ENTROPY - A talk I gave at church in 2001

ENTROPY

 

I had intended to put more content in this blog but focusing on other things through the course of the year overshadowed that intent :-) .

I had mentioned a talk I had given at Hillside, a small independent church in Boulder which I had the pleasure of attending for many years.  The church might be characterized as a small group of people in the community with a focus more on the Bible than on the doctrines of organized religion.  At least that was my impression -- actually quite an amazing thing, as the words of Jesus sometimes get lost as organized churches find themselves following other agendas.

At Hillside, we had a tradition where someone would get up and give a talk.   These talks were reflections that had a personal touch -- often as inspiring and meaningful to me as the sermons, and many of which I remember fondly to this day.  When I was asked, my first reaction was always fear -- as an introvert, the thought of getting up and talking about something personal and deep-felt is accompanied by all sorts of anxieties -- how I'll perform, what kinds of judgments might happen, whether people will understand, or relate, etc.  But the few times I did it, I was challenged immensely, but then found it rewarding.

Anyway, I was asked about this particular talk after I had brought it up in conversation.  I went looking through old Windows backups from about that time period, thinking I would cringe at my own words once I found it.  But when I finally did find it, I found I still kind of liked it, and found that it brought back fond memories of my time at Hillside.

The whole talk was inspired by a sign that was on a partition in the gym where our church had rented space.  I forget the words exactly -- it was something like "don't throw objects -- it will damage the wall".  That got me to thinking about the second law of thermodynamics (entropy), and out of that, my talk emerged.   (This is also a look back through time, by the way, memories and computer technology most of us have forgotten by now :-) ):  Finally it reflects on my favorite Bible passage -- Revelation 21.

Anyway, this is the talk:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hillside 7/28/2001: "Entropy"

I thought I’d describe a day in my life at work. And just to fill things out, a day in the life
of Isaac Newton, and a day in the life of our Cocker Spaniel dog, Abby.

A day in the life of Abby

Abby and I were driving across the western US on my way to visit my grandmother who lives in Portland. Abby was enjoying being able to watch me from her dog crate in the back seat of the car -- hour after hour

I was feeling guilty for confining her for so many hours, so I decided to try to find something fun for dogs to do along the way. And Abby had never been to a lake. So we stopped by a lake where I knew they allowed dogs thinking that Abby would love to swim. I grabbed a book to read, and we sat on the shore – a dozen other dogs were leaping around in the water, chasing each other on the shore, and generally having a great time. It was about a hundred degrees, so I encouraged Abby to get in the water and join them. Abby looked at me, and then looked at the lake and got this really serious expression. From her perspective it was as large as an ocean. But instead of seeming like a place where she could play, she looked across the expanse of water, bent over, and started drinking from the little bit of water lapping against the shore. To her, it was the world’s largest water dish, and I imagined that she wondered how in the world she was ever going to drink that much water

A day in the life of Isaac Newton

In college, when I was a student assistant at NCAR, we had three of us sharing an office – and to try to personalize our space a little bit, and to describe that space to anyone walking by, we put a sign on the door that read “Entropy Lab RL6-404”.

I wasn’t good at Physics in college, but in the 1660’s, Isaac Newton was at Cambridge studying, and in fact advancing Physics. Many people know about the story when Cambridge was closed due to the plague, and he was at his farm, saw an apple on the ground, and came up with gravitational theory in a flash of inspiration.

Not as many people know that Newton also thought about Entropy.

As students we defined entropy more in terms of the tendency for things to become disordered – like our office. Newton’s definition really only talked about energy states in the Universe. That is, the Universe is progressing towards an increasingly homogenous state where all that’s left of matter and energy is heat. The implication of that is that everything in the Universe that is organized – everything that has substance – takes energy to achieve that organization. And as the Universe’s energy equals out, and becomes heat, that organization disappears.

