Many people promote the latest technological advancements, claiming that technology makes their life so much simpler, but is this really the case?  Computers with word processing are definitely easier to use than typewriters, but what about even newer technology?  With the onset of new technology, there is a simultaneous onset of problems with all of the new electronics.  We keep inventing new machines to fix the problems of the previous ones.  We live in a world in which machines do much of our work for us, yet we are all frustrated will all of the customer service we must go through in order to fix the broken machines.  Instead of searching past technology, many people propose new technology to help fix the problems of old technology.  What this world really needs is a lesson in simplicity.

      With every technological advancement there are drawbacks, so new machines are always being created to take care of the problems with the older ones.  There are programs that claim that the user can orally verbalize his or her paper and the program will type it.  This sounds wonderful at first, but there are so many errors if the person is not speaking clearly, if the person has an accent, or if he or she is saying homophones such as “pale” and “pail,” which sound the same even though they are two very different words.  Many people who own this type of program complain that it would be faster to have typed the paper in the first place than to have to go back to fix the numerous errors.  There are so many problems with new technology and electronics that are similar to this problem.  A person invents a supposedly perfect new piece of equipment, but one can be sure that it will break down at some point.

      Simplicity can take care of all of our problems with technology.  This world should take a look at Henry David Thoreau’s Walden to see the advantages of nature.  Thoreau is very extreme in his ideas of living in the solitude with no worldly possessions.  He actually goes to the middle of the woods and lives alone, trying to rid himself of the world.  Though he takes simplicity to an intense level, every person can emulate some of his general ideas.  Is it really necessary to anyone to have hundreds of channels on their television?  Most people with all of these channels still complain that there is nothing to watch.  Does every person need a cell phone – even children who are only eight years old?  Lately, parents have been buying cell phones for their fourth graders.  This seems a bit excessive and wasteful.  These children should be playing with Barbies and Legos; not texting or talking to their friends on their cell phones.  People are always buying the newest SUV, yet most of the owners do not have more than two or three children.  Their fancy SUV is burning fuel for what purpose?  To intimidate the drivers in smaller, more environmentally friendly cars, or to show off to their neighbors?  With this current economic crisis, it is a good time to start living simply.

 Living simply allows people to appreciate the aspects of their life that are truly important.  Without being tied down to all of these new electronics, a person can appreciate family, friends, nature, and God.  Instead of watching television or playing videogames, people can go hiking, have a family game night, or just go outside, enjoy nature, and praise the Lord for His creation.  Life is so much less hectic when people actually take time to revel in the simple things in life instead of all of their possessions.  By living simply, people can have much happier marriages, friendships, and relationships to children and other relatives.

      Health is an added benefit to simple living.  Most people who are not attached to their possessions take more time to go outside.  This helps their health both physically and mentally.  Children should come home from school and go outside to play with their friends instead of heading straight for the junk food and television or computer.  A main part of the reason that this nation is so obese is because of our sedentary lifestyle.  Why was this obesity crisis not so prevalent in the times of our ancestors?  Because they did not own all of these addicting electronics.  Now, people prefer to sit on their couch watching lousy television shows to going outside and enjoying nature.  If people went outside to walk or garden for just half of the time they usually spend in front of the television or computer, this country’s obesity problem would be almost eliminated.  Not only would this problem be fixed, but also depression.  Some people do have depression due to a chemical imbalance in the brain, but many people experience this problem because of their hectic lives.  If they took the time to enjoy the outdoors, they would probably experience more joyful days.  People claim that after a long day of work they do not have time to relax because they have to get dinner ready, take care of the kids, get ready for the next day, and so on, yet somehow they find the time to watch a couple television shows or play around on the internet.  With that time, they could have easily gone for a short walk around the neighborhood to de-stress.  Living simply is a great benefit to physical and emotional health.

      There are so many benefits to embracing simplicity that there could be lists and lists of the numerous ways in which it will improve lives.  Thoreau is a great example of a person living a simplistic lifestyle, but most people in the world are not called to take it to such an extreme.  Just cutting out some of the time we spend with technology will benefit our lives.  Watching television for only one hour instead of two is a great first step.  Walking our dog instead of just letting him out in the backyard is another great way to embrace the simple aspects of life, such as nature and quiet time.  This world is so noisy that people have no time to hear themselves think, so simplicity is an absolute must.  By living simply our lives will improve drastically, which in turn, will enhance our world as a whole.

