D.C. Reflections Part 2: "don't waste your life!"

A friend and colleague of mine said those words to me after describing a disturbing experience he'd just encountered. He watched someone commit suicide. He was innocently walking down the street just blocks from our office and then it happened. A man had jumped from a building, hitting the ground just yards from my friend. Needless to say, his mind has been reeling for the last week as he copes with the trauma of witnessing such an event. And as he put it, he has been asking some "tough questions." At the very least, he has come away with the right conclusion: "don't waste your life."

For those who work in the District, a wasted life seems to not be a common worry. Like I mentioned in my last post, most people here are highly motivated and seem to have a clear direction for their life -- or at least they tell a good story of their imagined future. I'd say 90% of the people I've met have a type A personality. This is no surprise given the opportunity this city offers to satisfy the ambitious. Yet, sometimes I wonder if it really is a wasted life that people fear.

I would posit that fundamentally a meaningless life is what many, if not all of us, truly fear most. We're afraid of staying in our "boring" towns, of getting stuck in a dead-end job, or ten thousand other uninteresting life stories. Instead, we seek fame, connections, wealth, or anything else that will prevent a wasted life, that will give us satisfaction and meaning. There is nothing wrong with seeking any of those things, but is there more?

Someone named John Piper would say there is. In fact, all those other things -- wealth, fame, relationships -- he would say are empty without God. They only have true purpose in glorifying God. We only have a true purpose in glorifying God. He explains this in his book, "don't waste your life." Yet perhaps that sounds narcissistic on God's part, but if you ponder for a moment that if He is the one who gave you life, who created you and all that you know, than perhaps credit--indeed glory--is His rightful due. But is a fulfilling life, one that is not wasted, only realized in a subservient, self-abasing lifestyle? No, far from that. Piper's mantra that,"God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him," clearly speaks of something else.

It is when we are seeking to glorify God in our attitudes, words, and actions that we find meaning and satisfaction. One of my favorite passages from Scripture says, "Delight yourself in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart." If we first love and delight ourselves in the Lord, then all other pursuits follow. So be ambitious, driven, and set your goals high, but love God first.

My friend witnessed a wasted life come to an end. It scared him. It would scare me. But, he has no solution. Inside him he wonders if he is any different. What if his hopes fall short and his dreams die? What if success is empty? Relationships shallow? Life wasted? And even if these things do not happen, how do you know your life is not wasted? This is what I would ask those who have sought fulfillment here in D.C. or anywhere.

D.C. Reflections Part 1: Living in (arguably) the most powerful city in the world

As my second summer in D.C. comes to a close, I have a few departing thoughts to share over the next few days.

To anyone who has visited, read about, or lived in the District of Columbia it is obvious that it is a unique place. It truly is a powerful place, with powerful people. This fact defines everything from the ornaments that decorate the city’s landscape to the populace that walk its streets. Young, ambitious, and intelligent people fill the subway cars and office buildings. Just like Rome centuries ago, this city’s architecture and monuments set it apart from any other cityscape in the nation. Power emanates from buildings that stand prominently in view, from the Capitol at the head of the Mall to the Pentagon across the Potomac.

I had one incredible opportunity to view this city from an uncommon location, the dome of the Capitol building (Thanks Matt Stone!). From that vantage point, William Clayton took the picture in the upper right (if you want to see a larger image go to his website: www.williamclayton.com). As I stood up there with the Statue of Freedom herself and let my eyes wonder to familiar landmarks as far away as the National Cathedral I was struck by the thought that this was a once-in-a-lifetime moment, but reminded of something else far more important. Power and politics wax and wane, careers blossom and then disappear, friendships draw near but often move on, yet one thing never changes. God reigns eternally.

How this affects my life is a constant struggle for me to understand. After spending pages and pages crying out, “Vanity of vanities! All is vanity,” the author of Ecclesiastes concludes in two powerful sentences:

“The conclusion, when all has been heard, is: fear God and keep His commandments, because this applies to every person. For God will bring every act to judgment, everything which is hidden, whether it is good or evil.”

The man who wrote these words presided over a thriving kingdom, commanded the worlds respect as its wisest king, and enjoyed almost every pleasure the world had to offer. Yet, he called it all vanity without God. Everything I’ve done or accomplished (which isn’t much, by the way) is not measured by the power I amass, or even the fulfillment I find in it, but only by whether it is good or evil. And the metric of good or evil is not something legislated by congress, measured by an expert, or decided by the majority population. No, it is God who “will bring every act to judgment” on the final day.

