg, whatever. The obsessive word nerd in me is slightly irked.
Fortunately for you, I have the attention span of a gnat, and I’ll get over it momentarily.

(Hat tip to The Thinklings)