"There are only a few deeper similarities between Palin and Roosevelt.... Unlike many other politicians, they stand up for what they believe in, even when those beliefs may not make them popular...."

Recently, many people have been comparing Governor Sarah Palin to Theodore Roosevelt.  Since Roosevelt was much loved as a politician, people are excited to uncover these similarities because they have very high hopes for Palin’s future in politics.  There are many similarities between the two politicians, such as those relating to their hobbies and ages, but most of these similarities are superficial.  There are only a few similarities which go deeper.  There is definitely a bit of a likeness between Sarah Palin and Theodore Roosevelt, but the comparison is not strong enough to warrant intense predictions of Palin’s time in office if she is elected.
 
The main similarities between Palin and Roosevelt are not very important things to consider when deciding whether to vote for Obama and Biden or McCain and Palin.  Both Palin and Roosevelt love the outdoors and hunting.  Palin has five children and Roosevelt had six.  Both politicians were under age forty-five when nominated as the Republican Vice-President Candidate, and were governors for less than two years at the time of the nomination.  Do these aspects of Palin’s life really deem her the next Teddy Roosevelt?  Just because Palin and Roosevelt are people who enjoy the outdoors and have similar family sizes, does not make much of a difference in the scheme of the presidential election.  Palin should be looked at as a unique individual who possesses similar qualities to those of Roosevelt.

There are only a few deeper similarities between Palin and Roosevelt.  Both are said to have strength of character.  Unlike many other politicians, they stand up for what they believe in, even when those beliefs may not make them popular with the American public.  Both politicians have layers of experience, but those layers are very different.  Also, Palin and Roosevelt are both seen as reformers who “take on the establishment.”  These similarities are important, but they do not seem to justify the comparison Palin and Roosevelt.  In her acceptance speech, Palin mentioned her similarities with Harry S. Truman; not Roosevelt.  Though there are similarities between Palin and Roosevelt, they are not as numerous as people in the media have been mentioning.
Palin and Roosevelt both have layers of experience, but those layers are far from similar.  Roosevelt graduated cum laude with a Bachelor of Art’s degree in history and government from Harvard College, and then proceeded to attend Columbia Law School.  Palin graduated from the University of Idaho with a Bachelor of Science degree in communications and journalism.  Roosevelt published many books about history and politics.  He held various positions, such as Police Commissioner in New York City, Captain in the New York National Guard, and Assistant Secretary of the Navy, just to name a few.  Palin has also held various positions, but they are very different from those of Roosevelt.   She has been a city council member and Mayor of a town in Alaska, an NRA member, Chief of Oil and Gas Compact Commission, and Chair of National Governors Association Natural Resources Committee. 

Palin and Roosevelt were both governors, but that is the case for many presidential candidates.  Palin is the governor of Alaska, which may be large in land area, but is very small in population, while Roosevelt was the Governor of the densely populated state of New York.  In the 2006 census, it was estimated that the population of Alaska was only around 670,000 people.  Even Rhode Island, the smallest state, has a larger population than Alaska, at over one million.  Palin is Governor of Alaska, but her duties differ very much from Roosevelt’s responsibilities when he was Governor of New York. This is not to say that Palin’s experience is of a lesser value than that of Roosevelt, but it is of a very different nature.
The biggest comparison between Palin and Roosevelt probably relates to Roosevelt’s presidency after William McKinley’s death and Palin’s possible presidency if McCain were to pass away.  Some voters may be voting for McCain because they really want Palin to become President and are voting with the notion that McCain could die before the end of his term.  Since McCain is very old, it is unfortunately likely that he may pass away during his term, if elected.  In that case, Palin would acquire the position of President, adding another similarity to the list of comparisons between her and Roosevelt.  That being said, however, the public must be careful in their voting decisions because a person should not vote for McCain solely based on Palin, just as someone should not vote for Obama simply because they are fond of Biden.  If McCain is elected and passes away during Presidency, then there would definitely be a more important similarity between Palin and Roosevelt.

