Human nature, Compassion and Liberty Mutual

Been awhile since I've written, but this week's events have led me to make another post. I'm currently going through my first major family health challenge, but I'm grateful for the great health care institutions in Minnesota and am confident that all will turn out well.

This whole ordeal got me thinking about the inherent compassion of humankind. Namely, the amount of empathy and sympathy I've received from the people I've talked to, mainly coworkers and friends. It's amazing how much support and genuine compassion is readily available, and I honestly believe that compassion (to a certain level) is innate in everyone. Some people relate to me because they've been through similar family crises. Others simply know what it is to care about another person deeply, and I think others just care about me as a friend. Very few have ever met my father, and yet they wish us their very best.

Most days, I wake up and read the news, and the majority of headlines are negative. Suicide bombing here. Devastating floods there. School shooting here. Plenty of intolerance everywhere. I work in nonprofits, so I generally have some positive stories from work to balance me out. Not always, but there's usually at least a silver lining. Otherwise, I know for a fact that good people are doing great things around the world, every day. Most of those stories just don't sell as front page news.

I don't think that anyone is inherently 'good' or 'evil.' Everyone is raised in different settings and have their own personalities, and everyone reacts differently to adversity. One person will view the loss of a loved one as an unjust punishment and go out to exact revenge, another person will realize the fleeting nature of life and dedicate the rest of their life to helping prevent similar situations. It's not necessarily a judgement on anyone's character, I don't think that's fair. We all come from different walks, and have accordingly divergent viewpoints.

Cynic that I am, I believe that the vast majority of people know general right from wrong. And, like the Liberty Mutual Insurance Commercials, cheesy as they are, compassion is contagious. Whether as a reminder of your mother's lectures or guilt for not being as good a person, witnessing a selfless act (in my opinion) will typically trigger something of a chain reaction.

Life is simply unfair to a lot of people. You can do your best, help others your whole life, and still get shit on. Why bother? And yet I've worked with literally some of the world's very poorest people, and they have consistently been among the most generous I've known.

I don't mean to preach, and I don't want to be 'that guy' who has suddenly found the meaning of life based on a single incident. All I am promoting is compassion and perspective. I've been working toward this for several years now, so this is not new to me. And yet, I will still undoubtedly judge someone too hastily this week, and I won't always be able to put myself in someone else's shoes. However, my point is that when we are reminded of the inherent fragility of life and the warmth of human compassion, try to ride the wave as long as you can, and pass it along to the best of your abilities. You probably won't reap any rewards beyond a subtle sense of personal satisfaction, but the full impact of your action may have untold reach. Or, it may simply ease the worried mind of an anxious son. Either way, good happens.

Searching for Inspiration

A recent CNN video clip explored the world of orphans and aid in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. Dr. Sanjay Gupta visited a group of ostensibly optimistic orphans, singing and smiling whilst mired in deplorable conditions and hunger. It turned out that literally tons of food aid were going untouched just a few miles away in warehouses, and thanks to a phone call by Dr. Gupta, donated manna from Asia ultimately made its way to this orphanage.

It was a nice finish to the story, a rare glimmer of hope in the impoverished and earthquake-decimated nation. But in spite of the relatively happy ending for some 50 orphans, as well as the heroic example of selflessness set by the interviewed NGO worker, the story did not inspire me with much hope. Dr. Gupta portrayed the situation as it was: an exception to the rule, where donated food and goods were transmitted directly and efficiently to those truly in need. However, it took CNN's top medical correspondent, along with his personal network, to ensure the delivery of said aid.

To be sure, the timely and transparent delivery of international aid is a major concern for governments and organizations worldwide. But there were so many questions that Dr. Gupta and CNN never addressed: How is so much food going undelivered? Who is responsible for connecting people with aid? Why did it take a phone call from Dr. Gupta to spur the NGO into action? And perhaps most importantly, what can viewers of this video clip do to help?

I hate to say it, but this human interest story may have even discouraged some potential donors from making contributions. I could see a more skeptical mind coming to the conclusion that Americans send money, the money buys food, the food sits untouched in warehouses, and only a stroke of good luck will help it eventually find its way to the hungry. Why donate?

Of course it is important to share these stories, and of course I am glad that this orphanage received some much-needed supplies. However, it seems to me that a network with the reach of CNN and a person with the intelligence, expertise and network of Dr. Gupta could combine to find some answers as to why this problem persists. At the very least, it would have been nice to leave their viewers with a little more hope and a reason to help.

You want your belt to buckle, not your chair...

I had a fatty weekend. Can't lie. I spent the majority of my time watching the World Cup, hanging out with friends, helping my brother move, and attending his going away dinner. Plenty of good times, but these activities equated to a less than stellar diet: the lowlights included a renewal of an on-again, off-again affair with McDonald's dollar menu, a Papa John's gorging session slathered with guilt-infused garlic butter, a breakfast and lunch consisting entirely of chicken fingers and Newcastle Brown Ale, and some of the weirdest tacos I've ever seen.

In light of my recent indulgences, I revisited a website I had found last winter entitled 'Eat this, not that,' which I believe is based upon a book of the same title. The following are a few of the random facts that I found:

-A Burger King cheeseburger with small fries has the same amount of sodium as 5 Big Grab Bags of Lay's Potato Chips.

-One 24oz Coldstone PB&C shake has the sugar equivalent of 30 Chewy Chips Ahoy cookies, and the saturated fat content of 68 strips of bacon. Wow.

-One 12oz Sierra Nevada Bigfoot beer=One 12-pack of Michelob Ultra (in terms of carbs). Granted, it's a strong beer (9.8% abv), but still.

