Tag Archives: politics

IRS Email Scandal – Does Sonasoft reveal what happened?

Today I was reading Sonasoft’s blog post denying that they have the IRS’s email archives and I noticed a few nuances that I wanted to point out. Their main point that is repeated several times is as follows:

“Sonasoft does NOT have IRS email. Sonasoft NEVER had access to IRS email.”

This is interesting because they stress that Sonasoft does not currently have IRS email (which is true) and that they never had ACCESS to IRS email. They do not say that they “never had” IRS email or that the email wasn’t archived – only that they did not have access. Presumably because the IRS was using a Sonasoft product (SonaVault) and not the Sonasoft arching service.

I believe that this is just another instance of performative language that is “legally accurate”, but purposely deceiving. They never deny that data was deleted or archived on their servers.

The “access” language is interesting to me because I believe Sonasoft is attempting to tell everyone what likely happened.

Sonasoft has safeguards and special algorithms to protect the SonaVault Email Archive from mischievous IT administrators who might be tempted to delete or tamper with the archived email. Any attempt to delete or modify the SonaVault email archive will capture the altered text, date stamp the attempt, and send out various alerts to IT personnel and management that an attempted breach occurred; the original email will not be changed in any way. The only way that email can be deleted from the archive is through SonaVault’s expiration policies. The Administrator can set retention policies to purge the archive of emails that have reached an expiration date, which is often set to be a seven-year period.

Basically, as I read it, Sonasoft is saying that they did not have access (i.e., did not have admin access to change the policy settings), but it is probable that an IRS admin did. Which is what I think happened. Someone inside the IRS was probably told to change the configurations to dump email archives.

Sonasoft also gives us the key to finding out who deleted the files right in the blog post:

There are many options to safeguard expired email, and purging the email requires several steps so that email cannot be ‘accidentally’ deleted. In addition, all purge policies are recorded and become part of the permanent log that cannot be tampered with.

They key to understanding who deleted the IRS emails and by extension who ordered the files to be deleted is in the administrative logs. A savvy lawyer should subpoena the administrative logs, determine which administrator changed the configuration settings to delete the archived emails, and determine who made the decision to do so.

Why A One-Size-Fits-All Minimum Wage Doesn’t Work For America

It seems to me that federally enforced on-size-fits-all minimum wage legislation is an ineffective way for policy makers to improve the standard of living for this country’s people.

I completely agree that something needs to be done. There are a thousand different ways we could improve the standard of living for the entire country. Simple and effective ways we could close the income gap between the richest and the poorest among us, but $10.10 an hour isn’t one of them. Frankly, it’s lazy policy making.

$10.10 an hour means different things in different parts of the country:

I think it is difficult for people in different parts of the country to understand what $10.10 an hour means to one another. Someone in New York City probably thinks that $10.10 an hour is slave wages while someone in Jackson, Mississippi (capital of MS) probably considers $10.10 an hour a livable wage. That is because the average cost of living varies wildly from region to region in the United States.

Average Cost of Living

Housing Prices Vary Wildly Across Major Cities: 

We can quickly compare median sales prices for homes across the country (source):

City Median Sale Price
Manhattan, NY $1,175,000
Jackson, MS $184,502
Seattle, WA $435,000
Atlanta, GA $245,000
San Francisco, CA $945,000

Gas Prices Vary Wildly Across Major Cities: 

We can quickly compare gas prices across the country (source)

City Regular Mid Premium Diesel
Manhattan, NY $4.052 $4.216 $4.354 $4.479
Jackson, MS $3.440 $3.642 $3.812 $3.737
Seattle, WA $4.035 $4.152 $4.255 4.109
Atlanta, GA $3.692 $3.871 $4.045 $3.893
San Francisco, CA $4.225 $4.342 $4.440 $4.291

Note: There are similar variances for food and clothing costs.

It is important to realize that these major variances are across major cities. If you compare rural areas to cities the variance is even more dramatic. So why does anyone expect a one-sized-fits-all minimum wage to work across the country?

The Solution: A Livable Wage that Fits

If we want to increase the minimum wage it seems like we need to make an effort to understand what that wage is in each part of country. We should not pick a number that everyone is expected to implement across the board. The country is to diverse for that to be successful.

