An Elliptical for "on the go"

I'm a runner, and I loathe the treadmill. And for one of my gym workouts, I also use the elliptical machine, though I can use it for about ten minutes because going nowhere just doesn't work for me. My wife loves using the elliptical machine, but at one time tried to become a runner because she wanted to be outside in the summer. Now, we can have the best of both worlds, I think.

On my walk this morning, I happened upon a neighbor who was just taking off for a ride on one of these bad boys:

It's called an ElliptiGO, and it looks like a heckuva lot of fun, as well as a great workout. Now, I haven't used an Elliptigo yet, but I'm definitely going to check it out. My neighbor happens to be a local rep for the company, though he started out just using one for recreation and fitness. He does demos for people and offers a chance to test it out, and the company offers a 30-day money-back guarantee.

This particular model also offers a kit for an electric motor as well. And the handlebars are all tricked out to hold his phone and other accessories. From what I understand, these new road-ready ellipticals are popular with many different athletes, including Olympic triathletes. They're popular with current runners and bikers, as well former runners and bikers who can't handles the stress on their joints or time in the saddle anymore.

So, just passing on the info. I understand there is also a Facebook Group with owner feedback.

 

Who Knew Badminton was so Awesome?

Wait a minute. So, an Olympic badminton shuttlecock has sixteen goose feathers all from the left wing of the goose? Has anyone noticed some geese out there listing to one side?

The Olympics always brings some exciting sports moments you never knew you'd be interested in, and it also is a source of some of the most unique sports commentary you'll hear all year, or in four years for that matter. Case in point: badminton.

An old friend was commenting on social media about the Olympics and admitted that his interest always outweighs his original expectation. "I always tell myself," he wrote, "that I'm not that interested in the Olympics ... and then I find myself up at two in the morning, glued to the TV and yelling enthusiastically about badminton." 

I couldn't agree more, especially about the badminton excitement. It's a sport everyone has played (badly in the backyard), and it's also a competition we know almost nothing about. Hence, the trivia and snarky comment I opened this piece with. However, as badminton commentary goes, there is truly nothing quite like the bit from NBC's Mary Carillo at the 2004 games. It still might be the "best sports commentary of all time."

Check it out if you haven't seen it before, or even if you have. You won't be disappointed. Also, check out some badminton matches, and watch out for those lopsided geese in the neighborhood.

Leonard Cohen & Marianne Ihlen in Greece

When Leonard Cohen was living on the Greek isle Hydra in the 1960s with his lover Marianne Ihlen, he was bothered by installation of electricity, particularly the telephone pole and power line visible from the window of his little bungalow. As he told Marianne they would need to move to a more rustic place, a bird alighted on the wire. She told him, “If the bird can get used to it, Leonard, so can you.” That’s the story of his well-known song “Bird on a Wire.”

This great story comes from Judy Scott, a writer who spent many summers in Greece in the early 1960s hanging out with an eclectic community of artists which included the iconic Leonard Cohen. Scott recounted those years in a book, Leonard, Marianne, and Me.

Tom Brady Shills for Subway, but won't eat it

Most sports fans know that the most valuable piece of sports memorabilia is the T206 Honus Wagner baseball card.  Like most commodities, the card's value is a result of its scarcity. It's believed that fewer than sixty of the cards exist despite the general rule that thousands of them are made. The reason T206 is so rare is that after the cards were created and packaged, as was standard at the time, to go with cigarettes from the American Tobacco Company, Wagner refused to allow continued production and demanded the cards be recalled. His reason was that he did not want children buying cigarettes to get the card. And, of course, Honus Wagner was one of MLB's greatest and most popular players, so his card would have been a real prize for kids.

Wagner's decision, folks, is what we call integrity. 

Now, it sounds like another great athlete could take a lesson in character from ol' Honus Wagner. The news has reported that future Hall of Famer and iconic NFL quarterback Tom Brady has signed on to do commercials for Subway. Athletes taking endorsement deals is, of course, not news or a big deal. But the world has taken notice of this one because everyone knows what an all-natural, organic nutrition freak Tom Brady is. Thus, we can be fairly certain that Tom Brady does not eat Subway sandwiches, and has probably never been in one of their restaurants. Thus, it's a bit sketchy that he is endorsing and taking money from a company and product that he is personally philosophically opposed to.

It can't be about the money, right?

Come on, Tom.

Existentialism & the Itsy Bitsy Spider

A question on a text thread from a college-age former student:  "What would you say, colloquially speaking, makes a work existentialist?"

