Okay, I want to make sure I understand. Two years ago, with the nation facing a host of complex and difficult problems, voters put a bunch of thoughtful, well-educated people in charge of the government. Now many of those same voters, unhappy and impatient, have decided that things will get better if some crazy, ignorant people are running the show? Seriously?
Friday, October 15, 2010
Quote of the Day
Eugene Robinson:
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Quote of the Day
Jamie Dimon, chief executive officer of J.P. Morgan Chase:
On the J.P. Morgan Chase earnings call, Dimon promised that there was “almost no chance we made a mistake” with foreclosures.I'm looking forward to seeing that quote in a new context some months down the road.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
The Miners Are Free
A very, very good day.
Here's the Los Angeles Times story. As I post this, they haven't quite caught up.
Here's the Los Angeles Times story. As I post this, they haven't quite caught up.
What Journalists Don't Tell Us
Mostly, what they don't have the wit to ask. Here's an example.
I thought I wrote something about this New York Times article on a possible explanation for colony collapse disorder, which is killing bees. But apparently I didn't.
A group of scientists led by Jerry Bromenshenk of the University of Montana in Missoula, along with some Army scientists, found both a fungus and a virus in dead bees, leading to the suspicion that the combination of the two is the cause of colony collapse. The article is a bit better than the average science article of this type, because it does qualify the finding a bit, although someone skimming the article might well conclude that the cause of colony collapse disorder had been found.
But it turns out that Bromenshenk has a grant from Bayer AG, the manufacturer of pesticides that might be associated with colony collapse disorder. And that funding just happened to come at a time when Bromenshenk had signed on to serve as an expert witness for beekeepers who brought a class-action lawsuit against Bayer. Bromenshenk also has a company of his own that might profit from finding that disease, not pesticides, are the cause of colony collapse disorder. The Times reporter, Kirk Johnson, appears to have expected Bromenshenk to have told him these things.
Scientists can be horrendously naive about conflicts of interest. To some degree, their naivete is justified: they manage to do good work anyway, and Bromenshenk's findings may well stand up.
In an ideal world, the funding would come from sources that don't have something to prove. That would mainly be the government. But some long time ago, we became convinced as a society that funding from private companies, and assigning intellectual property to them, would be a good thing for the universities. So situations like Bromenshenk's become more likely. Yes, the university's administration should be watching for conflicts of interest, and so should the scientists. But, as I say, scientists are famously naive about such things, and, unfortunately, the prospect of funding tends to blind the administration.
And, um, reporters are supposed to be watchdogs, too, but I guess they may well have bought into the idea that the conflicts of interest involved in industry funding of research are purely illusory. Not even worth thinking about.
I thought I wrote something about this New York Times article on a possible explanation for colony collapse disorder, which is killing bees. But apparently I didn't.
A group of scientists led by Jerry Bromenshenk of the University of Montana in Missoula, along with some Army scientists, found both a fungus and a virus in dead bees, leading to the suspicion that the combination of the two is the cause of colony collapse. The article is a bit better than the average science article of this type, because it does qualify the finding a bit, although someone skimming the article might well conclude that the cause of colony collapse disorder had been found.
But it turns out that Bromenshenk has a grant from Bayer AG, the manufacturer of pesticides that might be associated with colony collapse disorder. And that funding just happened to come at a time when Bromenshenk had signed on to serve as an expert witness for beekeepers who brought a class-action lawsuit against Bayer. Bromenshenk also has a company of his own that might profit from finding that disease, not pesticides, are the cause of colony collapse disorder. The Times reporter, Kirk Johnson, appears to have expected Bromenshenk to have told him these things.
Scientists can be horrendously naive about conflicts of interest. To some degree, their naivete is justified: they manage to do good work anyway, and Bromenshenk's findings may well stand up.
In an ideal world, the funding would come from sources that don't have something to prove. That would mainly be the government. But some long time ago, we became convinced as a society that funding from private companies, and assigning intellectual property to them, would be a good thing for the universities. So situations like Bromenshenk's become more likely. Yes, the university's administration should be watching for conflicts of interest, and so should the scientists. But, as I say, scientists are famously naive about such things, and, unfortunately, the prospect of funding tends to blind the administration.
And, um, reporters are supposed to be watchdogs, too, but I guess they may well have bought into the idea that the conflicts of interest involved in industry funding of research are purely illusory. Not even worth thinking about.
Mirror, Mirror
India has not joined the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty because, well...
From early on in the development of the treaty, India objected to the two-tier nature of it: five acceptable nuclear states, who just happen to be the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and no nukes for anyone else. There are at least two ways to look at that disparity: stopping the spread of nuclear weapons where it was in the early 1960s, when the treaty was being developed, or that if some have the right to nuclear weapons, all must have the right to them.
Indian rhetoric slides from one to the other, as does the rhetoric of some who claim to be for no nukes. Indian reality is that it has a fully functioning nuclear weapons industry that has turned out something in the vicinity of a hundred nuclear weapons.