What may be a fit for Seattle, WA would probably be overly burdensome to businesses in Jackson, MS. What may work in Jackson, MS would probably be insufficient in Manhattan, NY. So why do we treat wages the same when costs across the country are provably and undeniably different? This makes no sense to me.

Instead, it seems like we should empower our communities and local policy makers to actin the best interest of their constituents by providing the people living there with critical data and information to make better decisions for themselves. And if we are going to implement something federally (which I don’t think we should) – shouldn’t we at least make an effort to make it work for everyone?

We are a great country because of our diversity. There is something, somewhere, for everyone. We have always embraced that mantra. I don’t think we should stop now.

The Economics of Compounded Growth

Our economy slowly grows at around 4% a year. This is a given. An expectation. Anything less is seen as a failure, anything more is an achievement.

I read an article today that did a good job of putting that kind of growth into perspective.

“Let us imagine that in 3030BC the total possessions of the people of Egypt filled one cubic metre. Let us propose that these possessions grew by 4.5% a year. How big would that stash have been by the Battle of Actium in 30BC? This is the calculation performed by the investment banker Jeremy Grantham(1).
The trajectory of compound growth shows that the scouring of the planet has only just begun. We simply can’t go on this way.

Go on, take a guess. Ten times the size of the pyramids? All the sand in the Sahara? The Atlantic ocean? The volume of the planet? A little more? It’s 2.5 billion billion solar systems(2).”

This idea makes me wonder: Where is our breaking point? Where is the point in which we can’t sustain growth any longer? And what is our contingency plan?

I don’t know. Maybe we are already there. Maybe technology will let us keep going further than any of us ever dreamed. I don’t claim to know, but it’s certainly something we should all consider.

Problems and Solutions to the Broken Healthcare System

My wife and I recently had a little girl. Until that moment I had never been exposed to the healthcare and insurance ecosystem. I have been fortunate. I’ve never had an extended stay at the hospital, I’ve never been on prescription medication, and as an adult, I have never been to the doctor outside a checkup. Now I realize that the system is completely convoluted and non-transparent.

From what I can tell there are four major problems with the healthcare and insurance mechanisms.

1. Prices for healthcare services are unavailable, non-existent, or not published.
2. There is no crowd-sourced ratings system for hospitals (think yelp for hospitals).
3. Since everyone is insured no one cares about cost. This has resulted in higher prices.
4. The people have no power to control the quality or cost of the healthcare services.

These four problems ultimately result in a system that is too expensive, low quality, and where the people have no power to do anything about it.

Here are my proposed solutions:

1. Pricing for healthcare services are unavailable, non-existent, or not published.

Require all hospitals post itemized prices for their goods and services. Every procedure should have an itemized “menu” outlining what the procedure may cost. Since any given procedure is highly variable the menu should include “average cost”, “best case”, “most likely”, and “worst case” scenarios.

The menu should also include things like bandages, medication, and anything else a hospital could use to inadvertently pad the bill.  Great hospitals should even consider hiring a “budget specialist” who discusses costs and options with each patient.

These menus should be posted online and available before he procedure. This will allow individuals and insurance companies to shop around for a facility that meets the individuals’ need. This will also drive prices down since hospitals will be forced to compete based on price (or provide superior service to justify higher prices).

I would not eat at a restaurant that didn’t post prices so I should not have to receive healthcare services without prices either.

2. There is no crowd-sourced ratings system for hospitals (think yelp.com for hospitals).

There should be a crowd-sourced ratings system for hospitals. In my opinion this would have been a much better investment than healthcare.gov. When hospitals are forced to compete for business based on price and services the consumer benefits. Prices will ultimately fall and service will rise.

For example, in Atlanta there are several major hospitals in the metro area. For most procedures I have no idea what a service cost or who the best service provider may be. I usually just go to the closest major hospital. I imagine most people do the same thing.

A rating system would enable a consumer to quickly and easily search for a service provider based on thousands of consumer ratings. Ultimately a sick person cannot choose if they want to go to the hospital, but they can choose which hospital they visit. The power of consumer choice based on good information will ultimately force hospitals to compete.

3. Since everyone is insured no one cares about prices. This has resulted in higher prices.

The third major problem I see with the healthcare system are insurance companies.