Perhaps you do not believe any of this is true. Perhaps you find it unfair or abstract that some other being decides the measure of your life’s worth. Fine. But, if it is not true than what? How do you choose to live? What do you measure your life by? Power? Relationships? Fame? How do you know it is not all vanity? Think on that.

"Get with the Creator yo!"

Truth is hard to come by in our culture today. Popular culture perverts it, the mainstream media distorts it, and most of us try to ignore it because we fear the responsibility of knowing the truth. Few speak out boldly by their lifestyle, their words, or their actions.

One man has chosen to speak truth in a sincere and straightforward way, but perhaps in an uncommon medium; rap. I have come to appreciate rap, though it will probably never be something I can listen to for any extended period of time. I like to describe it as poetry put to a beat. If done well it can be powerful. Lecrae, a rapper and a follower of Christ, uses it to proclaim the truth he knows.

In the album (rebel), the title to one song says it all: Truth. He unabashedly challenges our culture's acceptance that all truth is relative. He says, "If what's true for you is true for you and what's true for me is true for me, what if my truth says your's is a lie? Is it still true? Come on man!" But, this verse is my favorite.

"See, there's this thing called "Secular Humanism", it says man is the source of all meaning and all purposing. You know what i'm saying? We're just the result of a big cosmic explosion. We don't really have a purpose or meaning, so we just come up with our own purpose. We're the source of our meaning and our purpose. How can a man, which is the product of chance, a finite being be the source of purpose and meaning? You can't! You're created with purpose man! Get with The Creator yo!"

This man's life, which was broken and floundering, changed. Why? He'll tell you it was Christ his savior that reclaimed his life by the truth of Jesus' redeeming sacrifice. Now he proclaims that in his lifestyle, actions, and his music. If you do not know truth in your life, consider that you were created for a purpose. And "Get with The Creator yo!"

Thoughts on Burke (part 1): The Contract with Prosperity

The New York Times Columnist, David Brooks, wrote an op-ed recently titled The Power of Prosperity where he engages in an instructive thought experiment. He asks, “What would happen if a freak solar event sterilized the people on the half of the earth that happened to be facing the sun?” His full answer is worth reading, but this paragraph gives the crux of his argument.

"Without posterity, there are no grand designs. There are no high ambitions. Politics becomes insignificant. Even words like justice lose meaning because everything gets reduced to the narrow qualities of the here and now."

I want to dwell on an important idea that Mr. Brooks alluded to: the relationship between the living, dead, and unborn. Edmund Burke famously wrote about this in his letter to the young Frenchmen Charles DePont—an enthusiastic revolutionary who had elicited Burke’s response to the revolution in France. Burke’s book length letter later became known as Reflections on the French Revolution.

In the Reflections, Burke defends the importance of heritage, protects reason from rationalism, and reminds those crying “Liberty, equality, fraternity!” that liberty is not license, justice is not equality, and fraternity has responsibility. The revolutionaries in France rejected their past heritage because they accepted Rousseau’s definition that the social contract existed merely as a commercial agreement between consenting individuals. Burke agreed that a social contract did exist, but he gave it far more meaning. He says,

“Society is indeed a contract. It is a partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection. As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.”

Simply, I believe he means that past and future, not just present, matters. If we deny the past bequeaths us any duties or posterity demands our responsibility, than we will develop a narrow individualists set of values. This “presentism” gives rise to the license and irresponsibility that dominated the French Revolution and is corroding the DNA of America. Why worry about a founding document if the culture has changed? Why reform Social Security if you will be dead before it is bankrupt? Why commit to marriage and children if it prevents immediate pleasure? Why invest in a community if you will not be here to see the fruits in the next generation? And there are many more similar questions that could be asked.

We are indebted to Mr. Burke for standing athwart the doctrinaire radical who wants change for the mere sake of change, and thus destroys the contract between God and man and between the generations of mankind. If Burke were asked to evaluate the thought experiment at the beginning of this post, I believe he would say: “The whole chain and continuity of the commonwealth would be broken. No one generation could link with another. Men would become little better than the flies of summer." And that is why we must remember our contract with prosperity.

Do you live for your Reputation?