My initial response: "Working from the premise that life is inherently absurd and meaningless, and, thus, the only meaning to a man's life is that which he defines and creates for it, dealing with existence as it is, rather than some arbitrary, contrived, pre-established notions of how things are supposed to be and what they really mean."

The conversation that followed veered into distinctions from nihilism, which I feel is ultimately pessimistic in a way that existentialism isn't, or at least doesn't have to be. As the discussion veered off, I begin thinking about some of the ways I have introduced my students to the concept with the study of and references to literature and pop culture such as Camus' The Myth of Sisyphus, Hemingway's Code Hero in The Old Man & the Sea, the contemporary films Groundhog Day and Stranger Than Fiction, and even the story of the Itsy Bitsy Spider.

It's a big topic, existentialism, which is also a rather simple and straightforward idea, which can often be explained through some of our most familiar stories. Amusingly it was in a short essay by Robert Fulghum and on a CD of children's songs I had for my kids in the early 2000s which talked about the existentialist nature of the story of the Itsy Bitsy Spider.

This fact is indeed the interpretative key to the whole puzzle: Camus’ Sisyphus climbs the hill because his live has no other meaning, but Jacques’ Sisyphus climbs the spout because he lives in ignorance of his life’s meaning. Spiders, after all, make webs and catch insects, and we have no reason to believe that a spider doing so will face anything like the existential emptiness of Sisyphus. A spiderweb made, for example, next to the water spout, will certainly be able to withstand the coming rain. This subtle change allows Jacques to reframe Camus’ existential dread not as the desperate cry of a man in an absurd world, but merely as the confused ramblings of a spider who has seen that he was not meant to climb water spouts and concluded that he must not be meant for anything.

It's Time for Permanent Olympic Sites

I blogged about this idea earlier, but now I have revised and developed the position for my column in The Villager. Now that the IOC has extended the problem for four more years with the announcement that Brisbane will be the site of the 2032 Summer Olympic Games, let's put an end to the bidding and instead work on a plan to establish a permanent home for the Games.


In 1972, via a statewide referendum, the people of Colorado rejected funding for the 1976 Olympic Games, becoming the only city ever awarded the games to turn down the chance to host. While that decision shocked the rest of the country, as well as many around the world, it wasn't a surprising move for anyone who knows the taxpayers of the Rocky Mountain state. In fact, knowing what we know now about the structural challenge and fiscal nightmare the Games can be for some cities and countries, it was a surprisingly prescient and prudent move.

Hosting the Olympic Games is an incredible honor and opportunity for a country to shine on the international stage, but it’s also a significant financial and structural investment saddled with huge risks. The Olympics generally cost tens of billions of dollars to stage while providing only a fraction of that in terms of revenue. Host countries must invest heavily in building a vast infrastructure of sites to hold the events, housing for the teams and guests, and transportation and security systems to manage the people. While these can certainly upgrade a city, they are rarely necessary to maintain following the games and often end up in disuse and decay.

Additionally, any benefit from the event is often overshadowed by the corrupt history of the bidding process at the International Olympic Committee and the potential for bloated budgets prior to the event followed by blight afterwards. The scandals plaguing the entire hosting process are extensive, ranging from bribes and extortion to graft and highly orchestrated doping programs which have tainted vast numbers of events and athletes. It often seems the Olympic Games, an international institution intended to honor the individual pursuit of excellence, are more trouble than they’re worth. But it doesn't have to be that way.

Instead, the international community should establish permanent locations for the Olympics, where all countries contribute to maintaining the sites as the premier athletic facilities in the world. The fields and tracks and stadiums could serve as hosts for an endless number of world championships at all levels, and they could also serve as training grounds and research locations to serve all manner of individuals and organizations committed to honoring and promoting the highest levels of athletic achievement.

Choosing permanent locations would obviously be a significant challenge, though certainly not more problematic than the current bidding process. It’s reasonable to have host cities across multiple geographic regions, and it makes sense to consider places which held successful games and maintained some of the original infrastructure. Athens is the obvious choice for one permanent summer location, while Barcelona, Seoul, and Sydney are solid choices as well. Salt Lake City and Lillehammer are good bets for the Winter Olympics, though a strong case can be made for both Vancouver and Turin. Obviously the city and host country must want the honor and responsibility and be willing to trust the rest of the world to support the plan.