Healthcare prices are so complex and expensive (for reason listed above) that no one can or wants to deal with it. We defer all responsibility to our insurers. Now, with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) we have no choice anyways. Ultimately this leads to a system where no one cares about prices because they will be paying the same insurance premium regardless. But this is a false premise.

Because no one cares about prices and live under the illusion that their costs are the same there is no incentive to seek more cost effective solutions. People rarely look at their hospital bill and pay whatever the insurer requires. This ultimately leads to higher healthcare costs and higher healthcare insurance premiums.

Healthcare insurers should provide incentives (lower insurance premiums) to individuals who shop around for better prices and value. This would ultimately lower insurance prices and force hospitals to compete again.

4. The people have no power to control the quality or cost of the healthcare services they receive. 

The biggest problem with our healthcare system is that the people receiving the services have no power to control prices or the quality of service they receive. The appropriate infrastructure is not in place. All of the power resides with the insurance companies and healthcare providers.

Insurance companies operate as powerful unions who dictate what they will pay a hospital for a given good or service. Insurance companies have large staff who perform complex pricing studies so they understand what people are paying and how much a product SHOULD cost regardless what a hospital charges.

This results in hospitals charging several times market value for a given good or service because they fully expect the insurance company to pay only a small fraction of that amount. Meanwhile: the consumer is screwed, hospitals charge too much, and insurance companies reek most of the profits.

Obamacare:

Obamacare has only served to strengthen this broken system by further empowering insurance companies and disenfranchising the individual. Since EVERYONE is now forced to have healthcare insurance this eliminates any opportunity for individuals to negotiate or bargain for themselves.

Ultimately, we live in a system where the insurance companies dictate how much they will pay hospitals and how much they will charge consumers. Meanwhile, there has been no progress toward a system that promotes competition, dives prices down, or leads to better services.

Should we be worried about Climate Change?

With all of the media-created controversy about global warming I can’t see past the propaganda to form an opinion.  It seems like every climate change discussion is a prize fight between two entertainers (i.e., not scientist).

I get lost in the entertainment and can’t decipher the facts from the manufactured drama. It makes the whole topic of climate change seem like a farce. If we are really on the verge of death it seems like someone would stand up and say “Stop everything!” That hasn’t happened.

If things are as bad as climate activist would have us believe then why aren’t world leaders like President Obama taking monumental steps toward protecting the nation’s interests? There should be an immediate and mandatory ban on global emissions, all military and civilian resources should be dedicated to building flood barriers, creating alternative energy, and growing food reserves. None of this has happened.

Instead, even the most liberal politicians, have done nothing. We still protect oil pipelines in the middle east, we still have highest GDP on earth, and our economy still functions as the largest producer of pollution making machines (tanks, cars, and airplanes) on earth. That seems pretty anti-environmentalist if you ask me.

There are too many mixed messages and I think that is why so many people do not take climate change seriously. And for the average non-climate-change-scientist it is almost impossible to form an educated opinion.

I honestly do not know what to believe. I do not know if climate change is man-made or just part of the normal life-cycle of mother nature. I don’t even know if there is anything we can do about it.

The military passes a financial audit for the first time

For the first time since 1990, when the Congress approved the Chief Financial Officers Act, which among other things, required all federal agencies and departments to produce what would be regarded as a clean financial statement on their budgets, a branch of the U.S. military passed a financial audit.

As reported by Jamie Dupree:

“It was the first time any branch of the military service had been given an “unqualified favorable audit” for being able to show where billions in funding had gone.

Let me repeat that – it was the first time that any part of the service had been able to fully account for where all of its money was spent.”

This begs the question: What are the consequences for committing fraud, failing audits, and abusing tax dollars? Apparently nothing. What is the point of an audit if there is no enforcement?

Government Sanctioned Torture & Murder

The American political class is morally bankrupt. Many are guilty of crimes of greater magnitude and scope than almost any criminal you may find in the penitentiary. Among their crimes are theft, eavesdropping, deceit, murder, and torture. But such is the culture of immunity among the American political and financial elite that no one is punished for these crimes. 

Torture

Why is it so easy for individuals from all sides of the political spectrum to discuss abortion,  same-sex marriage, or other distractionary topics but ignore other blatant crimes against humanity directly committed by the political elite? Perhaps more puzzling is why the media spends countless hours discussing these type of issues while simultaneously ignoring reports of torture and murder committed by the individuals we elected to uphold the law.