While I was temporarily relieved to know that it could've been worse, the only real relief from my gutbomb-laden weekend came in the form of a hard workout at the gym, running around outside coaching soccer, and eating split green peas with brown rice. However, I am headed to the Twins game tomorrow night, we'll see how many Iroquois Twists it takes for me to make up for the walleye on-a-stick, Kramarczuk's brats, and Summit that I won't be able to resist. Bonus points if you got the Iroquois Twist reference.

World Cup Update

Apologies for the lack of posts, I figure it's time to share my thoughts about the Cup so far.

Team USA:

Exceeded my expectations, but ultimately underachieved. I thought Bradley coached a good tournament (Findley and Clark's inclusion in the starting 11 vs. Ghana aside), but our back line lacked quality and I think we missed Charlie Davies sorely. Deserved a win vs. Slovakia, but simply did not play well enough against Ghana. Personnel issues aside, the psychological preparation apparently was insufficient/ineffective as we never looked hungry out of the gates.

Referees:
Excruciatingly painful. Far too many games have been dominated by card-happy, nit-picky, ticky-tacky refs that are so intent upon 'cleaning up the game' that there is no opportunity for flowing soccer. This is to say nothing of the absolutely appalling blown calls that have cost teams dearly, which simply goes to show that video replay needs to happen. I won't get into that, but I think everyone is starting to realize the need for a solution.

Predictions:
I see Brazil, Uruguay, Argentina, and Portugal in the semifinals, with Brazil ultimately taking down Argentina in an all-South American final. So yes, that means Spain will choke in the Round of 16. I would normally like to see the Netherlands progress as I usually like their style, but the Oranje haven't done much for me yet in terms of attractive and flowing football. I'd actually love to see the young speed demons of Deutschland get through, but I can't see them out-gunning Argentina (especially as Messi seems to be finding form). Portugal over Uruguay in the 3rd place game as Ronaldo hits his stride too late.

Thoughts?

Winning Hearts and Minds

I don't give the U.S. much chance in tomorrow's highly-anticipated showdown with England in its opening match of World Cup 2010. I would of course love nothing more than a major upset, and even a point from a draw would be a fairly significant accomplishment.

But what would a victory mean for soccer in the U.S. as a whole? Would a win whip up enough pride and excitement to get soccer truly on the map in America? Probably not. For right now, no one game will have a significant, long-term effect on U.S. soccer, unless of course that one game involves the U.S. winning the World Cup.

Similar to the Olympics, the World Cup simply does not sustain lasting momentum for soccer in America after its conclusion. Europeans watch European football on Saturday or Sunday, Americans watch American football on Saturday and Sunday. South American kids play pickup soccer, American kids play pickup basketball. Soccer simply cannot compete with the tradition of baseball, ruggedness of football, or swagger of basketball.

That said, soccer in the U.S. will get there. Sam's Army, the die-hard group of U.S. National Team supporters, is growing. MLS is gaining increasing airtime on ESPN, and more American fans are following their favorite players in foreign leagues, especially the English Premiership. I'm not sure it will ever become the most popular sport in the country, but as the Latino population continues to grow, my guess is that soccer will eventually nudge out hockey as the fourth biggest sport in America.

My prediction: England wins 3-1

Your Lucky Stars

I just got back from an International Refugee Festival in downtown Minneapolis, and the presentations reminded me of two things: first and foremost, I am damned lucky to have ended up here in the U.S., and secondly, I can't stand it when privileged Americans complain about how terrible this country is and how much they wish they were living somewhere else.

The U.S. is far from perfect in a billion ways, but most of us have a very high standard of living compared to the rest of the world. So when I overhear some hipster bitching about his life in America, and how he wants to go live 'somewhere real and free,' I really wish he could hear the stories I heard today; stories about torture, starvation, untold suffering and humiliation. The pure elation of the Burmese or Libyan refugee and his family when they arrived here.

Now, if you got sent off to Vietnam and came back a shell-shocked amputee, forgotten by the government and scorned by your fellow countrymen, you can bitch. If you were living in poverty in southern Louisiana, lost what little you had to Hurricane Katrina and were shipped off to a forsaken and hopeless FEMA trailer park in the middle of nowhere, you can bitch.

I'm talking to all of the young, privileged people that 'can't stand another day in this oppressive hellhole.' Please stop and remember that you could have a much worse life here in the U.S., and an even worse life somewhere else. Every country has its problems. If you're not happy, do something about it. Otherwise, quit ripping on your home country. It's insulting to the people who have literally risked life and limb just to make it to our shores.

As Cold as the Rockies

I love the Coors Light NFL press conference commercials, almost as much as I don't understand their whole cold-activated can and 'windowed' case campaign. Does anyone really need to be told when their beer is cold enough for consumption? And yet, Coors has apparently ridden this decently clever but ultimately worthless gimmick to a virtual tie with Miller for second place in the American light beer market behind Budweiser.

These three light beers are all essentially the same: cheap, weak, and watery. What's interesting to me is how the different companies try to set themselves apart through advertising. All three target the same young, male, sports-mad, coed-chasing, chicken wing-craving market, and all of their ads seem to unfold in more or less the same way: drink our beer, because we understand you and your desire to be clever, charming, athletic, dominant and drunk.

So, how do certain ad campaigns like these manage to succeed or fail? Some individual ads are particularly good, but do people actually buy beer based on a single commercial? Do people really buy Coors Light because the mountains turn blue at 34 degrees? Or do young men make their light beer selections based upon stronger points of association and identity, like family tradition, location of alma mater, or local happy hour specials? Just something to think about during the next commercial break.