This idea is not new, having been discussed for years among commentators, athletic groups, and political leaders. In fact, at the end of the 1896 Games, which launched the modern era, King George of Greece called for Athens to be the permanent “peaceful meeting place of all nations,” and many delegations signed a letter endorsing the idea. Now, news out of Tokyo indicates nearly 80% of Japanese people oppose holding the Olympics there next week, as the surge in Covid cases unsettles residents even as officials still consider allowing fans to attend. Obviously, the pandemic which delayed the Games for a year is a huge factor in the national sentiment of Japan, though it’s worth noting that in 2016 nearly two-thirds of Brazilians worried the Rio Olympics would bring more harm than good to the country.

Currently, host cities are already established through 2028 when Los Angeles will host its third Olympic Games. And perhaps that’s enough. Before any more bidding happens and planning begins, the public should discuss the idea of permanent host cities. Once the idea is floated to athletes and voters, political and business leaders should take the discussion to the IOC and make it happen. With many future games already assigned and planned, there is plenty of time to develop and implement this logical change to the Games.

The Rich & Taxes

Nothing is for sure except for death and people complaining or disagreeing about taxes. This week the Washington Post Editorial Board weighed in with some thoughts on "The Smartest Way to Make the Rich Pay ..." (and it's not a wealth tax; looking at you, Senators Warren and Sanders). 

The basic gist of it is this: "it's the capital gains, stupid."

Fortunately, legitimate goals of a wealth tax can be achieved through other means, as the OECD report indicates. This would require undoing not only some of the 2017 GOP tax cuts, but much previous tax policy as well, which has produced a top federal marginal tax rate on capital gains of 23.8 percent — far below the top rate on ordinary income, which is 37 percent. The Treasury Department has aptly summarized the effect of this differential: “Preferential tax rates on long-term capital gains and qualified dividends disproportionately benefit high-income taxpayers and provide many high-income taxpayers with a lower tax rate than many low- and middle-income taxpayers.” The disparity “also encourages economically wasteful efforts to convert labor income into capital income as a tax avoidance strategy.” A notorious example of the latter is the “carried interest” loophole that enables hedge fund managers to characterize their multimillion-dollar annual compensation as lightly taxed capital gains.

I recall years ago that on a trip with our Debate team to Cal-Berkeley, one of our PF pairs was raising a heckuva ruckus in the early rounds by arguing from the position that if the United States eliminated the tax on capital gains it would not simply go to zero, but would instead shift those earnings to income, where the "gains" would be taxed at the individual's marginal rate. It was a brilliant curveball in the tournament, which flustered a lot of teams not ready for it. But at the same time, it made perfect economic sense to many of us. Capital gains should simply be taxed as income, for that is what they are.

Glenn Beck's "Common Sense" is anything but that

So, this one is an oldie but a goodie. Back in 2009 when info-tainer (radio & television talk jock, author, and podcaster) Glenn Beck published a book called Glenn Beck's Common Sense: The Case Against an Ouf-of-Control Government, Inspired by Thomas Paine. I read it with interest because I'd read several other books by Beck, and at that time he appeared not nearly as unhinged as many GOP pundits are today. However, when I read the book, I was shocked by his mis-reading (if he even did read) of the classic Age of Reason tome from one of America's greatest orators. So, I wrote up the following review for Amazon.


Well, I just finished Glenn Beck’s “Common Sense,” which, according to Beck, was “Inspired by Thomas Paine.” Beck has clearly never truly read Thomas Paine and knows very little about him, his history, or his beliefs. For many readers, pages one to seven seem to make a lot of sense. There are some general and specific criticisms about government spending and corruption in Congress I agree with. Who wouldn’t? But Beck’s attempt to connect his neo-conservative positions with Founding Father Thomas Paine is shockingly ignorant of both Paine and American history.

Beck uses this book – and Paine’s name – to criticize “Progressivism,” blaming it for much of what ails the country. Sadly, this is a complete distortion of Paine’s legacy. While the extent of most Americans’ knowledge of Paine is “he wrote Common Sense," I teach his work in class every year. I've used “The Crisis” and selections from “The Rights of Man” and “Age of Reason.” If you want to understand Paine and his vision for America, you should read them. Beck doesn’t understand Paine, but he does want to use the credibility of “The Founding Fathers” to promote an anti-government message.

Far from opposing “progressivism,” Thomas Paine is one of the original “Progressives,” though at the time he was called a radical for his liberal views. He is commonly associated with the origins of American liberalism. “Common Sense” was one small piece of his work – it was a pamphlet simply designed to encourage revolution against Britain. Paine later clearly outlined his vision of what he thought American government should look like. This is where Beck falls off the apple cart.

