Public policy, social issues, gender politics, religion, civitas, and other taboo topics fall under the hammer of Shava's iconoclasmic force of natural philosophy.


























 
Archives
<< current













 
the requisite out of date homepage

the old day job

HIRE ME PLEASE! I'm poor and I hope it's temporary...

the rss feed

discuss the blog, get posts via email




























Unpopular Nonfiction
by Shava Nerad
 

Revenge of the Neocons

Wednesday, May 18, 2005 10:49 PM  
In the Washington Post review of Revenge of the Sith, Dan Froomkin gets jiggy with the symbolism:

"Revenge of the Sith," it turns out, can also be seen as a cautionary tale for our time -- a blistering critique of the war in Iraq, a reminder of how democracies can give up their freedoms too easily, and an admonition about the seduction of good people by absolute power.

Some film critics suggest it could be the biggest anti-Bush blockbuster since "Fahrenheit 9/11."


(Have there been that many candidates? Did I miss them? :)

Regardless, he has an annotated list of international reactions.

This is not the press reading unintended symbolism into the movie. Lucas was overt about it at Cannes:

'I didn't think it was going to get quite this close,' he said of the parallels between the Nixon era and the current Bush presidency, which has been sacrificing freedoms in the interests of national security. 'It is just one of those re-occurring things. I hope this doesn't come true in our country. Maybe the film will awaken people to the situation of how dangerous it is.'



Mr. Buckley questions Newsweek's retraction

Tuesday, May 17, 2005 10:14 PM  
William F. Buckley, the soul of true conservative erudition, sees more than semantics in Newsweek's retraction today. According to Buckley, Newsweek was intending to express regrets over the story's impact, but was pressured into a retraction by the state departments of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Newsweek hesitated here, on the reasonable assumption that just as the magazine was wrong to proceed to publish the story without sufficient foundation, it would be wrong, without sufficient foundation, to take an Orwellian step into "retracting" it.

But, understandably, the magazine yielded the point, even though the difference between regretting a story and retracting it is more than merely semantic. Newsweek was not being asked to take the position that because blasphemy is wrong, a report that it had taken place was derivatively wrong. The author of the story, Mr. Isikoff, might have been reminded of the skepticism with which he was met when, seven years ago, he said that the president of the United States was having sex with an intern.

The underlying difficulty derives from the fact that infamous people are capable of infamy -- that the U.S. military could include, in Guantanamo, a soldier or two who behaved not as they should, but as other U.S. soldiers did in Abu Ghraib two years ago.



Galloway rakes the Senate over the coals

9:17 PM  
Just sit back and enjoy the man's testimony before the Senate.

Regardless if he's really the questionable flake several people have told me he is, he's got my vote for favorite British Trickster God.



Christian radio, just behind country and talk by the numbers

Monday, May 16, 2005 2:26 PM  
In a Columbia Journalism Review article amusingly titled Stations of the Cross, Marian Blake manages to spook me. It's not just her stories of the props that DC politicians are giving to this media ghetto, but the bald fact of the size of the category:

Conservative evangelicals control at least six national television networks, each reaching tens of millions of homes, and virtually all of the nation’s more than 2,000 religious radio stations. Thanks to Christian radio’s rapid growth, religious stations now outnumber every other format except country music and news-talk. If they want to dwell solely in this alternative universe, believers can now choose to have only Christian programs piped into their homes. Sky Angel, one of the nation’s three direct-broadcast satellite networks, carries thirty-six channels of Christian radio and television — and nothing else.

Are these your local, heartfelt ministries, respectful of the separation of church and state? Not!

The NRB [National Religious Broadcasters, and note the TLA in the URL] has taken a number of steps to ensure it remains a political player. The most dramatic came in 2002, after Wayne Pederson was tapped to replace the network’s longtime president, Brandt Gustavson. He quickly ignited internal controversy by telling a Minneapolis Star Tribune reporter that he intended to shift the organization’s focus away from politics. “We get associated with the far Christian right and marginalized,” Pederson lamented. “To me the important thing is to keep the focus on what’s important to us spiritually.”That didn’t sit well. Soon members of the executive committee were clamoring for his ouster. Within weeks, he was forced to step down.