In fact, leaked reports and declassified memos have revealed the horrifying extent that torture has been used, illegally, by the United States military and the CIA in the past two decades. However; most people have never heard about any of it.

For example, in his book “With Liberty and Justice for Some” Glenn Greenwald notes  a few of cases of documented and confirmed torture:

“…a new report that found that U.S. personnel tortured and abused detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, using beatings, electrical shocks, sexual humiliation and other cruel practices…

…One forty-six-page memo from OLC chief Steven Bradbury dated May 10, 2005, authorized the following acts to be performed on ‘high-value detainees’: forced nudity, dietary manipulation involving minimum caloric intake, corrective techniques such as facial and abdominal slapping, water dousing, stress positions designed to induce muscle fatigue and the attendant discomfort, and sleep deprivation…

…[One detainee] Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times in March 2003 and Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded 83 times in August 2002…

…[Other torture] techniques included walling, cramped confinement, and insects placed in a confinement box…”

What is worse, as Greenwald notes, many of these detainees were held for years without trial. Even more frightening some of the individuals held and tortured were completely innocent!

“Of the fifty-nine detainees who so far have had their habeas cases heard in federal court, thirty-eight of them have won. In other words, in almost two-thirds of the cases reviewed, the courts ruled that there was no credible evidence to justify the detention.”

Perhaps some people find it morally acceptable to overlook the crimes committed by the state since it was against “terrorist”, but even if you believe that how can you justify what happened to innocent men. And shouldn’t the Government be obliged to at least prove guilt beforehand?

Murder

Perhaps more frightening than the numerous documented cases of illegal torture are the instances of fatality due to those same techniques. “The Human Rights Watch researcher John Sifton has documented that approximately 100 detainees, including CIA-held detainees, have died during U.S. interrogations and some are known to have been tortured to death.” [1]

Drone Strikes

Beyond the cases of detainees being tortured to death are the numerous cases of civilians that have been inadvertently or purposely killed during U.S. drone strikes.

drone war

One Pakistani Government report noted that at least 67 civilians have been killed by U.S. drone strike since 2008. [2] In another report Washington Post report noted that, “in Yemen, Human Rights Watch investigated six selected airstrikes since 2009 and concluded that at least 57 of the 82 people killed were civilians, including a pregnant woman and three children who perished in a September 2012 attack.” [3][4]  That is 150 innocent lives in just two countries – two countries we are not at war with!

One may argue that these are casualties of war, but no war has been declared by congress. In fact, many of the drone strikes are not controlled by the military at all, but by the CIA. So are these simply casualties of war or a dangerous signal of a U.S. drone program gone rogue?

Sadly, these crimes are just a sliver of what we can prove and do not even begin to address the vast amount of information not available to the public.  It is frightening to even imagine the true scope of Government murder and torture. It is perhaps more frightening to imagine how history will judge our country, but what can we do?

What can we do?

We can start by paying attention. We can stop being detracted. Forget about Duck Dynasty, Candy Crush, Facebook, and the next holiday shopping session for a while. Stop allowing yourself to be distracted while the elites steal from you and your children. Demand justice, oversight, and investigation. Demand representatives that actually represent your interests. We deserve more.

Continue reading

Morality: Questioning Land Ownership

I began to think about the concept of  land ownership after reading two separate books, whose authors probably would not agree on the subject. The first was the final  pamphlet  in a series of writings by Thomas Paine called “Agrarian Justice”. The second is from a book I read about a year ago by Ron Paul called “Liberty Defined“.

Both Ron Paul and Thomas Paine are known for their outspoken “pro-Liberty” stance so I was interested to see such a dynamic exist between their ideas about land ownership. It also caused me to examine my own thoughts on the subject.

1. Opposing Views: Thomas Paine and Ron Paul on Land Ownership

In context, it may be helpful to quickly describe the two men’s views on the morality and right of land ownership and then my own thoughts on the subject.

1a. Ron Paul on Land Ownership:

Ron Paul is a champion of the Austrian school of economic thought. He believes that private land ownership is a pivotal component to a successful economy, personal liberty, and natural rights.  Ron Paul is against public land ownership, especially ownership by the Federal Government, citing the misuse of public land in the abuses of eminent domain, lobbyist groups, and otherwise corrupt actions by Governments. On many of these points I agree.