As I step onto the stage and voice my opinion, I cannot help but wonder – who is listening (or reading)? And what do they think? More personally, what do they think of me? I care, like every other human being, what people think of me. I behave, talk, or even alter my posture in the elevator to maintain some ideal reputation – automatically, almost without thinking. Today, after reading the quote below by John Piper, I spent the rest of the day considering how many times my actions and attitudes are dictated by some ideal reputation that I imagine myself having and which I seek to perpetuate. After reading the quote, ask yourself, “What reputation do I live for?”

What men think of us can burden or brighten our days. But it is of little account in the end. A good name among people may be better than great riches now, but neither name nor riches will survive the fire of [God’s] crucible. Truth is all that will matter. Not money or man’s opinion.

John Piper, Seeing and Savoring Jesus Christ

Social Networking Part 1: Facebook vs. Myspace

Ever wonder why people started using Facebook instead of MySpace? Perhaps you use both, but you probably favor one. Some recent research suggests that your use of Facebook or Myspace reflects your socio-economic class.

When Facebook started at Harvard in 2004, Myspace dominated the online social networking world (which was tiny compared to today, but growing quickly). Originally limited to just college students by requiring a valid university email address, Facebook held a reputation of exclusivity for the first couple of years. Myspace's open registration attracted all types, however, and it was the "in thing" to join for teenages by 2005. When Facebook opened up its registration so anyone could join in September 2006 an important transition occurred. It seemed every high school student was flocking to the new site, attracted by the opportunity to network with older, 'cooler' college students at universities they would soon be attending. It turns out, however, that not all teenagers made an exodus to Facebook, or if they were just joining social networking they did not necessarily choose Facebook over Myspace.

Danah Boyd, a researcher at Microsoft Research New England and a Fellow at the Harvard Berkman Center for Internet and Society, tackles the question of how these two social networks developed. Danah's main discovery in her research, and the proposition she advances in this essay is this: the social networking sites of Facebook and Myspace reflect the socio-economic class divisions evident in real society. Therefore, as Danah explains in a recent speech, a teenager’s choice of a site depended heavily on what socio-economic class they were in. As she admits, this is a sticky and often muddled issue, but an important one to think about.

Fundamentally, the divide (albeit murky) between Facebook and Myspace reveals that humans will almost always connect with and seek out others like them. In our lives we tend to build the closest relationships with people who share our values, like the same books, listen to similar music, etc. Is this wrong? No, I don't think so. Is it worth thinking about? Of course, we already do it all the time. But, how and why you make friendships is an important question you should ask yourself. Online social networking has exploded as an outlet for relationship building, to the point where many of us will say (only half-jokingly), "We're not friends until its official on Facebook."

I plan to consider next how the phenomenon of online social networking is shaping our daily lives and defining the culture of the 21st century.

Is the News as we know it about to disappear?

People process varying amounts of news everyday, some are addicted to it others ambivalent, but no one can avoid it entirely. Yet, how we receive news and what type of news is delievered could changing dramatically very soon. Indeed, it already has changed. The internet has revolutionized American's way of life in the past 15 years in a wirlwind of creative destruction that has opened new markets and transformed industries. The news business has been no exception.

Traditional modes of mass producing news no longer dominate the industry. Traditional methods of journalism no longer seem essential. The emergence of the blogosphere and other low-cost alternative news sources, like the drudgereport or the Huffington Post, have undercut the revenue stream by diverting readership away from previous news giants. Print newspapers are particularly threatened as fewer readers subscribe for home delievery. Journalist wonder if they will have a job in their industry in 10, maybe even 5 years. It is not an outlandish question to ask if news as we know it is about to disappear, or at least drastically alter in form.

But if not that, than what? What will news look like in the future? Will it be the immediacy of twitter feeds? The diverse but opinionated blogs? How will they produce revenue? I find the most compelling suggestion to be The Nichepaper. This type of paper could reinvent what 'news' actually is. The author of the article I linked to says,

Nichepapers aren't a new product, service, or business model. They are a new institution. They're a living example of the institutional innovation that is the key to 21st century business. They're not the same old newspaper, sold a different way. They are 21st century newspapers, built on new rules, that are letting radical innovators reinvent what "news" is.

Yet, Nichepapers are only one possible business model for the future. Chris Anderson, editor in cheif for Wired Magizine, explains in an interview that the internet's challenge to the traditional press might force most news to be free. Perhaps it will be reported by part-timers contributing whatever local knowlege they have combined with others analyzing and filtering it for the masses. Its hard to imagine an industry that is so interwhoven into the daily lives of most people changing so fundamentally. But, perhaps it is because news is so inseperable from most people's existence that the industry is being forced to change.