India has some of the geographical characteristics of an island: protective ocean to the south and protective mountains to the north, but unfriendly Pakistan to the west and needy Bangladesh to the east. This is somewhat like the United States: protective oceans to the east and west, and reasonably friendly Canada and Mexico at the other borders.
India has been unhappy with being excluded from nuclear trade by its choice to remain outside the NPT, and the Bush adminstration decided that India was a valuable enough trade partner (for jet aircraft and other military appurtenances, anyway) that it would lift that exclusion. Its rhetoric slid from encouraging India in its nonproliferation duties to improving the economics of the US nuclear industry. The reality of the agreement reached was very little additional safeguarding of India's nuclear establishment and opening up India's nuclear trade to all.
India's internal politics almost scuttled the deal the first time around; nationalistic elements wanted less scrutiny and more control over trade than might reasonably be expected. Now internal politics have again triumphed over the realities of international trade. India's parliament has passed a bill requiring that foreign firms working in India assume higher levels of liability than most companies are willing to.
That parliamentary concern arises from India's experience with Union Carbide's chemical disaster at Bhopal in 1984.
There are other issues, too, that India would like settled to its preferences while offering nothing in return. A Newsweek article summarizes them in advance of President Obama's visit to India in November.
We might consider, in that other almost-island nation, the overreactions to the events of September 11, 2001, and how the congress of that nation continues to work its internal concerns, ignoring how their actions may look to the rest of the world or how they may affect relations with others.
The tone of the Newsweek article partly echoes that insularity of the nation for which it is primarily written: India must pull up its socks!
The difference between the two nations, of course, is money and power. India has been steadfast in its views for quite some time.
From early on in the development of the treaty, India objected to the two-tier nature of it: five acceptable nuclear states, who just happen to be the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, and no nukes for anyone else. There are at least two ways to look at that disparity: stopping the spread of nuclear weapons where it was in the early 1960s, when the treaty was being developed, or that if some have the right to nuclear weapons, all must have the right to them.
Indian rhetoric slides from one to the other, as does the rhetoric of some who claim to be for no nukes. Indian reality is that it has a fully functioning nuclear weapons industry that has turned out something in the vicinity of a hundred nuclear weapons.
India has some of the geographical characteristics of an island: protective ocean to the south and protective mountains to the north, but unfriendly Pakistan to the west and needy Bangladesh to the east. This is somewhat like the United States: protective oceans to the east and west, and reasonably friendly Canada and Mexico at the other borders.
India has been unhappy with being excluded from nuclear trade by its choice to remain outside the NPT, and the Bush adminstration decided that India was a valuable enough trade partner (for jet aircraft and other military appurtenances, anyway) that it would lift that exclusion. Its rhetoric slid from encouraging India in its nonproliferation duties to improving the economics of the US nuclear industry. The reality of the agreement reached was very little additional safeguarding of India's nuclear establishment and opening up India's nuclear trade to all.
India's internal politics almost scuttled the deal the first time around; nationalistic elements wanted less scrutiny and more control over trade than might reasonably be expected. Now internal politics have again triumphed over the realities of international trade. India's parliament has passed a bill requiring that foreign firms working in India assume higher levels of liability than most companies are willing to.
That parliamentary concern arises from India's experience with Union Carbide's chemical disaster at Bhopal in 1984.
There are other issues, too, that India would like settled to its preferences while offering nothing in return. A Newsweek article summarizes them in advance of President Obama's visit to India in November.
We might consider, in that other almost-island nation, the overreactions to the events of September 11, 2001, and how the congress of that nation continues to work its internal concerns, ignoring how their actions may look to the rest of the world or how they may affect relations with others.
The tone of the Newsweek article partly echoes that insularity of the nation for which it is primarily written: India must pull up its socks!
The difference between the two nations, of course, is money and power. India has been steadfast in its views for quite some time.
Miners Links
News Stories: New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post.
The New York Times has a couple of interactive features: posting the men's photos as they emerge, and how the rescue works.
Probably the most important: the men's unity and cooperation. I hope to write more about this later.
Update (12:50 pm EDT): Looks like they are checking out the door on the capsule. One of the things I am impressed with on this operation is that they are pretty good on the safety and procedural aspects. You can quibble about hard hats falling off the relatives, but overall my sense is that they have procedures for the capsule that they are conscientiously following. This accounts for the seeming delays on getting the men into and out of the capsule: straps and connectors are fastened and unfastened and stuff is double-checked. So they found something not quite in order about how the door fastens and are fixing it.
Update (1:40 EDT): They've got it going again, with another miner on his way to the top.
The New York Times has a couple of interactive features: posting the men's photos as they emerge, and how the rescue works.
Probably the most important: the men's unity and cooperation. I hope to write more about this later.