Frank Wright was eventually chosen to replace Pederson. He had spent the previous eight years serving as the executive director of the Center for Christian Statesmanship, a Capitol Hill ministry that conducts training for politicians on how to “think biblically about their role in government.” Wright acknowledges that he was chosen for his deep political connections. “I came here to re-engage the political culture on issues relating to broadcasting,” he says. “The rest is up to individual broadcasters.”

[snip]

Many Christian broadcasters attribute the success of their news operations to the biblical perspective that underpins their reporting in a world made wobbly by terrorist threats and moral relativism. “We don’t just tell them what the news is,” explains Wright of the NRB. “We tell them what it means. And that’s appealing to people, especially in moments of cultural instability.”


Now *that's* journalism at its finest, wouldn't you say?

I guess News Corp has been studying with these folks.

Blake's article is lengthy and edifying -- and scary as hell.



The next governor of Massachusetts...

9:02 AM  
If I had a reasonable denomination greenback for every time I heard Deval Patrick's name and Barack Obama's in the same scentence last weekend at the Massachusetts Democratic Convention, I might be able to give as big a contribution to his campaign as he deserves from my extremely modest coffers.

The comparison is apt, but facile.

Yes, Patrick is a handsome, youthful, vital, eloquent and charismatic man with a lot going on "on the issues" and a firm hold on the Politics of Hope.

He's a child of a single mother in the Chicago ghetto, black, a civil rights activist, and a pragmatic progressive -- as are most Massachusetts Democrats.

He's also an intellectual, a Harvard lawyer, a former Clinton appointee, and has been on Coke's and Texaco's executive committees and boards.

He embodies a bridge across the gulfs that often divide electorate and society -- or at the very least, the factionalism of the Massachusetts Democrats.

What makes him so effective a bridge and not simply subject to sniping from the centrists and progressives?

Deval Patrick is one of those rare people who can speak to the whole human. When you hear him in person, you believe that he is grounded in reality, yet he is exciting, he is speaking truth to power, he makes your heart leap, he says things you would have said had you found the words, and he speaks from values that transcend so many of the petty differences that neurotically divide us. It was divine.

A transcript can not do him justice. He is a treat to hear. The Massachusetts Democrats dutifully -- and often enthusiastically -- clapped and cheered for Kennedy and Dean. Patrick had them responding in one voice, and he brought them to their feet.

I am old enough to remember Bobby Kennedy. Let's make that comparison instead.



Krugman on Iraq -- instate the Draft or withdrawal?

Sunday, May 15, 2005 11:28 PM  
Krugman's column on Iraq today (requires free subscription) gets forceful, considering the Times, regarding our position in Iraq.

He directly cites the Downing Street memo in a major US paper, including this quote from the memo:

Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and W.M.D. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

Krugman himself is obviously appalled at our position in Iraq:

Why did the administration want to invade Iraq, when, as the memo noted, "the case was thin" and Saddam's "W.M.D. capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea, or Iran"? Iraq was perceived as a soft target; a quick victory there, its domestic political advantages aside, could serve as a demonstration of American military might, one that would shock and awe the world.

But the Iraq war has, instead, demonstrated the limits of American power, and emboldened our potential enemies. Why should Kim Jong Il fear us, when we can't even secure the road from Baghdad to the airport?

At this point, the echoes of Vietnam are unmistakable. Reports from the recent offensive near the Syrian border sound just like those from a 1960's search-and-destroy mission, body count and all. Stories filed by reporters actually with the troops suggest that the insurgents, forewarned, mostly melted away, accepting battle only where and when they chose.

Meanwhile, America's strategic position is steadily deteriorating.

He closes:

I'm not advocating an immediate pullout, but we have to tell the Iraqi government that our stay is time-limited, and that it has to find a way to take care of itself. The point is that something has to give. We either need a much bigger army - which means a draft - or we need to find a way out of Iraq.

