As IF Times

link Democrats boycott Coke, Walmart over voter ID laws | Washington Examiner.

Maybe they’re right.  Where is the proof that people have nothing better to do than to go out on polling day and fraudulently vote for their favorite guy?  The very idea of it is insulting.  We constantly hear of voter apathy, so anything that can be done to make the process easier should be encouraged.  Heck, you may as well vote a couple of times while you’re there for good measure.  Let’s face it, bureaucracy is strangling society at every turn.  Maybe the entire notion of carrying ID for any aspect of our lives can be dismissed entirely.  The multi billion dollar sink hole which is homeland security can be wiped out overnight.  Gone forever will be border lineups, invasive questions and churlish officers.

Perhaps this same approach can be applied to other aspects of our daily lives.  Immediately we can think of airline travel.  Instead of the layers of bureaucracy that are presently associated with air travel today, including ticketing, airport security, passport applications etc etc, why not just revise the process into a first come, first served format?   It could be like waiting for a bus; no one needs to jump through all the ‘security’ hoops now required of all air travellers; just show up and board with a ham sandwich and a Big Gulp.

This novel notion can be applied to  work and education as well.  When someone applies for a job, is it really necessary to present all kinds of paperwork evidencing vocational and college bona fides?  Who would lie about this kind of thing?  The job application process can be made much easier by emphasizing the personal interview.  In fact, this humanizes the process rather than choosing people because of some abstract scholastic scores.

Think of how easy life would be.  When you attend sporting or entertainment events, you wouldn’t need evidence of having purchased a ticket, you simply stroll in and get the best seat.  When you leave a restaurant, you wouldn’t need to show any kind of ownership chit to the valet parking attendant.  You just tell him you’d like the convertible Mercedes.  At dry cleaners, the retrieval process is sped up immensely.  No longer will it be ‘no ticky, no laundry’, you just ask for some shirts in your desired size and color.

Over time, we’ve become a society hopelessly dependant on labels and tags.  We have come to accept all manner of restrictions and rules on our activities because apparently, it serves the greater good. Anyone who owns a phone or used a computer is plugged into ‘the matrix’.  There’s very little that can’t be known about anyone with only a few clicks of the mouse.  Maybe we should push back at all of the invasive ID tags imposed upon us.

Getting back to the voting process, it’s obvious to everyone that a bit of modern tweaking can improve the entire election process.  Logically, they could contract out people to go and gather votes as if it were a bottle drive.  These canvassers can then dump off their baskets of votes at centralized stations for counting.  What could go wrong?  If we want to be even more 21st century, people could just click to vote for their candidate from the convenience of their smart phone or computer.  What could go wrong?

link Hoodies evolution from fashion mainstay to symbol of injustice – CNN.com.

People can say what they want, but appearance counts.  It’s amazing how people still think that their manner of dress expresses their ‘individuality’, when in reality, it is the exact opposite.  For most people, what they wear is mainly a function of how they wish to fit into mainstream society, or at least to the subgroup that they find important to them.  In other words, it’s all about individuality…in a me too kind of way.

The entire foundation of the fashion industry is predicated upon the notion that the consumer is a ‘certain kind of person’ if only they wore that particular company’s goods.  They base their message on the universal frailty that is human insecurity.  Fashion is seldom about utility, it is always about conveying an implied message to others.  Let’s face it, if it was about utility, we’d all be wearing togas.

Instead we have millions of people willing to pay sometimes hundreds of dollars to buy …jeans.   As if wearing a $300 pair of jeans will confer to the wearer any more prestige than would a $20 pair of Costco jeans.   What it really says is that someone is dumb enough to pay $300 for some cotton denim that a laborer in a third world country made for $2.  The same applies to running shoes.  We see instances of kids who can’t possibly afford the latest Nikes but somehow manage to get them.

The ubiquitous hoodie has come into the spotlight recently because of events surrounding the shooting of a teen in Florida.  All of a sudden, the wearing of a hoodie is a political statement, even more than it was before.   Hoodies have been around for quite a while, long having been the favorite garb of monks.  Monks were supposed to be ascetics, so by definition, their clothing had to be the simplest of garb.  The hood served a couple of purposes: one, it eliminated the necessity of wearing hats, an extra cost item and two, monks tended to live in colder climates so a hood was useful to keep off the damp cold.

In the past 20 years, despite the onset of global warming, the hoodie has become quite the fashion item, found in the closets of probably most people, especially the younger crowd.  No doubt, the popularity of this ‘half snuggli’ has been pushed by many in the entertainment space who are often seen wearing them in their delightful music videos.   And because their artistic heroes wear them, the fan base emulates them as well.  This is all fine and makes sense unless you happen to not live in Detroit, Chicago or New York.  In places like Florida or LA for example, wearing a hoodie is as practical as a fur parka.

Instead, it’s a fashion statement much like wearing a ball cap sideways or pants below crack level.  It implies membership in a culture that glorifies all that is associated with that manner of dress.  Sixty years ago, this would have been the black leather bike jacket as kids identified with the outlaw persona of Brando or Dean.  Without question wearing a black bike jacket was meant to convey a message to others, that you were somehow this outlaw guy, a message that is of course desired by the wearer.   Similarly today, unless you’re a monk, wearing a hoodie with the hood pulled over your head is not just a fashion statement, it’s a message sent to others about who you are and your values.

Unfortunately, that manner of wearing hoodies is popular among bank robbers, gangsta rappas and other unsavory types.   So when otherwise normal kids copy that style, they are unwittingly lumping themselves in with this group.  Like it or not, the wearing of head covered hoodies has negative associations in our society.  They may as well be wearing striped crew necked shirts with eyemasks like the Hamburgler.  It has nothing to do with freedom of attire.  It has everything to do with identifying yourself as part of a segment of popular culture.   Unfortunately, this particular aspect of popular culture carries with it connotations of thuggery, no different than a mohawk haircut.

You can’t tell people what to wear, but people should not complain if what they choose to wear elicits responses from others that are not sympathetic.  People have the right to appear unsociable and all gangsta, but it’s axiomatic that others have the right to treat them appropriately as well.  If you don’t want to be chased by cats, don’t dress like a rat.