Update (12:50 pm EDT): Looks like they are checking out the door on the capsule. One of the things I am impressed with on this operation is that they are pretty good on the safety and procedural aspects. You can quibble about hard hats falling off the relatives, but overall my sense is that they have procedures for the capsule that they are conscientiously following. This accounts for the seeming delays on getting the men into and out of the capsule: straps and connectors are fastened and unfastened and stuff is double-checked. So they found something not quite in order about how the door fastens and are fixing it.
Update (1:40 EDT): They've got it going again, with another miner on his way to the top.
Chilean Miners Day
By some sort of arbitrarily selected power vested in me, I do hereby declare today, October 13th, to be Chilean Miners Day at Phronesisaical.
Update:
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
X-ism's Critical Illiteracy
This discussion at Non Sequitur strikes me as a basic summary of the pattern of current policy discussions in the US (to the extent there are any genuine policy discussions at all). At its most insidious, it's framed in the rhetoric of opinion, I think, as I was discussing in this post on "Untrying" a few weeks ago. In general, any time there's a discussion where X-isms like "conservative"or "liberal"or "Christian" are used freely it's probably a good idea to be wary of the ways in which they serve as heuristic black boxes. I don't think we can take for granted any more that this is just a matter of shorthand efficiency in policy discussions.
When addressed with the question whether X or Y is better, any reasonable person answering the question should be capable of two speech acts: (1) a determination of X or Y, and (2) producing a reason why that choice is a good one. Often we just allow folks to just to perform (1), and we let them keep their reasons for themselves. But its in the reasons that we find all sorts of interesting things, and we may, ourselves, learn something about X or Y. Importantly, those reasons should be about X or Y, what properties they have, maybe their history, what about X or Y appeals to you.
Here's a kind of reason that fails that requirement: I'm the kind of person who always chooses X. Or, I was brought up choosing X. Or, if X was good enough for my parents, X is good enough for me. Now, those reasons are pretty weak — they amount to the concession that X and Y aren't objectively any better than one another, but because of the contingencies of history, I've ended up an X-ist. Since it's just trouble to end up changing, I'll stay one. Again, that's a reason, but a very weak one. And one that, again, concedes that there's not much relevant difference between the two. Ad populum arguments and those from tradition need not be fallacious, but even in their non-fallacious forms, they still aren't very good. They, really, aren't answers to the question. The question was which was better, not which you choose.
Afghanistan Partition?
“Why does Afghanistan exist?” The country contains about a dozen ethnic groups, whose distribution is shown here in simplified form. There is no coast to attract people and trade. One should also bear in mind Afghanistan’s tribal divisions, particularly within the Pashtun ethnic group, which is split into numerous clans and smaller descent groups. These are too complex for a cartographer to suggest...From NYRBlog.
If, as seems likely, President Obama’s Afghanistan strategy comes unstuck over the coming months, more voices are likely to be raised in favour of partition. This is what Robert D. Blackwill, a deputy national security adviser during the presidency of George W. Bush, proposed this summer, and he repeated his message when he addressed the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London on September 13. Blackwill’s idea is that an unruly south may be quarantined from the north, where, as he observes, “locals are largely sympathetic to US efforts,” and that a deal needs to be made with the Taliban “in which neither side seeks to enlarge its territory.”
Among other pitfalls, Blackwill anticipates “pockets” of “fifth column” Pashtuns in the north and west. In fact, as our map shows, Pashtuns are found in quite big swathes outside their southern heartland; to relocate them would require ethnic cleansing. Blackwill also assumes that resistance to the US is confined to Pashtuns, when all the evidence suggests that anti-Americanism is now widespread among all ethnic groups. The effect of partition would not be to isolate the most unstable parts of the country, but to unite Afghans of different backgrounds around the goal of re-unification.
American University, Iraq
A tale of the establishment of American University of Iraq in Sulaimaniya. Funny, sad, and fascinating.
AUIS bloomed in the Northern Iraqi desert, a very artificial growth sustained hydroponically with US tax dollars. One night, at a very boozy faculty party, some veteran AUIS teachers told us the secret story of how the place was created. They claimed that AUIS was born when John Agresto, a right-wing academic and vassal of the Cheney clan, drove over the Turkish border with $500,000 cash taped to his body. There was something grotesque about this legend, because Agresto is a notably fat man, and once you’d heard the legend of his cash-strapped trip across the border, you couldn’t help imagining him bulging with cash on top of his other bulges, like a wombat infested with botfly larvae...
There was an even bigger problem with fulfilling our messianic mission: the faculty. We were not an impressive bunch. There were good teachers at AUIS — I won’t name them, because praise from me might get them fired–but they survived by lying low; being bright and a good teacher made you suspect in a place where center stage was firmly occupied by a clique of loud, provincial rightwing nuts. In this sense, AUIS was an excellent microcosm of the American polity that had produced it: the best lacked all conviction, while the worst (with apologies to Yeats) raked in the cash and talked nonsense...
There was a clear, simple formula for success at AUIS: be a Southern white male Republican with a talent for flattery, an undistinguished academic record, and very little experience in university-level teaching...