I can imagine a scene where Newton is contemplating this – perhaps observing not apples, but broken branches on the ground after one of England’s windstorms.  Certainly if he wrote his theory of gravity in a flash of inspiration – he probably wrote his second theory of thermodynamics, about entropy, in a flash of – well, depression.

In spite of the second law of thermodynamics – in spite of entropy – in spite of the fact that his hair turned gray before he was 30, Isaac Newton went on – and he achieved much more once Cambridge reopened. In fact, he was described by the Bishop as a devout, serious, hard-working, and moral man, and went on to be one of the greatest scientists of Western history.

His being able to go on in spite of this depressing discovery is sort of like Abby drinking from the lake. Neither got overly discouraged – neither thought about the enormity of their tasks – Newton just carried on, and Abby just drank.

A day in my life at NCAR

As I wake up in the morning, I have a wonderful feeling of well-being that all is well with the world – well, at least with our network. I of course have learned long ago not to indulge too heavily in those unrealistic thoughts.

I arrive at work, discover that a brownout from the thunderstorm of the previous evening has knocked out half of our systems, and the other half are all thrashing the network trying to reestablish contact with those that are down.

So as one of the servers comes on line – it does a disk check which looks like it’s going to take a couple of hours. I leave that to run, but can’t do much on the local network since everything depends on that server.

We have a visitor who needs a PC with Linux and Windows.  I get a Deskpro from storage but the disk is too small. So I pull a 9 Gigabyte disk out of a dead PC. I put the disk in, start the computer, but the bios on the mainboard is from an age when nobody was thought disks could be larger than 4GB.  I go to Compaq’s site on the web, grab the firmware update for the bios, put it on a floppy, take the floppy to the PC, go to install the update, and the computer won’t read the floppy. After a little bit of diagnosis I discover that we need another floppy drive. I get that, but it won’t fit in the enclosure – they make a different type of enclosure for floppies now.

I take the case apart, and attach the floppy drive loosely, and get the system to boot the firmware disk. So feeling a sense of accomplishment I check on the server. I walk into the server room, and find that the air conditioning has failed as a result of the power hit. The temperature is about 90, and the server shut down in the middle of its boot due to the heat.

So I call Facilities and open the doors to the room to cool it. I start up the server again and go to work on the PC some more. In order to run X-Windows, I have to have a better video card. So I put in a 4MB Matrox card and it fails – this time with smoke.

Fortunately it’s an old spare, and I have a 16MB nVidia card. I put that in, and reboot, and get beeps telling me something is wrong with the system, but it won’t tell me why. After checking the server which is still rebooting, I get on the web, go to Compaq’s site, and find that this type of Deskpro is no longer supported – and there is no technical information on what the beep codes mean. So I resort to newsgroups. I have to flash the bios with yet another version of the firmware so that it can recognize video cards that have more than 4MB of RAM. It takes so much time to figure this out, that by this time our server has booted.

So the Linux install goes well, but Windows 2000 needs 128MB of RAM and I only have 32MB in the system. I find out that it’s too old to support RIMM memories or even the DIMM memories. So while I’m on a site that sells legacy SIMMs, the PC shuts itself off without any reason.

I open the case, and it’s about 150 degrees inside. The power supply fan has failed, and even after replacing the power supply, the PC won’t boot. Fortunately it’s an old Pentium Pro manufactured in ’96 – so I put it in the dead computer pile, and find another PC to set up for the visitor. The pile now fills up about half of my office.

Anyway, that describes a day at NCAR.

According to one of those Miers Briggs temperament profile tests, I don’t multitask well and shouldn’t be a Systems Administrator. But on days in which I manage to bring a computer back to life I’m rewarded with a great sense of power -- I’ve defeated Entropy – the most powerful and certain force in the Universe.

But it’s really an illusion. Entropy and decay are all around us, especially in the I.T. business. Computers cost thousands of dollars at the beginning of their life, and within a few short years you can’t give them away.