Seems reasonable to me. Which way will we go?

As a sidenote, more than one person at the Massachusetts Democratic Convention this weekend drew a line between the violation of White House airspace and the lack of coverage on the Downing Street memo in the US press last week. We wonder.



Newsweek apology lukewarm with reason?

11:15 PM  
Newsweek says it can no longer verify it's story from last week that the Pentagon was investigating Gitmo interrogators who may have desecrated a Quran by flushing it down the toilet.

The report sparked riots in Afghanistan.

But is it Newsweek who is backpedaling, or is it the Pentagon?

In Newsweek's apology article, they note:

On Saturday, Isikoff spoke to his original source, the senior government official, who said that he clearly recalled reading investigative reports about mishandling the Qur'an, including a toilet incident. But the official, still speaking anonymously, could no longer be sure that these concerns had surfaced in the SouthCom report. Told of what the NEWSWEEK source said, DiRita exploded, "People are dead because of what this son of a bitch said. How could he be credible now?" [circular, eh? -- SN]

In the meantime, as part of his ongoing reporting on the detainee-abuse story, Isikoff had contacted a New York defense lawyer, Marc Falkoff, who is representing 13 Yemeni detainees at Guantánamo. According to Falkoff's declassified notes, a mass-suicide attempt—when 23 detainees tried to hang or strangle themselves in August 2003—was triggered by a guard's dropping a Qur'an and stomping on it. One of Falkoff's clients told him, "Another detainee tried to kill himself after the guard took his Qur'an and threw it in the toilet."


We'll probably never know what's at the bottom of this one, if it were overenthusiastic journalism, or a government retraction or coverup of a potentially damaging investigation.

Take it on the chin, Newsweek!

Hey, after recent purges due to bad-source reporting, do you think someone big at The Washington Post Company -- who owns Newsweek -- will fall on their sword?



Dean endorses Sanders -- the price of honesty

Friday, May 13, 2005 7:42 AM  
Although Dean' endorsement of Bernie Sanders involves party coalition brokering of the most conventional sort, he's going to catch flack from it from the right and the left.

The left will criticize Dean for being undemocratic in his open request for Progressives not to run for local offices if the Dems support Sanders:

He says he understands that some Vermont Democrats would like to run for the seat being opened by the retirement of Senator James Jeffords.

Dean says if Democrats agree not to run for the Senate, Progressives should agree not to run for other statewide offices like the U-S House and lieutenant governor.
from the above cited article

The right is already criticizing Dean for endorsing a socialist. Of course, the right in this country wouldn't know a social democrat from a bolshevik -- perhaps this is part of our foreign policy problem with the EU.

I personally find Dean's attitude refreshingly transparent. This is the way party politics work. It's especially the way things work in multi-party coalition states. Of course, that Vermont is the only multi-party state in the US, might be the reason people in the national press are bound to be confused by this one.

Plus what Republican would believe that Bernie Sanders brought better long-term community-minded employers to Burlington, Vermont as it's pro-business socialist mayor, getting re-elected for several terms before the state sent him to DC as their only (then Independent) member of the House of Representatives?



Military puts US reputation into the toilet again

Wednesday, May 11, 2005 1:26 PM  
With Afghan riots coming up with at least four dead and over 70 injured, we see the most visible tip of the iceburg of impending diplomatic harm as the US military sends our reputation down the toilet again.

In Guantanamo, our interrogators are alleged to have put copies of the Quran down the toilet to soften up detainees there.

Why did we resort to measures that fly in the face of the US putative support of religious freedom and respect of diversity?

Apparently we were dealing with some really tough characters:

Q Different issue. There have been protests in Pakistan over reports that investigation over abuses in Guantanamo has found that guards have apparently put Korans in the toilet. And I'm wondering if either of you can comment on whether that's accurate, or whether the investigation has found that, and what's being done about it?