Beck uses this book to openly criticize progressive taxation, public education, social security, and “the progressive agenda.” But readers should know something – Thomas Paine was one of the earliest advocates of progressive taxation, even drawing up tables and rates.

He was also the first proponent of the estate tax. And in Agrarian Justice he proposed combating poverty and income inequality by taxing the wealthy to give jobs and “grants” to young people. He also proposed using this system to provide government-sponsored pensions for the elderly. Paine’s Agrarian Justice can be considered the earliest call for a national old-age pension – ie. Social Security. He wanted to tax the rich and give money to the poor.

He joined Thomas Jefferson in strongly advocating universal tax-supported public education, believing it was necessary to promote an educated electorate and was a necessary way to combat poverty. Paine also sought a federally guaranteed minimum wage, and long before Woodrow Wilson, Paine urged the establishment of, and US participation in, global organizations to help solve international problems and avoid wars.

Yet, this is all lost on Glenn Beck.

Beck criticizes Progressives for leading the United States away from its original purpose. He even goes as far as chastising Teddy Roosevelt. That’s pretty bold for a guy whose only contribution to the United States has been as an entertainer. Has Glenn Beck completely forgotten “The Gilded Age”? While Beck, for whatever reason, is disturbed by progressive ideals, he fails to concede the un-democratic conditions that led to the desire of Americans for the rise of progressive reforms.

In fact, if you look at American history from 1776 to 1900 and from 1900 to present, you will see that Beck is right in that progressives shaped America into the country that it is. It’s one with a thriving middle class, reasonably safe food and water, no child labor, forty hour workweeks, etc. If Beck wants to dismiss Progressives and return to life under President McKinley or Harding with robber barons running the economy and the atrocious work conditions chronicled by Upton Sinclair in The Jungle, he’s crazy. Beck has never known what it would be like to live in an America not guided by the leadership of progressives. Instead, he lives comfortably in a nation defined by liberal and progressive policies, and then audaciously challenges the very notion of the peaceful prosperity they provide.

Beck ironically praises “our political leaders” that could inspire us to “defeat Nazism and fascism,” and then goes on to criticize that leader - FDR - as helping destroy the country. Beck doesn’t even concede that the United States would never have been able to wage WWII or build the Atomic Bomb or put a man on the moon or wage and win the Cold War if it weren’t for the large-scale ability of the federal government to raise revenue, mainly through progressive taxation. He reviews the original foundation of the United States government in the Articles of Confederation, acknowledging that it failed because it was too weak, and then heaps his praise on the Constitution. However, he doesn’t concede that the significant difference in power given to the federal government in the Constitution was the power to levy taxes. Even conservative Edmund Burke knew that “the revenue of the state is the state.” Thus, weak revenue gathering equals weak government. And a weak federal government would never have been able to respond to two World Wars, the Cold War, and two Iraq wars.

Beck goes on to criticize Hillary Clinton and the public education system for “suggesting the community has a vested interest in what each child is taught.” Who doesn’t believe that? He offers no alternative proposals for how education should be carried out. Though I hardly believe he is proposing the end of public education. That would be so un-Jeffersonian, another Founding Father.

On page 99, Beck shifts from a scathing criticism of public education to promote God and religion in public life. This is completely disingenuous in a book “inspired by Thomas Paine.” Paine was a deist who vigorously opposed Christianity or any organized religion. He often called himself an atheist. Paine was very anti-Christianity. He vehemently opposed the government supporting religion in any way. In fact, in his later life, he was practically exiled from the country because of his criticism of religion in America.

A few other criticisms:

On page 61, Beck paraphrases Barry Goldwater’s (or some attribute Gerald Ford) quote, “A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have,” and he doesn’t even give the original speaker credit.

On page 17, Beck paraphrases the well-known “You can’t save the poor by destroying the rich” quote from Reverend William J. H. Boetcke and again doesn’t give credit. Historians and English teachers call this plagiarism.

Finally, Beck writes a mere 111 pages, and then re-prints all of Paine’s “Common Sense” which is in the public domain – and he charges $12.00 for the book. What a sham. I’m glad I checked it out of the library, but I hate that my library spent taxpayer funds on it. They should have waited until it was in the bargain bin for $.99

That’s why Beck is disingenuous. He is a hack, and while I occasionally enjoyed some of his earlier work – I’ve read all three of his books – I am sadly disappointed in this mis-use of one of America’s Founding Fathers. Beck says Americans do not know their history, but he is one of them, and with this book he is counting on their ignorance. Ultimately, this book is a poorly-written piece of neo-conservative fear-mongering. Perhaps saddest of all in a book "inspired by" a Founding Father, Glenn Beck says he "fears" the end of the republic. What a profound lack of faith in the very people and institution he praises. What an absolute insult to every true patriot who has ever laid his life on the line for the republic. As Republican Bob Inglis recently noted, "This is a constitutional republic that can withstand any president I disagree with." If the United States has managed to survive all the trials it has - from the Civil War to the Gilded Age to the Great Depression and beyond, it will survive today.