There was an expression after the Titanic went down – “all ships sink”. People understood Entropy. Roman Engineers built structures that could stand for 2000 years, but today they are but fragile reminders of that Empire which itself slowly disappeared 1500 years ago.

Things break.

Your hair gets gray like Isaac Newton’s. Nobody wants to play football in a stadium that’s 35 years old. Video tapes decay and become unviewable after 10 or 15 years, even if you have the right kind of equipment. Photos loose their color after 30 or 40 years. Movies and books become forgotten.

This wall will get damaged.

CD-ROMs will only last a century. The Boulder Turnpike already needs to be resurfaced
after only 5 years. The Crossroads Mall expansion in 1981 is now the only part of the mall that anyone wants to use.

Nothing that man creates lasts.

So when I fix computer systems, I feel like Abby drinking from the lake – it’s a futile effort, but somehow I work on our computer systems, hoping to give each one a year or two of extra life.

A day with God

But to look at the day with an awareness of God transforms it.

It isn’t Entropy – it’s Creation that I see when I step out of the house in the morning.

The previous evening’s storm has left behind a cool morning, and everything smells washed and cleansed from the rain. In the deepest blue sky waiting for the dawn, Mars, Venus, and the crescent moon are perfectly lined up – and as the sky becomes light, Mars, which is near its closest point to the Earth remains brilliant next to the moon as the other stars quietly disappear.

On days where I am aware of God, I’m also aware of God’s continuing miracles and blessings. For instance, I’m blessed to come home in the evening to Sherrie, and to have little Daniel look at me and make all kinds of smiley faces because he’s glad I’m there.

My life is not a Zen type contentment by any stretch. It’s often chaotic and frantic, and when things break down at home or at work, it’s tremendously frustrating.

But there’s a lot of joy in knowing that Entropy is not an absolute, irreversible process. What God created moves through time towards eternity because of God. Left on its own, it would return to the chaotic void from which it started. The things we know – computers, and football stadiums, malls and empires, lakes, the Moon and Mars will all die away with time. But out of his mercy, God offers us a life in a newly created eternal world described by John in Revelation:

“a new heaven and a new earth .. the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. ‘Now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death, or mourning, or crying, or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.’

And wherever we live with God in those promised times to come, there can be no entropy – no decay, no disappointment, and as Jeff pointed out a couple of weeks ago, nothing broken. Fishing nets will remain untorn. And it will be a place where nobody will have to be a Systems Administrator – where no trees fall due to the wind – where dogs get to play in the surf, and where God’s love and creation is eternal and sure.

The Populist

THE POPULIST

It's been a while since I posted my last essay, so I thought I'd try a new one.  But this one is a challenge -- I have a lot of random thoughts that aren't very organized.  I should have taken on a smaller more focused topic to write about.  In other words, this is going to be long :-) .  I wanted to comment on the election in this historic time, sharing a few thoughts, and probably decide to "publish" this in an unsatisfying not-yet-finished form.

Oh, and to give you a sneak peak, this is really about we who take sides in the end -- not about the "Populist" as I've sneakily titled this essay.

Also within my verbosity, I'm going to make a bunch of blanket statements, all of which can be argued with -- you'll naturally disagree with a few of them and I'll even be able to see your side.   This is mostly "me" talking out of the thoughts in my head at this moment in time -- any greater truth is really up to you as you bear with me and consider these thoughts.

Our painting: "Today"

Washington's Inauguration by Jean Leon Jerome Ferris
(Wiki Commons link)

Not being a journalist or professional writer, these thoughts tend to come together for me not as some sort of learned insightful analysis, but as a "painting" that begins with a palette of emotional and cultural forces.   The colors that emerge are very much dependent on the pigments that they begin with.   "Today", then, is a large complexly crafted painting created over time.  I believe we are the artists as individuals, as groups, and as humanity.  I also believe that God provided us the canvas and I take comfort that God considers our creation and holds "Today" up in consideration, no matter if it worthy of the museum, the living room wall, or an attic chest.   Along with other people of faith, I pray that God teaches us to improve our skills with our brushes and paints when we begin to work on the now-empty canvas of "Tomorrow".