The man Agresto hired to teach American History makes a perfect Exhibit A in any list of what’s wrong with AUIS. The first sign that he was not exactly committed to intellectual integrity was his choice of textbook for the course: an abominable book called America: The Last Best Hope, by William Bennett. Yes, THE William Bennett, Reagan’s Secretary of Education, the buffoon who sermonized on virtue until his gambling losses added up so high that they drowned out his pomposities, the man who once scolded a child in public for wearing a Bart Simpson t-shirt.
Bennett’s title sums up the thesis of his textbook clearly: America is literally, simply, the last and best hope for the human species. Tough luck, China — or Burma, or Ecuador, or any other nation on the planet — because we R it, the alpha and omega. It’s a classic reactionary thesis: “I can’t imagine any nation ever being as great as America; therefore no nation ever will be.” Argument by lack of imagination — a favorite among opponents of evolution, biological or historical.
The Tragedy of Denial
Ron Brownstein pointed out, over the weekend, that the Republican party is almost unique among major political parties across the world in its overwhelming skepticism of the science of global warming...The Bellows (via).
We’re not talking about a nuanced, Jim Manzi-argument in favor of a recognition of the science but inaction on the policy. If that were the median GOP position, a bill much tougher than any placed on the table would have flown through Congress. No, it’s far worse than that. No GOP leader of consequence is able to make and sustain the argument that climate change is occurring as the scientists say it is. That’s remarkable! Imagine the world’s major powers sitting down in the early 20th century to negotiate a treaty on the law of the sea, only to have one of America’s major political parties vow to defeat any settlement, on the grounds that the world is in fact flat.
This is an immense tragedy, for America, but especially for the rest of the world. I recognize that Democrats are no angels on this subject. Politics is politics, and no one is going to line up to accept painful sacrifices. I accept that in a world in which Republicans do believe in global warming, it would still be nearly impossible to pass a carbon price sufficient to slow and eventually halt warming. But that’s not the only option out there. It could still be possible to price carbon sufficiently to cut off the possibility of extreme tail events (some of them anyway). It would still be possible to invest in some new green technologies and some crucial adaptation plans. It would still be possible to strike a meaningful international deal on emissions, general mitigation strategies, and contingent plans for extreme weather events. We can’t even debate these options, because half of the people who matter in Washington are committed to denial of the basic facts.
We are sowing the seeds of catastrophe. I keep thinking that at some point, a conservative of conscience will take a stand and force the GOP to do some soul searching on this issue. There are hundreds of millions of lives depending on the decisions the American government makes. Surely some Republican of some importance values those lives over short-term political gain!
Update note: I had added what I thought was an editorial correction (the "not" in brackets) to the above sentence: "No GOP leader of consequence is able to make and sustain the argument that climate change is [not] occurring as the scientists say it is." But rereading the sentence, I think the edit was probably incorrect, so I've returned it to the original sentence. Implicit in the original sentence is the thought that there are Republicans who would make the case for tackling climate change, if only their party would allow it, but they are instead cowed into silence. Lindsey Graham is the prime example. My correction had changed the meaning of the sentence to something along the lines of no Republicans being able to make a strong case against the existence of climate change but denying it anyway. Avent's sentence is more generous.
Monday, October 11, 2010
It Must Be the Cupholders
From Barking up the Wrong Tree, the question, "What kind of car is most likely to get broken into by a hungry bear?":
Black bears (Ursus americanus) forage selectively in natural environments. To determine if bears also forage selectively for anthropogenic resources we analyzed data on vehicles broken into by bears from Yosemite National Park, California. We classified vehicles into 9 categories based on their make and model and collected data on use (2001–2007) and availability (2004–2005). From 2001 to 2007 bears broke into 908 vehicles at the following rates: minivan (26.0%), sport–utility vehicle (22.5%), small car (17.1%), sedan (13.7%), truck (11.9%), van (4.2%), sports car (1.7%), coupe (1.7%), and station wagon (1.4%). Only use of minivans (29%) during 2004–2005 was significantly higher than expected (7%). We discuss several competing hypotheses about why bears selected minivans.
Saturday, October 09, 2010
Friday, October 08, 2010
Bits and Pieces - Not in the News Edition
Or at least, not enough in the news.
If the Republicans take Congress, look for a war on science.
A judge has ruled that the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate (the requirement for people to buy health insurance) is constitutional. And Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon questions the sincerity of the challenges. Don't expect that to slow down the Republicans.
Germany has only just this week finished paying reparations for World War I. It was those reparations that Hitler used as reasons for Germany to try to take over Europe. As John Quiggin notes, we seem to be progressing slightly in our thinking on such things.
The cause of honeybee colony collapse may have been found.
If the Republicans take Congress, look for a war on science.
A judge has ruled that the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate (the requirement for people to buy health insurance) is constitutional. And Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon questions the sincerity of the challenges. Don't expect that to slow down the Republicans.