Although there are apparent similarities between Sarah Palin and Theodore Roosevelt, it is hard to believe that, if elected, Palin would be a replica of Roosevelt.  She is her own person and should not be viewed as 2008’s Theodore Roosevelt.  Palin mostly resembles Roosevelt in superficial aspects, such as matters of interests, age, and position of governor.  Granted, there are deeper comparisons, but they are not strong enough to make any predictions about Palin’s time in office, if elected.  People will continue comparing Sarah Palin and Theodore Roosevelt, but they are both most definitely their own people and must be viewed on an individual basis.  If a voter is going to vote for McCain and Palin, they should be voting based on the beliefs and character of the two candidates and not because of Palin’s resemblance with Roosevelt.

"Americans cannot be content living as modernists who exclude the influence of their past generations of family from their lives."
 

People always comment on the common phenomenon of high school cliques and how the student body naturally splits into various groups of people, most yearning to be a part of the so-called ‘popular’ group. Many of the students strive to be in the ‘popular’ group, but they believe that they can only be a part of that group if they dress, act, and speak a certain way. They conform in order to be considered ‘popular’. Most people agree that this is the normal way of life for many adolescents, yet they do not understand that adults act in a very similar manner. Just looking around at the general population, it is evident that many parents are striving to be in the ‘popular’ group.

Adults pursue popularity in many different ways, but they are ultimately conforming. Before the recent explosion in gas prices, SUVs were the cool thing to have. It didn’t matter if a family had one child or five – every parent believed that he or she needed an SUV. It was simply the trendy thing to do because it was what everyone’s friends and neighbors were doing. Why do parents host parties and offer alcohol to underage teens with such high frequency? Because it will make them the ‘popular’ parents, despite the potential consequences and the fact that it is illegal. Not only are these parents conforming, but they are also ignoring their personal values in this pursuit of popularity. They are brushing aside laws and morals with the hopes of gaining the ‘cool parent’ status with their teenagers. By brushing aside their morals, parents are throwing away the values that their own parents taught to them. In the quest of popularity, parents are doing a disservice to themselves as well as their children by eliminating the cultural ties that hold their family together. Popularity is unfortunately not just a high school goal, but a lifelong ambition for the vast majority of Americans, who are all conforming to fit in.

Ironically, this bland “conformism” has replaced a sense of culture, of identity, and of self. Just a few decades back, people were proud of their heredity, but even this aspect of human life has changed with modern times. Today’s society is conforming to meet a certain social ‘norm’ that people believe will give them the most prosperous, happy life. People are more concerned with being the same as their peers (especially by owning the same material goods as their peers), and have disregarded the importance of their heredity and culture of their family.

America has become a culture of conformists, and because of this, many personal cultures are fading away. People no longer care to learn about the history of their families. They are concerned with modernity and are forgetting all else that should be important to them. Many Americans have a bit too much nearsightedness. They are content being American, but fail to learn about previous generations and the places from which their relatives immigrated because they believe America to be better. By failing to remember where they've come from, people fail to appreciate what they have; why their ancestors left their countries to come here, thereby losing any true pride in America. They are left with comfort, not patriotism. Some of these people figure that they live in the greatest country, so why bother to learn about any other places? By losing their heredity, they are losing a part of themselves. People should avidly search for information about their ancestors from their parents and grandparents while they still have the opportunity. Many people are disregarding their backgrounds because they are only looking forward and trying to fit in with the modern world, but their personal family history makes them the people they are today, and gives them their personal characteristics. What would their ancestors think if they saw their descendants’ rejection of the things that they held with high importance?

Conformity is overrated, plain and simple. God made each human being completely different from any other person, down to the minute details such as the fingerprints that are unique to every individual. People must strive to ultimately be themselves, which means embracing not only their personal qualities, but also learning about their culture. It is important that future generations are still interested in reviving and holding onto culture even though they will live in an even more modernized society.

As Ghandi once said, “no culture can live, if it attempts to be exclusive.” Americans cannot be content living as modernists who exclude the influence of their past generations of family from their lives. A person can never have too much culture, so they must strive to learn as much as they can about the cultures which have blended to make him or her the person he or she has become. Those who still search for popularity will pursue it forever, but those who are well-rounded, content with themselves, and are learning about their culture are those who will ultimately be the most fulfilled.