MR. DIRITA: I can't speak to any particular -- I've not seen the reports on that specific point. As we've said many times, we have conducted multiple investigations into the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo and elsewhere in the world, and we are facing an adversary -- in the case of many of these detainees, particularly at Guantanamo -- who are exceedingly well-trained in counter-interrogation tactics. And the procedures that are provided for by field manuals, as well as other authorization, have taken that into account. But I can't speak to a particular assertion about what may have happened.
DOD regular briefing, 5/11/05


How very depressing. Can you imagine the rationalization?

"Well this one is really tough. He won't tell us anything. But who knows, he might really know *something* -- maybe he's a high operative in Al Qaeda and just really resistant to interrogation. We aren't governed by the Geneva Conventions because we've declared him not to be a prisoner of war -- so we could strip him, use electrodes on his genitals, threaten him with dogs...but nah, that would be ikky. Let's just commit sacrilege instead. He's just a raghead -- won't bother *my* God."



Royal countdown to Iraq

Monday, May 09, 2005 6:48 PM  
A recent hack had the Bush twins enlisting to go to Iraq, but here is the real life corresponding number from Britain: Prince Harry, the bad boy of the recent generation of royals, is in officer boot camp at Sandhurst. For purposes of first name/last name at Sandhurst, he'll be known as "Harry Wales."

Does this mean he's heading for Iraq? Does it mean that the Brits will be out of the war, guaranteed, before he gets out of Sandhurst? That's one year and counting.



The nose knows...

6:14 PM  
Swedish research reports that gay men and straight women respond to the same pheremone in men's sweat.

This managed to make international news with the "See? Gay guys' brains are different!" headlines.

However, this is a study that had a total of three dozen participants. Is this a statistically significant sampling?

Although the Reuters story indicates that the authors call for further research, I can't get beyond the free abstract of the actual paper at PNAS to see how they positioned the significance of the story.

But, it's all over the news. Sex sells, I guess!



Report from the time traveller's convention

9:24 AM  
Well, only a few percent of us arrived in costume (I will take the comment from one videographer that I looked like I was from Japan in the future as a compliment). It took well over an hour to get started, some of the talks were interesting, one of the skits was clever but didn't end well, and apparently about 99% of the attendees had missed the bit in the invite that said that refreshments were potluck.

The countdown at 10pm waiting for the time travellers to arrive (hey, I was there already!) was underwhelming.

In the sandy volleyball pit, two metal sheets (like storm-cellar doors) were marked with the logo for the convention, and warning borders about the edges that read "ACHTUNG!" amid their red hazard hatchmarks. The doors were roped off with yellow tape on poles. A bit of dry ice added smoke atmospherics. Next to the doors were carefully saran-wrapped milk and cookies, such as you'd set out for Santa.

Of course, there were too many people for everyone to be able to see the small hatch -- the event got limited to 475. I was amused to see people taking pictures over the heads of the crowd with their cell phones and trying to figure out what they were looking at.

At 10pm, we had a 60-second Times-Square style countdown -- at which point, nothing happened. So after a few seconds of anti-climax, some folks stole the cookies, and the crowd dispersed, some back to Walker for the music, some elsewhere.

But rather than returning for the post-punk eclectic loud music after 10pm, my friend Sam and I went to w20 to talk about the nature of knowledge and tradition and many other things, so the evening was a good one.

To the credit of the organizers, it's the end of the school year, inauguration week at the 'tute, and it's amazing they could pull off anything at all! So good job all around. Hard job to live up to a build-up like that.



Wired sees IQ surge in gamers, credits reality

Friday, May 06, 2005 12:11 PM  
I play games. Too much, I'd say. But come on!

Wired attributes a generational increase in IQ to the upcoming generations' affection for computer/video gaming:

Over the last 50 years, we've had to cope with an explosion of media, technologies, and interfaces, from the TV clicker to the World Wide Web. And every new form of visual media - interactive visual media in particular - poses an implicit challenge to our brains: We have to work through the logic of the new interface, follow clues, sense relationships. Perhaps unsurprisingly, these are the very skills that the Ravens tests measure - you survey a field of visual icons and look for unusual patterns.


Am I just dense, or is this an artifact of a test that, in the 50's, was measuring a skill (visiospacial abstract manipulation) which took thinking, which is now just developed by drill?