“In a free society, the land is owned by the people, not the government…Total federal ownership is more than one third of the land mass of the fifty states. But that’s not the only problem…Taxation and regulations are so cumbersome that land owners are essentially renters with no right to the land…”

Ron Paul also hints and problems of facism and oligarchical control of land:

“Today’s corporations and private businesses ask local governments to condemn land in order to resell it to them. The promise is that the land value will go up, the business will pay more taxes, the municipality will benefit, and the new business will earn moremoney with its new, preferable location…This is a modern distortion and abuse of the principle of eminent domain.”

The part I do not believe Ron Paul addresses  is the potential for private land owners and corporations to own and hold giant portions of land into perpetuity. If it is every man’s natural right to own land how can we justify one man or single corporation to own it all – leaving nothing for some people. Isn’t then, the perpetual ownership of massive amounts of land inherently immoral and contrary to liberty?

Thomas Paine addresses some of these concerns.

1b. Thomas Paine on Land Ownership:

Thomas Paine believed that, in a civilized state, individuals are entitled to the fruits of their improvements to land. And since it is impossible to separate the improvements made to land and the land itself property ownership is a right. Paine did however draw a distinction between the land itself (which everyone is entitled to) and the cultivation and improvement of that land (which the laborer is entitled to):

“And as it is impossible to separate the improvement made by cultivation, from the earth itself, upon which that improvement is made, the idea of landed property arose from that inseparable connection; but it is nevertheless true, that it is the value of the improvement, only, and not the earth itself that is individual property. Every proprietor therefore of cultivated land owes the community a ground-rent for the land which he holds…

The additional value made by cultivation, after they system [of property ownership] was implemented, became the property of those who did it, or who inherited it from them, or who purchased it. It had originally no owner. Whilst, therefore, I advocate the right, and interest myself in the hard case of all those who have been thrown out of their natural inheritance by the introduction of the system of landed property, I equally defend the right of the possessor to the part which is his…”

Thomas Paine offers the following solution to bridge the gap between the rights of land owners (those who own land and cultivate it) and the rights of non-land owners (those who have a right to the ground itself, but cannot use it because it is occupied):

“To create a National Fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of Fifteen Pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property. And also, The sum of Ten Pounds per annum, during life, to every person now living, of the age of fifty years, and to all others as they shall arrive at that age.”

Many people equate Thomas Paine’s solution with the modern day property tax and Social Security payments.

2. My Thoughts on the Morality of Land Ownership

The biggest problem I see with land ownership today is the perpetual ownership of mass amounts of land by the wealth elites, government, and corporations. This system usually means that large plots of valuable land and it’s resources are owned by the same family, company, or the Government for centuries.

I wonder: Is the process of perpetual and infinite land ownership acceptable in a free society or is it a modern form of royalty – where power and resources are passed down from generation to generation by a group of powerful elites?*

25 men control over 30 million acres of land (2%).
* The federal government owns more that 650 million acres of land (30%).

The Real Nelson Mandela

I really enjoy listening to Cornel West speak. While I don’t agree with all his politics, I do think he is brilliant, endlessly entertaining and has a fiery spirit that has unfortunately been all but stomped out and placated in most members of American society.

Cornel West did an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN recently, and as always did not fail to entertain or raise a few eye brows. West said that we were witnessing the “Santa Claus-ification” of Mendela’s legacy. He went on to proclaim that we had “turned the revolutionary into an old man -  a huggable old man with toys and a bag, smile on his face, no threat to anybody, domesticated, tame. And no longer really full of the fire.”

Cornel West is absolutely correct.

The mainstream news will rarely mention this, but up until a few years ago Nelson Mandela was on the United States Terrorist Watch List.  And historically, the US didn’t exactly look favorably on Mandela. In fact, during the 80’s, President Reagan placed Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) party on America’s official list of terrorist organizations. But we don’t seem to hear a lot about that now. Instead we hear about President Obama taking selfies with Danish PM Helle Thorning-Schmidt during the memorial service or Senator Ted Cruz’s Facebook page blowing up because right wingers hate anything anti-‘merican.