Germany has only just this week finished paying reparations for World War I. It was those reparations that Hitler used as reasons for Germany to try to take over Europe. As John Quiggin notes, we seem to be progressing slightly in our thinking on such things.
The cause of honeybee colony collapse may have been found.
It's a New Day
We've been having some lovely sunrises this week. This is Tuesday's:
Today's was similar, not as good with the clouds, but a double rainbow to the west.
Today's was similar, not as good with the clouds, but a double rainbow to the west.
The Sludge Reaches the Danube
and it turns out, once again, that dilution is the solution to pollution, as I said yesterday.
I'm not endorsing that idea as a policy for waste management, just pointing out that it does work if you're not overloading the system.
One of the things that seems to be understood poorly by the media and many others is that concentration matters. For the caustic qualities of that sludge in particular, dilution helps.
I'm not endorsing that idea as a policy for waste management, just pointing out that it does work if you're not overloading the system.
One of the things that seems to be understood poorly by the media and many others is that concentration matters. For the caustic qualities of that sludge in particular, dilution helps.
Thursday, October 07, 2010
Why I Don't Write About Bob Woodward
Mark Ambinder explains by example.
And if that's not enough for you, there are more links and commentary here.
I mean, how many times can someone come up with that business about Hillary Clinton replacing Joe Biden as Vice President in 2012?
And if that's not enough for you, there are more links and commentary here.
I mean, how many times can someone come up with that business about Hillary Clinton replacing Joe Biden as Vice President in 2012?
More on That Hungarian Sludge
The Armchair Generalist has more about what's in the sludge than I've seen elsewhere.
The New York Times confirmed something I suspected: the ponds date from Soviet times. The Soviet disregard for the environment even exceeds that of capitalists, which proves the wisdom of the proverb, "Choose your enemies wisely, for you shall become like them."
The sludge is approaching the Danube River. The good thing is that as it gets into the rivers, dilution makes it less dangerous, although it's going to take a lot of dilution, and the heavy metals will add to the load already in the Danube and its tributaries.
The New York Times confirmed something I suspected: the ponds date from Soviet times. The Soviet disregard for the environment even exceeds that of capitalists, which proves the wisdom of the proverb, "Choose your enemies wisely, for you shall become like them."
The sludge is approaching the Danube River. The good thing is that as it gets into the rivers, dilution makes it less dangerous, although it's going to take a lot of dilution, and the heavy metals will add to the load already in the Danube and its tributaries.
Quote of the Day
The Armchair Generalist:
Unfortunately, the money will also come from accounts that could finance civilian infrastructure, education, and other good things. But the search for the unattainable will still occupy a country's scientists and divert them from other weapons.
Speaking of which, we might consider the neocon penchant for missile defense and the nonexistent electromagnetic pulse (EMP) threat and what they are doing to divert US funds that are needed elsewhere.
I personally hope that Venezuela and Burma continue to pour millions into nuclear weapons research. That will mean much less money will be invested in more effective and useful conventional military weapons as they waste time and money into a capability that they will never be able to develop.I've said the same thing about laser isotope separation in particular.
Unfortunately, the money will also come from accounts that could finance civilian infrastructure, education, and other good things. But the search for the unattainable will still occupy a country's scientists and divert them from other weapons.
Speaking of which, we might consider the neocon penchant for missile defense and the nonexistent electromagnetic pulse (EMP) threat and what they are doing to divert US funds that are needed elsewhere.
Discovery in Itself
... I have to say, though, that I’m always very skeptical about applications. When someone asks about applications in my talks, I usually tell a story about how I was on a boat one day watching dolphins, and they were jumping out of the water, allowing people to nearly touch them. Everyone was mesmerized by these magnificent creatures. It was an extraordinary romantic moment—well, until a little boy shouted out, "Mom, can we eat them?" It's a similar matter here—as in, okay, we just found this extraordinary material, so we're enjoying this romantic moment, and now people are asking if we can eat it or not. Probably we can, but you have to step back and enjoy the moment first.
--2010 physics Nobel laureate Andre Geim, in a 2008 ScienceWatch interview, on preserving the romance of discovery.
Civil Society and the Expert Class
Peter Levine mulls over the professionalization of governance concentrated in a segment of the population and its effects on democratic voice.
Theda Skocpol notes that traditional fraternal associations like the Lions and the Elks, which once gathered people at the local level who were diverse in terms of class and occupation (although segregated by race and gender), have lost their college-educated members. But non-college-educated or working class people remain just as likely to join these groups. It is not so much that working-class people have left civic groups, but that professionals have left them--moving from economically diverse local associations to specialized organizations for their own professions and industries.
The proportion of all Americans who are professionals or managers has roughly doubled since the 1950s. That is a benign shift in our workforce, reflecting better education and more interesting jobs. It largely explains why highly educated specialists have become more numerous in meetings. They bring sophistication and expertise to community affairs. Still, two thirds of people do not classify themselves as professional or managers, and it important for their values and interests to be represented. The steep decline in traditional civil society leaves them poorly represented, to their cost and to the detriment of public deliberation.