Whatever your position on any of these points, I wish you peace as we all go through a tumultuous time together.


---


A lot has transpired since the 2016 election -- in fact today is the inauguration day of Donald Trump, the 45th President of the US.  I have also been considering throughout the week some of the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., whom we celebrated on Monday.

We're at a point in our history where everyone is asking questions and everyone is wondering what will happen next.  Usually the questions are asked in an anxious voice.  These are indeed uncertain times, and for a large number of us, our new leaders haven't given us a lot of encouragement.  For others of us, our previous leaders didn't give us a lot of encouragement.   In fact, the schisms that divide us manifest themselves as a gulf impossible to cross.

Our painting's models

My own world view is probably not yours.  That's okay of course -- but here are some of things I am currently perceiving as I contemplate the landscape of "Today".    (Keep in mind that I generally include myself as a member of the "left" but I've had a fair amount of experience also being on the "right" side of the political spectrum).  I've sorted a few random thoughts to see how they look alongside one another:

• The "right" seems largely disenchanted with our institutions.
• A populist came along who doesn't seem that savvy or insightful, but who has a very concise populist message "Make America Great".  The message ended up having a great deal of appeal among those on the right who are disenchanted with our institutions. 
• Someone from outside the political system came along, appealing to the "left" with a populist message that was nearly as concise and appealing - something like "take back control from the elite 1% who have unfair power over us".
• The populist on the right represents the 1% and so his message is incomprehensible to the left.  On the left he is seen as anything but "populist".  But on the right, his message resonates.  And in the face of no seriously viable contenders, the right chooses to run him as a candidate.
• The populist on the left had a viable contender whose pragmatic problem-solving style represented many institutions who are similarly striving to get things done.
• While the populist on the left eventually stepped back and supported the pragmatist on the left, not all of his supporters warmed to her message.     Her message provided well thought out solutions for most of the "issues" that were brought before her.  His message continued to focus tightly on taking back control from the 1%. 
• Neither candidate in the end was perceived as likeable by the majority (see below)
• On the just-hours-old canvas of "Today", as new institutions form alongside new leadership, the "left" is already disenchanted.  They were similarly disenchanted with our institutions during the time of George W. Bush.  Disenchantment has swung dramatically back and forth during my adult lifetime.

Our painting's color palette

Are you with me so far?   I know I'm generalizing quite a bit.   I know that you might not agree with each of my points.  I know that I might tend to add and subtract from the list as I continue to ponder this election.  I have tried to restrain myself from character judgment above.   I'm also not considering extremists so much even though they get all of the attention -- I'm really thinking of Americans across the board.   As a separate grouping, here are some more character-oriented thoughts:

• The "left" sees the "right" as void of compassion because of a perceived prejudice.
• The "right" sees the "left" as void of compassion because of a perceived elitism.
• Extremists on the "left" act "elitist" -- those on the "right" feel judged.
• Extremists on the "right" practice racism and hatred -- those on the "left" feel hated.
• The "left" sees the "right" as uninformed because the "right" distrusts "facts" that they see as associated with the institutions they react against.
• The "right" sees the "left" as uninformed because they don't focus on issues important to them.
• With regard to religion, each side sees the other as "faithless".  Each side values their own faith highly and faith frames their thinking. 
• Both sides have a hard time seeing the perspective of the other.  Some of it is geography or demographic, but a lot of it Social media.  Social media polarizes each side's judgments and insulates each side from the perspective of the other.  Social media is the brightest of pigments.  With such a pigment and the thickest of brush strokes,  extremists stand out with bold clashing contrasting brilliance.  The extremists can be dazzling to one side, and garish to the other.   Any other perspective is hard to see as it becomes "background" or obscured altogether.
• The "right" reacts with resentment and fear to everything the "left" expresses. 
• The "left" reacts with resentment and fear to everything the "right" expresses.