I’m just a little bit disappointed of the media coverage of Mandela’s funeral, the shallow commentary on his life and that so many Americans are so short sighted and stuck in their lame duck train of thought.

A very brief look at Mandela’s early activism

Scanning Wikipedia, we see that Mandela was born into an African royal family and was able to go on to attend Fort Hare University then the University of Witwatersrand, where he studied law. After studying law, we became politically active, joining the ANC party. As a member of the ANC party, he served as a lawyer and was repeatedly arrested.

In the beginning, Mandela followed the rules. He played it strait, by the book. He took the path of non-violence, and it got him nowhere. After spending over 10 years fighting peacefully for change and seemingly getting nowhere but arrested over and over, he turned to more radical measures.

While in college and thereafter, Mandela became more and more influenced by communist and socialist thinking. He had many socialist and communist friends and became increasingly inspired by other revolutions and movements that had taken place like Castro’s 26th of July Movement in Cuba.

In 1961, Mandela founded a militant group (MK) and in association with the South African Communist Party, led a sabotage campaign against the apartheid government. This ultimately led to his imprisonment and a 27 year sentence in jail.

My Take on Nelson Mandela

Many Americans are quick to look at Mandela and label him negatively as a terrorist and communist. And why shouldn’t we, we are taught to think this way after all. Communism will destroy our entire way of life if we don’t stomp it out and terrorists are always lurking in the dark, looking for ways to kill us.

I see it much differently. Yes, Mandela was a socialist/communist and yes, Mandela did say that his armed forces (MK) would resort to guerilla warfare and terrorism if need be (at least according to Wikipedia which points to a citation to a book I don’t own), but understand that he lived in a world of complete injustice.

Consider what Mandela and his fellow man endured, a world where a foreign nation had swooped in and taken over, removing natives from their foreign lands, relocating them to slums. A world where it was illegal for blacks and whites to intermingle or be married, or where blacks were not allowed to run businesses or hold professional jobs. A world where busses and trains, hospitals and ambulances and virtually everything else was segregated.

Wait… this all sounds so eerily familiar to me…

In the United States, many of our great civil rights leaders took to peaceful protest to effect change, as did Gandhi during the Indian Independence Movement. But Mandela decided to take a more radical approach. Perhaps that is a sign of weakness, perhaps he might not be considered as noble for doing so, but regardless, I understand why he felt as he felt and why he did what he did.

Mandela was sick of injustice and he stood up against it, as did many of his fellow men. Perhaps if Mandela hadn’t been sent off to prison for 27 years, we’d have not ever even heard of his name today. Regardless, I understand why he did what he did and felt the way he felt. I would have felt the same.

Quick Final Thoughts

How can so many Americans have such negative things to say about Mandela when we have such a similar history or oppression in this country? Are we really that short sighted? Do we really not comprehend? Perhaps it is so. Perhaps most people are incapable of putting themselves in other’s shoes.

I am not a socialist, communist or radical. But I have never had any reason to be. I have always been relatively happy, healthy and free or injustice and oppression. But if I were in a situation where I was forced into poverty or slavery, oppressed, beaten down, starved and broken, I too could see how I might cling to more radical ideologies. I too can see how I might be led to lash out violently. Is it not a man’s primal instinct to defend his own life after all?

Why is it that so many others appear incapable of considering this?

Check out this other interesting article about Nelson Mandela- Don’t Sanitize Nelson Mandela: He’s Honored Now, But Was Hated Then

-Holden

Why does religion exist and why does it matter?

If religion, that is to say the existence of a personal God, is a fabrication of the human mind then a logical question might be: Why does religion exist at all? I’d like to discuss a few reasons I believe, based on my own experience and observations, that religion exists and thrives.

1. The Victors of War, Justification, and The Persistence of Myth

The conquest of men by other men, by all religions and creeds, have been vast and well documented. However, justification by God is a uniquely religious invasion.

1a. Kings and Crusades

During the Crusader’s invasion of South America the Spanish called upon God to justify their pillage of native villages. Their purpose was power, greed, and glory, but their excuse was conversion. Religion has always been an excellent excuse to do evils, but ironically these evils also serve to spread and preserve the institution.

Today, for example, South America remains one of the most religious nations on Earth (90% Christian). The very religion that their conquerors practiced hundreds of years ago. There is a common phrase among historians that “the victors write the history books” and it seems no coincidence to me that powerful Christian nations have been so successful at preserving the ideology that justifies their imperialism.