Wednesday, October 06, 2010
The Sam Zell Culture
This article has been bothering me all day. It's the story of how Sam Zell tried to change the culture at the Tribune Company, parent company of the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, and other newspapers, after he bought it.
Apparently he felt that installing a juvenile and sexist bunch of executives would solve the daunting problems that newspapers are facing. It's hard not to wonder what he was thinking.
Perhaps it was something like this: just unleash those red-blooded men, and they'll fix all that stuff. To which one has to wonder what he expected they'd do, beyond trying to bribe waitresses to show their boobs.
The Times article has a photo of the executives, all men of a certain age, which Mr. Zell exceeds. They live in a world that is gone forever.
I'm just back from one of my periodic forays into the college world. I love it that the students are showing so many characteristics that some of us dreamed of when I was in college. In particular, they expect that people will be treated equally and don't understand why gender and skin color and speaking with an accent might be a basis for anything else.
Sam Zell and his executives are of a generation in which gender and skin color and speaking with an accent are markers for derision and a way to cause explosive laughter in one's peers (white males, of course), particularly while drinking or developing pranks to undermine those carrying the unfortunate markers. So there must have been horror and disbelief when the employee handbook told them that, hey, they just needed to be able to take a joke!
What puzzles me, though, is how anyone thought that this sort of behavior, which might be called juvenile except that our current-day juveniles probably wouldn't find it all that much fun past middle school, would improve things. Or what the plan was to deal with the real problems that newspapers face. An open atmosphere for the old white guys would boost their creativity and they'd find the answers? After their track record of bringing newspapers to where they are today?
So was it a rich guy and his friends just having a little fun, fiddling while Rome burned, or did Zell and his crew really believe this was going to improve things?
Apparently he felt that installing a juvenile and sexist bunch of executives would solve the daunting problems that newspapers are facing. It's hard not to wonder what he was thinking.
Perhaps it was something like this: just unleash those red-blooded men, and they'll fix all that stuff. To which one has to wonder what he expected they'd do, beyond trying to bribe waitresses to show their boobs.
The Times article has a photo of the executives, all men of a certain age, which Mr. Zell exceeds. They live in a world that is gone forever.
“Here was this guy, who was responsible for all these people, getting drunk in front of senior people and saying this to a waitress who many of us knew,” said one of the Tribune executives present, who declined to be identified because he had left the company and did not want to be quoted criticizing a former employer. “I have never seen anything like it.”This executive must be younger if he has never seen anything like it.
I'm just back from one of my periodic forays into the college world. I love it that the students are showing so many characteristics that some of us dreamed of when I was in college. In particular, they expect that people will be treated equally and don't understand why gender and skin color and speaking with an accent might be a basis for anything else.
Sam Zell and his executives are of a generation in which gender and skin color and speaking with an accent are markers for derision and a way to cause explosive laughter in one's peers (white males, of course), particularly while drinking or developing pranks to undermine those carrying the unfortunate markers. So there must have been horror and disbelief when the employee handbook told them that, hey, they just needed to be able to take a joke!
“Working at Tribune means accepting that you might hear a word that you, personally, might not use,” the new handbook warned. “You might experience an attitude you don’t share. You might hear a joke that you don’t consider funny. That is because a loose, fun, nonlinear atmosphere is important to the creative process.” It then added, “This should be understood, should not be a surprise and not considered harassment.”Of course, there is an implied division between the "you" who doesn't consider the joke funny and those who revel in a "loose, fun [that word again], nonlinear atmosphere." And the implication is that "your" point of view doesn't count. Obvious now, not so much to the Mad Men.
What puzzles me, though, is how anyone thought that this sort of behavior, which might be called juvenile except that our current-day juveniles probably wouldn't find it all that much fun past middle school, would improve things. Or what the plan was to deal with the real problems that newspapers face. An open atmosphere for the old white guys would boost their creativity and they'd find the answers? After their track record of bringing newspapers to where they are today?
“Anybody can make money when you are not servicing the debt and cutting people. Zell and the people he brought in had no idea what they were doing.”Well, yeah. Sounds like some of the bright ideas that our financial wizards had that brought down the economy, although less sophisticated.
So was it a rich guy and his friends just having a little fun, fiddling while Rome burned, or did Zell and his crew really believe this was going to improve things?
Tuesday, October 05, 2010
Bits and Pieces - October 5, 2010
Something happening in North Korea.
After all that hoo-ha about Stuxnet being an Israeli/US creation designed to take down Iranian nuclear sites, we really don't know any of that or much about its origin.
A scary and dangerous mess in Hungary. It's what could have happened in Sillamäe, although the mess would have spilled into the Baltic Sea, not the town. Fortunately, the Estonians stabilized that horribly engineered (probably not engineered at all) dam and constructed an engineered cover over the tailings. Now it's a port. One of the things I'm proud to have participated in. (h/t to Plutonium Page) Update: photos from Hungary.