Our painting's muted hues

Still with me?  I may not be with me :-) -- this is getting a bit jumbled together, even in my own head.  But with each one of these thoughts, a Facebook post, a Meme, an Internet comment, or an opinion piece, or a piece of journalism comes to mind.

Here's the rarest thing in my mind -- things I have yet to see on Facebook or on the Internet except in the subtlest most understated hints.  I occasionally see this more boldly in personal conversation with people who are thoughtful and broad minded.  Here's my "rare" list -- understated colors and muted tones somewhere in the background on the canvas of "Today" and largely unnoticed:

• A new understanding emerges
• The "left" can see why the "right" is disenchanted with our institutions and appreciate their traditional values.
• The "right" can see the value of some of the more pragmatic approaches of the "left" and appreciate the value of some progressive social change.
• Both sides understand what they have in common.
• The "left" finds greater value in compassion than in fear and hate.  They emphasize compassion in the context of the ideals that define them as "left".  This is so, even while becoming activists for the causes they believe in.
• The "right" finds greater value in compassion than in fear and hate.  They emphasize compassion in the context of the ideals that define them as "right".  This is so, even while becoming activists for the causes they believe in.
• Each side communicates thoughtfully and compassionately and listens to the "other"
• Judgment is minimized in place of good, positive, and creative ideas

How I saw the election of 2016

My own perspective of the election was initially just thinking that we needed a veto vote for the majority in Congress -- that was an institution which left me disenchanted, the low point being Sequestration and then the government shutdown in 2013.  In waging a war of ideals against President Obama, Congress seemed to me to be neglecting its duty to come up with good ideas with which to carry us into the future.  Hillary Clinton quickly emerged, but I still had quite a bit of resentment against the ending years of the Bill Clinton administration and his conduct in the White House.   I then did some reading and was able to find quite a bit about her to like -- like others who I admire, she seemed to be a hard-working problem solver who believed the institutions of government could be reformed to indeed carry us into the future.   

Then Bernie Sanders came along.  He seemed to more sharply focus on the plight of the 99% -- and like many on both sides of the political spectrum, I was disenchanted by corrupt business practices that led us into the disastrous 2008 recession.  Nobody had really stood up to that particular elite, and as respected friends were energized, I too found myself mostly in favor of Sanders.  Deep in my mind, though, I felt like Clinton's pragmatic approach might work more effectively than Sanders' visionary approach.

And Trump came along as the other populist.  He represented that very 1% to me, but to others the things he said represented traditional values.  That was particularly so as politically oriented religious leaders on the right began to endorse him.  As I mentioned above, both had concise easy to explain messages.  Clinton's in comparison was complex and difficult to articulate.  I once looked up candidate slogans over the years (e.g., "Give 'em Hell Harry") and found that the Clinton campaign had perhaps a dozen of them.  Trump stuck with his one.  His tweets were similarly sharp, simple, and to the point as you'd expect with a 140 character limit -- exactly what his constituents wanted to hear.

Trump's message was one thing, but his outrageous behavior another.   I could see people I know on the "right" embrace the idea of change for the sake of traditional values ("Make America Great Again") but just about not vote for him because of his behavior, his lack of competence and experience, and his very visible lack of ethics.  And just about any comment about him from the "left", in the media or in social media, demonstrates the horror expressed regarding his character.  His character attracted the extremists on the right, but his message attracted a much larger group of voters on the right even thought they saw him as unlikable.

In the end it was the populist on the right (not really a Republican, but embraced by Republicans who tended to normalize him in their minds to the point where they could vote for him, holding their noses as the expression goes) running against the institutionally-oriented problem solver on the left.   I had no trouble moving back from Sanders to Clinton -- I had already identified quite a bit about her that I liked.  But others on the Sanders side never did move over.