1b. America: A religious colony

And it should be no surprise that the United States remains a religious country seeing as the first inhabitants fled here to escape religious persecution. It seems obvious why America is predominately protestant and not Catholic or Church of England. These traditions have been carefully handed down from generation to generation slowly perpetuation religion in our very culture.  Were they handed down because the believes are accurate or because they are part of the culture? The answer seems clear.

So perhaps it seems obvious how and why religion spreads across the world, but why does it exist in the first place?

2. Religion provides answers to hard questions.

One of the greatest comforts of religion, even today, is that it answers some of the hardest philosophical and scientific questions our human minds can devise.  Questions about the creation of the Universe, why bad things happen to good people, and so on are addressed in the form of an all powerful entity we have named God.

When early man gazed at the Sun and the Stars and were unable to fathom their existence a supernatural answer seemed logical.  Over time the supernatural answer to difficult questions became stories that village elders passed down from generation to generation. Soon those stories became modern religion.

2a. Why being settling for mythical answers to difficult questions is a weakness of religion:

My problem with accepting the mythical as fact in the modern day is a practical one: It hinders progress. Where would we be if modern man accepted the Sun as a God, or ceased to find answers to evolution, DNA, and history because they believed that all of the answers lay in the literal interpretation of the Bible or Koran? We would probably be dying of plague and accepting it as God’s will.

Furthermore, I think of all the great minds that are engulfed in Religion. I myself know more than a few intelligent people who reject good science on the grounds that it conflict with the Bible. Where would we be if all the great minds today and in the past dedicated themselves to the progress of the human condition and rid themselves of the hindrances of religious mythology?

3. Religion provides a sense of community.

One compliment I will give many practitioners of religion is their sense of community. I have seen, on more than one occasion, a man consumed by vices change his life for the better thanks to the support and love of the religious community. And isn’t everyone searching for one such place or another?

Every human being wishes to belong. To be a member of something larger than oneself, bonded by a common goal and ideology. Whether that be a sports club or a religious institution all men desire such a thing – and most churches, mosks, and temples fill that role. These institutions are free and readily available.

But why do we rely on such institutions as the primary source of community? Why do we send our most vulnerable in society (the poor and uneducated) and question why religion is such an ingrained institution? Is there a better way?

3a. Why finding community among the religious can be detrimental to progress:

The danger of utilizing religious organizations as our main source of community is the advantage such an organization has in maintaining and building a society that believe their mythologies. How can we expect great minds to abandon the very institution they were raised on, or that accepted them in their darkest hour? We can’t. How can we expect society to generate great ideas, solve complex problems, and utilize reason when we are indoctrinated by an institution that promotes feel good mythology over truth? Again, we can’t.

Rather, those of use in the community who find reason, kindness, and truth to be our only form of religion should form similar such institutions to provide alternative sources of community and human service. What good would we do society if such institution promoted values based on logic, reason, and justice rather than pretend?

4. Religion makes us okay with perceived injustices and failure.

My life has been plagued with individuals who are completely satisfied with societal injustices and personal failure. I have family members who are plagued with vices (laziness, alcoholism, drug abuse, ignorance) that will proclaim with pride that “As long as I am right with God everything will be alright in the end.” This line of thinking is illogical, even to most religious scholars, but none-the-less a favorite among the religious.

What type of society do we promote when such a number of our inhabitants believe, even if subconsciously, that ultimate justice and happiness is yet to come – in another life! How can we earnestly expect to improve upon the land of the living when so many are anxiously awaiting to die?

4a. Why accepting injustice and failure is problematic:

We cannot accept injustice and failure in this life, thus we cannot promote an organization that passively does so itself. We create a society that believes, even if they will not admit it, that their shortcomings in this life are okay because they will be resolved in the next.

This line of thinking is immoral and unjust in itself. How can we justify regression to our children, and to our children’s children, and their children? If you are a conservative, which most religious claim to be, isn’t such an ideological fallacy a liberty-stealing one for future generations?

Instead we should demand organizations that promote morality, reason, and justice. Such an organization that tolerates all ideas and creeds, but forces one to examine them reasonably. One that teaches one to think – rather than what to think.