It will even survive fear-peddling "rodeo clowns" who are ignorant of its history.

America Will Never Love Soccer – But This Might Help

Now that the Euro Cup is over, and England is reeling after the loss, not to mention all the hype that “football’s coming home,” and many American Gen X soccer fans still probably recall the story of “Soccer Made in Germany,” Americans can now go back to basically ignoring the world’s game for the next four years. Granted, watching Americans develop a crush on the “Beautiful Game” during events like the Euro Cup, the World Cup, and the Olympics is certainly gratifying for soccer fans. However, with the conclusion of any international championships, American viewership of soccer will begin to fade as fast as the Brazilian defense against Germany in the 2014 World Cup. While thousands of American fans always gather to watch the early games of the USA, interest is always bound to die off once the team is eliminated. In 2014, the semi-final match between Brazil and Germany garnered roughly 12 million US viewers, which is basically the same number who watched MLB’s All Star Game a week later. Even then, that’s a huge number compared to how many Americans regularly watch professional soccer in the United States. Realistically, Americans simply don’t love soccer, at least not the way the rest of the world does.

Without the draw of the best players in the world coming together for a once-every-four-years international event, Americans will not naturally shift their attention and enthusiasm to the United States’ version of professional futbol, Major League Soccer (MLS). Certainly, MLS has increased in popularity and significance in recent years, though it still suffers from low-status on the hierarchy of professional sports in the United States. Every year, some will argue that the World Cup was the tipping point, as America finally fell in love with soccer. There will, no doubt, be some increased interest in soccer, and attendance at MLS games will probably continue to rise. It’s TV ratings, though, that truly drives revenue and equates to popularity in pro sports, and in that area pro soccer is severely lacking. For that reason, pro soccer players average salaries of about $150,000, whereas the average salaries of the NHL’s pro hockey players are in the range of $2.5 million. There’s simply no comparison.

As Derek Thompson insightfully argues in The Atlantic, soccer will not maintain the hype of the World Cup any more than professional skiing or swimming or track and field do following the Olympics. Millions of fans tune in to watch athletes like Missy Franklin and Michael Phelps swim and Usain Bolt run and Shaun White snowboard during the Olympics. But those unique events do not create a larger regular fan base for swimming, track and field, or snowboarding as spectator sports. Heck, curling is hugely popular during the Olympics, but it is on no one’s radar until then. It’s the hype of an historic, international event that truly prompted many Americans who "never watch pro soccer" to tune in to World Cup games. For, while more American kids play soccer than any other sport, few youth soccer players turn into true pro soccer fans. Soccer is just not that popular in a country that has so much other sports entertainment.

However, it doesn’t have to be that way. Of the many reasons that Americans haven’t ever taken to the game en masse, a few aspects of soccer simply inhibit spectator interest. And, it’s not that soccer is simply boring or low scoring. There is arguably much more action in a soccer game than football or baseball, and Americans truly enjoy watching slow games like golf. How else would Tiger Woods have become so popular – and rich? And, baseball fans are as interested in a pitchers’ duel leading to a shutout or a no-hitter or a perfect game as they are in a Home Run Derby. Granted, FIFA, soccer’s international governing body, is never going to take advice from Americans about futbol. But that doesn’t mean that Americans and MLS can’t tweak the game a bit.

Here are a few simple rule changes that could alter America's feelings about soccer:

1. No off-sides penalty – Off-sides is the most useless penalty in soccer, and off-sides is a primary reason games are low scoring and "boring" to non-aficionados of soccer. Watching goals waved off because of this frivolous rule is truly disheartening during the Euro Cup, the World Cup, and the Olympics. Ending off-sides would lead to many more goals, not to mention exciting breakaways and one-on-one match-ups with the goalkeeper. Removing the off-sides threat would also require much more strategy on the part of defenses and coaches. Nothing would be lost by ending the off-sides penalty.