Does this mean people are getting smarter, any more than measuring typing speed increase with the advent of computers means we are more secretarial? It might indicate a slight increase in small hand manipulation -- just as there may be a slight increase in relationship recognition from gaming.

However, it doesn't perforce make us smarter than people 50 years ago. Let's add a new test -- something less drilled in -- like media criticism, finding inconsistencies in arguments. Then we might have a better test of IQ.

Of course, we'd lose our capacity to compare the 50's to today.

Still, seems like we need a new test. Gaming is what I do when I want to stop thinking.


Where is the Life we have lost in living?
Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?
TS Eliot, The Rock


...and I didn't even know he played Everquest...



NC church excommunicates Democrats

10:50 AM  
Daily KOS reports that the East Waynesville Baptist Church has excommunicated all people who voted Democrat. An additional 40 congregants resigned in protest.

The Democratic Underground is going nuts

This is, perhaps, the most clear cut case for the IRS to step in.

And this is from me.



BBC goes postal on Respect MP

10:21 AM  
Listening to the brit election returns on the BBC World News Service last night, this interview.

George Galloway is a former Scottish MP who moved to urban London to challenge a Labor MP as the independent (running under his new Respect Party ticket as it's only candidate) on a strong anti-war ticket. The now-displaced MP was a black woman who was a prop to Blair's pro-war policies. Interestingly, in an urban district (many of which are anti-war) which includes a good slice of Moslem population, many of the shocked BBC commentators seemed to focus on this race being about...well...race. I don't know if they're right or not. But I came out feeling nothing but sympathy for Galloway.

Jeremy Paxman confronted him with the "have you stopped beating your wife" no-win question:

Mr Galloway, are you proud of having got rid of one of the very few black women in Parliament?



Regardless of the man's politics, I admire his refusal to rise to the bait. He stayed on the issues.

An hour later, apparently, the sms text messages and emails were pouring in to the BBC. One sms claimed the attack interview was "the end of British decency." I'd have to disagree, having seen a few British tabloids. And obviously Paxman is known for this kind of thing.

However, usually the BBC is a bit more constrained on the World Service. Obviously Paxman is famous for this style of attack interview. Perhaps he was not a good choice for election reporting.



Hockfield inaugurated as MIT president

9:59 AM  
This week MIT gets a new president. Hockfield is hailed in the first paragraph of the first bio I read as the first life scientist to head up MIT -- she's a pioneering neuroscientist.

Only in the last paragraph of that full page bio did it say something like, "Oh, yeah, and she's the first woman to head up MIT too."

Her official bio in the inaugural materials doesn't even mention she's the first woman to head up the 'tute.

This is typical MIT communication. "We aren't going to diminish the impact by saying it's cool that she's female. Being female or not shouldn't matter to the job. But it's an interesting footnote outside of the officious bits."

The fierce and subtle aspects of my personality were well honed in my decade here, if not born in this particular fire.



Snopes does Menken

9:42 AM  
Two great things that go great together! On the urban-myth-checker site snopes.com, a Menken quote I saw recently gets confirmation:

The larger the mob, the harder the test. In small areas, before small electorates, a first-rate man occasionally fights his way through, carrying even the mob with him by force of his personality. But when the field is nationwide, and the fight must be waged chiefly at second and third hand, and the force of personality cannot so readily make itself felt, then all the odds are on the man who is, intrinsically, the most devious and mediocre — the man who can most easily adeptly disperse the notion that his mind is a virtual vacuum.

The Presidency tends, year by year, to go to such men. As democracy is perfected, the office represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. We move toward a lofty ideal. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last, and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.

H. L. Menken, Baltimore Evening Sun on 26 July 1920


One of the interesting things about this quote is that the circulated version begins with the phrase, As democracy is perfected.... I think the whole quote is far more interesting (especially with my fascination with Howard Dean).

But then, grokking the whole quote might demand that the reader think more, and obviously Americans aren't good at that en masse.

*heh*



 
This page is powered by Blogger.