After all that hoo-ha about Stuxnet being an Israeli/US creation designed to take down Iranian nuclear sites, we really don't know any of that or much about its origin.
A scary and dangerous mess in Hungary. It's what could have happened in Sillamäe, although the mess would have spilled into the Baltic Sea, not the town. Fortunately, the Estonians stabilized that horribly engineered (probably not engineered at all) dam and constructed an engineered cover over the tailings. Now it's a port. One of the things I'm proud to have participated in. (h/t to Plutonium Page) Update: photos from Hungary.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Bits and Pieces - October 4, 2010
Teh Stupid Division: We did such a great job on our inadvertent experiment of pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, let's see what else we can f*** up. Update: Russia's thinking big too.
Be afraid. Be very afraid. I don't understand what the people who issued the terror alert for Europe hope to accomplish if they won't say what the danger is.
Today's news not in the MSM: China's lunar mission.
Not so much in the MSM: terror trial in New York. Odd juxtaposition (or nonjuxtaposition) with the encouragement to be very afraid.
Student Brutality Division: The American West and Gin and Tacos on Tyler Clementi's suicide and potential punishment of his harassers.
Watch as the Supreme Court makes the law disappear.
Good News Division (yes, there is some!): Ptolemy's map of Germania deciphered.
Americans don't want to go to war with Iran.
Evolution among the trilobites.
Too good not to embed:
I have a confession and apology to make. I get some of the "Bits and Pieces" links from my friends on Twitter and Facebook, as well as from their blogs. But all that is beginning to run together, so I'm not as conscientious about giving credit as I used to be. And if you want to follow me on Twitter, I'm @cherylrofer.
Be afraid. Be very afraid. I don't understand what the people who issued the terror alert for Europe hope to accomplish if they won't say what the danger is.
Today's news not in the MSM: China's lunar mission.
Not so much in the MSM: terror trial in New York. Odd juxtaposition (or nonjuxtaposition) with the encouragement to be very afraid.
Student Brutality Division: The American West and Gin and Tacos on Tyler Clementi's suicide and potential punishment of his harassers.
Watch as the Supreme Court makes the law disappear.
Good News Division (yes, there is some!): Ptolemy's map of Germania deciphered.
Americans don't want to go to war with Iran.
Evolution among the trilobites.
The take-home message isn't that trilobites are cool (they are), but that this brings out a very important point about evolution, and a good refutation of the old creationist canard, "if evolution is true where are the half-way transitionals? The half reptile-half bird?"The Russians continue to be willing to talk about joint missile defense.
What these results show, is that evolution doesn't happen to all features at the same time, or at the same rate, producing a neat half-and-half transitional form. Some features change relatively rapidly (the expansion of the frontal glabella), some features change relatively slowly (head width to length ratio), and some don't change at all (the distance from the back of the eye to axial furrow distance as a ratio of head length). So there isn't a transitional which has all features exactly half way between the ancestral and descendant forms. What we find are transitionals with a mix of features depending on the rates at which those features are changing. We should not expect to find exact half-and-half transitionals. Evolution doesn't work that way.
Too good not to embed:
I have a confession and apology to make. I get some of the "Bits and Pieces" links from my friends on Twitter and Facebook, as well as from their blogs. But all that is beginning to run together, so I'm not as conscientious about giving credit as I used to be. And if you want to follow me on Twitter, I'm @cherylrofer.
Libertarianism in Action
[I]n Obion County, Tennessee..., Gene Cranick’s home caught on fire. As the Cranicks fled their home, their neighbors alerted the county’s firefighters, who soon arrived at the scene. Yet when the firefighters arrived, they refused to put out the fire, saying that the family failed to pay the annual subscription fee to the fire department. Because the county’s fire services for rural residences is based on household subscription fees, the firefighters, fully equipped to help the Cranicks, stood by and watched as the home burned to the ground[.]This, of course, is one of the examples liberals give (and Benjamin Franklin recognized) of why some services should be provided by government and paid for by the community. But I guess those folks in Tennessee prefer their libertarianism straight.
Quote of the Day
Paul Krugman:
So the Ministry of Propaganda has, in effect, seized control of the Politburo.
Good Food
Some of you might be interested in this Nobel conference coming up on October 5th and 6th. The Nobel 46 event focuses on the question of what makes food good via "ethical, agroecological, physiological, economic, and aesthetic conceptions of 'good'." The conference can be followed live on the website. If you have limited time, try at least to follow Paul Thompson's talk.
Sunday, October 03, 2010
Bits & Pieces - Helmut Edition
The Ig Nobels. My favorites:
Physics: Lianne Parkin, Sheila Williams, and Patricia Priest of the University of Otago, New Zealand, "for demonstrating that, on icy footpaths in wintertime, people slip and fall less often if they wear socks on the outside of their shoes." (Paper: "Preventing Winter Falls: A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Novel Intervention," New Zealand Medical Journal, July 3, 2009.)Public health: Manuel S. Barbeito, Charles T. Mathews, and Larry A. Taylor of the Industrial Health and Safety Office, Fort Detrick, Md., "for determining by experiment that microbes cling to bearded scientists." (Paper: "Microbiological Laboratory Hazard of Bearded Men," Applied Microbiology, July 1967.)