In the midst of this were three earth-shaking events, all damaging to the rational-minded problem solver on the left even as she seemed unstoppable in the polls:  "Fake news" (mostly on the "right"), the Russian hack and the calculated release of embarrassing emails to Wikileaks, and Comey's inexplicable FBI investigation which also seemed calculated to do the most damage to Clinton's campaign.  Those who primarily saw Sanders as an outsider ready to reform government also saw Clinton as part of the establishment -- in their words, "in bed with wall street".  Fake news reinforced that image.  Wikileaks added fuel.  Comey's announcement of the email investigation lit the fire.  As fake news took hold, people were expressing views of Clinton that judged not her, but some horrible caricature that had been painted instead of her.  (I would say that the view of the left toward Trump is also that of a caricature except that I haven't had much evidence yet from Trump that holds up against criticisms of his character :-) ).

The other force were the extremists -- the KKK for instance, or the extreme religious right, or the alt-right (as known in "Gamergate").  They took the populist's more outlandish and hateful rhetoric as license to move their extremism out of the shadows.  Their hatred of the candidate on the left showed no limit.

I voted for her already knowing that these forces were formidable.  I still expected her to win, but I wondered how she was going to move beyond the damage caused to her campaign by fake news, Wikileaks, Comey, and the extremists.

In hindsight, it isn't hard for me to understand how the sides became much more polarized than I've ever seen before.  And it isn't even hard for me to understand how Trump managed a narrow victory.  The folks at fivethirtyeight.com have analyzed what they said in response to polls, and his victory always remained possible given the closeness of the race and some of how polling can offer imprecise data.  By election night, Trump had roughly a 30% chance of winning, and 30% events tend to happen all the time -- just under a third of the time.

Filling in the Gulf

So where do we go from here?  We have a so-called populist in the executive branch, and we have the same "right" dominated Congress that has been a continual disappointment to me.  Nobody really knows right now, but my guess is that he isn't going to have a lot of power and that Congress is going to have much more power than before.  I don't fear a fascist regime, but at the same time, I understand those who do.  (As an interesting exercise, read Trump's inauguration speech sometime, and then read Hitler's ).

My side, the "left",  is going to have to do some soul-searching.  We seem blind to the fact that when we say or post something in outrage over what someone on the right has said or done, others on the right will dismiss it as part of our elitism.   While gaining approval from our friends on the left, it's not going to close the gulf in the slightest.  But if the gulf remains open, we're going to have a nearly impossible influence over the next election or among those now in power today.

Clinton didn't loose because of any fault of her own, or her campaign, although I've read plenty of criticism and analysis that makes that claim.  She had good ideas and she had a positive outlook ("When they go low, we go high").  Trump isn't some genius that somehow manipulated the system to his advantage -- but he happened on the right circumstances.

Voters tended to like the more tightly focused messages of Trump and Sanders.   One of those, Bernie Sanders, will always have my admiration for holding the very wealthy and the very powerful ethically accountable.

I'd suggest that a future candidate should be as pragmatic and as positive as Clinton was, but with a very focused message - preferably one that considers the inequitable influence and inevitable corruption of leadership by the 1%.  But even that isn't going to work unless we Americans begin to bridge newly-widened gulfs.

My Christian faith focuses on the teachings of Jesus -- and among those teachings are a multitude of examples of being called to love and have compassion for others across similar social gulfs.  The well known parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) is a great example of such a teaching.  Honoring God above all and seeing ourselves as humble servants is another quality to which those of my Christian faith strive.  That too leads to bridging gulfs -- a positive reverence of God as our creator quickly quashes fear and hatred that divides us from one another.

Put into practice (and I speak for myself), that might mean stepping back from the pure enjoyment of a good barb against the other side.  Put the memes aside, and instead consider why it is that someone from the other side, if they are not an extremist, voted the way they did.  There is a reason large numbers of people on the right distrust some of these institutions -- government, science, medicine, education, the press, business, law enforcement, and religion.  There are reasons many on the left distrust others of these institutions.  Instead of judging and condemning, a more productive course would be that of Hillary Clinton insofar as we identify what we can improve about those institutions.   How can we support those who we know closely who work within those institutions, just trying to make the area of their responsibility work as well as possible?

