I find myself in what would seem to be very desirable circumstances regarding information.  The internet gives me access to books, blogs, videos, social media, news feeds, email, texts, and even good old phone calls.  Since I am a retired empty nest man with just a few life maintenance activities to tend to, I have ample time to explore the available information.  Yet I find myself frustrated by my lack of discipline in how I make use of the resources available.  

One default mode I seem to share with many folks is a tendency to use my phone to mindlessly scroll through various articles.  The social media, search engine, and artificial intelligence software is very good at feeding me more and more bite sized chunks of things that I seem to have shown interest in.  Consequently, the scrolling can become somewhat akin to a substance abuse disorder.  

I used Facebook for a couple of decades and found that I was reading many fewer things that could be seen as edifying.  When I posted my thoughts on various subjects, I became increasingly frantic to see whether I got likes or comments on what I had written.  I found myself checking many times a day to see where those stood, even though I knew full well that the data would trickle in over a day or three and would prove to be of very little importance or even interest.

I got off Facebook about a month ago.  I don't really miss it except for one small thing.  Facebook was one of the few places where I strove to put my thoughts into writing.  Passive consumption of other people's creative content can certainly be worthwhile, but I miss the discipline of organizing and recording my own material.  

So here I am on Blogger once again.  I see that most of my writing are more than a decade old.

The Left Right 2D Trap

 Humans are incredibly multidimensional.   Nonetheless, it seems that many, maybe even most, debates in

 recent years are couched in terms of a single dimension.  

One such spectrum that seems greatly overused is the left/right political one.  Leftists are said to 

believe "such and such" which is thought to be quite contrary to what right wingers are adamant about.  

For example, leftists might be said to support big government whereas right wingers want small government. 

 My personal bias shows even in how I have selected terminology for this example. 

 I suspect my "leftist" friends would start by denying that they are leftist. 

They would likely prefer to be described as compassionate.  

They might be happy to see the size of the government diminished in certain areas such as military defense 

spending or immigration enforcement.  They might see my calls for smaller government as a disguised 

cruel streak where I may be indifferent to the suffering of the poor, the sick, or the weak.  

Each of us is puzzled by what seems to be a gross misunderstanding of our respective positions.  

Perhaps my so-called leftist friend believes they are well aware of the limitations of governmental

 solutions to such things as poverty. They may espouse a thorough understanding of the fact

 that government spending is necessarily limited to one degree or another.  I on the other hand am eager to

 see many government programs that are meant to help the poor as actually contributing to their plight 

because of a misunderstanding of human nature and a faulty approach to stimulating productivity as a 

means to increase the resources available in a way that reduces the likelihood that a large portion of the 

citizenry will find themselves suffering from a lack of life's necessities.  

We may also differ in our attitude toward whether it is inherently unfair for some to have so much

 more than others, even when the poorest have access to basic food, clothing, and housing.  

Some may believe that the very existence of rich and poor is a sign of failed sociopolitical policies.

I find it interesting that the very idea of left and right in politics can be traced back to the seating

 chart for the French National Assembly during the French Revolution. Those seated on the right 

of the assembly president's right generally wanted to preserve traditions of the king and church.  

Those seated on the left opposed monarchy and sought many changes to the existing order.  

Of course, in the United States there has never been a monarchy or a state church. 

 The French left wing agenda of republicanism is foundational in the US constitution. 

 Applying left and right as descriptors for the US congress is immediately problematic. 

Nonetheless, language morphs over time.  Here we are in the 21st century United States and we tend to 

use left and right freely with the supposition that we have mutual understandings of what we mean.

I hope to avoid a simple linear spectrum unless I am addressing very specific topics.