2. Injury Box – There is nothing more annoying to casual soccer fans than the “flopping” and writhing on the ground by players supposedly “injured” from phantom fouls. It’s become such a part of the culture that players will often give up a great opportunity to advance the ball simply to “take a dive” in hopes of a penalty shot. And the imposition of “injury time” which is only known by the ref is so frustrating. So, if a player goes down with an injury and stays down long enough for a stoppage in play, he must leave the field – and be subbed for – for a period of five minutes. The “injury box” would also allow for better evaluation of players with potential concussions and other serious injuries. In fact, it would mandate prudent medical practice. And players would never risk five minutes off the field just to “flop” in hopes of a penalty kick. Referees would also have the authority to stop play and send a player to the box to avoid injured players from worsening a true injury.

3. Continuous Subbing - The limit on substitution – a total of three in a full professional game – is another useless rule that doesn’t enhance the game. And, it’s not conducive with the game so many kids grow up playing where substitutions are quite regular. Intentionally tiring players out is boring and does nothing to elevate the quality of the game being played. Soccer needs regularly fresh players like hockey to keep the action at a higher level. Frequent subbing would lead to greater emphasis on strategy from coaches, and it would increase the energy “on the pitch.” Increased subbing also complements the “injury box” rule.

4. Sudden Death overtime – No game should end in a tie – ties violate the basic rules of competition. Ties are too socialist for Americans, and they remind us of our contempt for the self-esteem movement which implies there are no losers. And, remember how outraged American baseball fans were in 2002 when the All-Star Game ended in a tie. That literally led to a rule change in MLB. So, in the event of a tie, MLS teams should each remove a couple players from the pitch (the way the NHL does overtime), and the teams should play to a first goal victory. Fewer players will open up the field, and the “sudden death” pressure will significantly increase the offense and risk taking.

California Board of Ed to delay vote on controversial new math standards

According to The Independent Institute, the California Board of Education will postpone until May of 2022 the schedule vote to implement changes to math instruction in the state. At the July board meeting, the state's education leaders were poised to adopt new math standards and curriculum which would stifle instruction, learning, and acceleration in "a step toward social justice and racial equity." This new plan for math instruction is apparently rooted in a one-size-fits-all rigid course of instruction which allows no acceleration or advanced instruction before the eleventh grade. And shockingly, it is alleged to "reject the ideas of natural talents and giftedness" and to oppose the "cult of genius."

As an honors and AP teacher and gifted education coordinator, I am baffled and disturbed by the belief that natural talents and giftedness don't exist and that educational advancement is simply a matter of privilege and even racism. Apparently, quite a few others agree, and hundreds of educators and academics have pushed back on the state of Californian in an open letter to the board and the governor, a letter which is believed to have influenced the decision to table a vote on the changes for one year. 

Thoughts, Quips, & Comments

• My dad was the eternal optimist, and one of his favorite stories was about two brothers - a pessimist and an optimist -- who were tasked with cleaning up a huge pile of horse manure. As the pessimist whined and complained about the work and the mess, the other brother just started digging through the pile. When the first brother asked what he was doing, the optimist looked up to say, “With all this horse s--t around, there has to be a pony in here somewhere.” Look for the pony, my friends. Always look for the pony.

• Years ago during a moment of ennui and melancholy, I voiced a worry that I had perhaps lost my faith. A young but wise and spiritual man told me that, on the contrary, faith is what remains when all else seems hopeless. Faith is not something you lose -- it’s what you turn to when feeling lost.

• From a physiological standpoint, it should be impossible to hit a 95 mph fastball from 60 feet 6 inches away, and according to the laws of physics and aerodynamics, bees should not be able to fly. Neither professional baseball players nor bees know this.

Boyz in the Hood -- Thirty Years Later

"Either they don't know, don't show, or don't care what's happening in the hood."

Those daunting, heartbreaking, and prescient words were first uttered by Doughboy thirty years ago at the close of a film which shocked and amazed audiences and critics alike, while kicking off a new era of independent filmmaking and kickstarting a discussion that society is still having three decades later.

While it might have been easy to dilute the movie's message down to a warning about drugs and gang violence in the inner city communities like South Central Los Angeles, the inaugural work from iconic Gen X filmmaker John Singleton was so much more. Boyz N the Hood was a groundbreaking piece of cultural commentary about race in contemporary America. Through the words of Furious Styles, the team of Singleton and Laurence Fishburn gave audiences a master's thesis on racism, gentrification, youth, policing, and the socio-political urban landscape, while making the case that Black Lives Matter decades before the words became a rallying cry and social movement.