Conclusion

And instead of ideological camps, anger and hatred (which exists on both sides in abundance), how about applying energy to upholding what we see as the best of humanity -- intellect, character, humility, reverence, compassion, forgiveness, ... there are many examples which are also found in abundance among what Jesus was always asking of those with whom he communicated.

I believe Trump must prove himself now that he is our president.  My opinion is also that he is off to a terrible start (inauguration speech and cabinet picks).  Ditto for our Republican Congress.   I believe that activists must fight for compassion and I admire Martin Luther King Jr., for the example he and his followers set so many years ago.  On my side of the political spectrum, I applaud and support those who march, those who petition, and those who work within the system. I support those of the press with journalistic integrity who hold our leaders accountable.

As a Christian, I also believe in praying for our leaders, even these new ones, as directed in the Bible (1 Timothy 2:1-4) that we may all live quiet, holy, and peaceful lives, made better in that process collectively.

But I believe that both sides could make significant progress toward filling in the gulf, simply by refraining from anger-fueled judgment and attempting to appreciate each others' perspective.  These are the ideals for which I pray most as I pray for our leaders and as I pray for ourselves.

During times in which I feel more optimistic, I have an assurance that such ideals put into practice will quickly move us into a brighter future.  During times in which I feel more optimistic, I find myself thinking that  in spite of the doings of a Populist, we may actually find that America is Great in a new way that we Americans haven't ever seen before.

During times in which I feel less optimistic . . . well, we always have Internet memes :-)

---

PS - Events are happening very fast -- I started composing this on the day of the inauguration shortly after watching the coverage and have edited it a few times since.  Since I started this essay, the weekend was highlighted by the history-making Womens' marches throughout the country, all defined by positive energy, loud voices, and nonviolence which I felt inspiring.  I'm proud of the fact that Denver had among the 5 largest demonstrations in the country.    I admire very much those who marched, those who are politically active, and those who are working to effect change in so many ways.  I admire even more those from each side that are actively seeking to understand the other side as I've tried to communicate in this essay.   These are indeed historic times.

A wall, A message from Martin Luther King, Jr.

A Wall, A Message from Martin Luther King, Jr.

The symbolism of this photo is from what I believe is one of the greatest speeches of human history. I try to read it every year at this time and get something new from it each time: "With this faith, we will be able to hew out of a mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day".

For my Christian friends, I think these reflect the words of Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for you are all one in Christ Jesus".

To me the MLK monument also symbolizes a wall -- you walk through the cleft in the stone from one world to another as you enter the monument. In the darkness of a Washington evening, I left my familiar world as a business traveler and tourist in DC, and entered another one. I stood alongside African American families, and other groups of every "world" and we shared awe, reading the plaques and gazing on the statue, the older among us remembering his tumultuous times.

Social media often is the opposite of "Social". Just read the comments section of any news story to see how hatred and fear abounds, how it feeds upon itself, and how walls are subsequently built. And it's not just hyper-partisanship. Online, there is always a "we" and a "them". "We" hang out in tribes of others who are just like us. "They" are always seen as lower than us in every way.

This wasn't the dream of Martin Luther King -- not if you let his words sink in.

I am part of the "liberal" tribe, but we are just as guilty of building walls as any other tribe. What if we devoted more energy to connecting positively with anyone different instead of holding onto hatred and resentment?

I've been privileged to know many who are different and in each case, that connection has been beautiful. If you are presented with that same opportunity and/or if you get a chance to read the entirety of Martin Luther King's "I have a dream speech", even if you've read it before, I'm pretty sure you'll see some of that same beauty.

--Tim Fredrick, Martin Luther King Day, 2017