Ben Franklin's tips for nonprofit development and fundraising.
Monkey guards on patrol at the Commonwealth Games.
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Something About Wisconsin
There's something about Wisconsin cow humor that doesn't entirely translate. But I would be happy if they would share their frozen custard franchises with the rest of the country.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Bits and Pieces - September 27, 2010
More on Stuxnet: "Realize that the computer malware industry feeds on speculation and fear -- and the journalism industry isn't exactly beyond reproach."
Epic marketing FAIL.
Why immigration is good for the country.
Nice summing-up of the American Taliban from Markos Moulitsas.
Added later: On the enthusiasm gap. There are only two parties, and one is mean and crazy. That's the choice.
Science journalism today.
Epic marketing FAIL.
Why immigration is good for the country.
Nice summing-up of the American Taliban from Markos Moulitsas.
I oppose regressive Islamic fundamentalists for the same reason I oppose regressive conservatives - because whether it's their violent tendencies, views on women and gays, hostility to science and knowledge, or fear of pop culture, they're cut from the same ideological cloth.
Added later: On the enthusiasm gap. There are only two parties, and one is mean and crazy. That's the choice.
Science journalism today.
Too Much of a Muchness
A law professor who is married to a doctor last week provided the sad story of his difficulties in living on more than (probably a lot more than) $250,000 a year and the immense difficulties that a tax cut on the amount under that combined with no tax cut on the amount above that would entail him and his family.
The post provoked not much crying and some laughter. Many of us live quite happily on much less than that.
Many religions touch on this problem and counsel, as often as not, giving more away if you're feeling that you don't have enough. It's easy to get into these mental ruts, whether it's keeping up with the neighbors or someone being wrong on the Internet. Washington has its own versions of this, as Joe Klein is finding as he tours the country outside the Beltway.
It's a matter of focusing on what's important. I can't tell if Ezra Klein's use of this quote is sardonic; it would be if I were quoting it.
Paul Krugman gives another example of what we might call false focus:
So when James Fallows thinks that that poor sad law professor is just making an error in comparing his wealth to others', he's succumbing to the common wisdom, in this case, that the one who dies with the most toys wins.
The post provoked not much crying and some laughter. Many of us live quite happily on much less than that.
Many religions touch on this problem and counsel, as often as not, giving more away if you're feeling that you don't have enough. It's easy to get into these mental ruts, whether it's keeping up with the neighbors or someone being wrong on the Internet. Washington has its own versions of this, as Joe Klein is finding as he tours the country outside the Beltway.
It's a matter of focusing on what's important. I can't tell if Ezra Klein's use of this quote is sardonic; it would be if I were quoting it.
It is inconsequential whether you like these entrées or not. The purpose of eating at a buffet is to get the most value for money by selectively feeding the face with the most expensive dishes.I guess I'd disagree. I go out to eat to enjoy what I'm eating.
Paul Krugman gives another example of what we might call false focus:
This brings to mind a review I once read of a bad movie in which Mel Gibson played a Revolutionary War patriot. The film made a point of showing the Gibson character as being apolitical – until the British did him personal harm; that’s when he got involved. As the reviewer pointed out, this gets the notion of patriotism all wrong – you’re supposed to care about the cause regardless of your personal interests. In fact, there’s something especially laudable if you oppose a regime even though you were doing fine under that regime.I think that Krugman's critics may have swallowed the self-interest thing whole and believe that nothing else can be genuine.
So: I support tax increases that will reduce my own after-tax income; I worry greatly about unemployment, even though my own living is secure; I warn about growing inequality, even though I’m of the class that has gained from rising disparities; I’m upset about the direction this country is going, even though my own life is comfortable. And this is supposed to cast doubt on my motives?
So when James Fallows thinks that that poor sad law professor is just making an error in comparing his wealth to others', he's succumbing to the common wisdom, in this case, that the one who dies with the most toys wins.
Make Up Your Minds
Yesterday, according to the MSM, Stuxnet was the most brilliant computer attack evah. Today, according to the New York Times, it's dumb.
What they are looking at is what I noted yesterday: it's transmissible and seems to be blowing back to all the likely perpetrators. That makes it more likely to show up, which, as I pointed out, could be part of the point. Besides helping to outline associates of the target, having it discovered could be part of the message: we can damage you.
This is an inherent shortcoming of unconventional warfare. Once you use a non-lethal weapon, the enemy knows what it is and can defend against it or use it himself. Any weapon that can spread itself, like computer and real viruses, can blow back.
Feature or bug? One more of the many questions.
What they are looking at is what I noted yesterday: it's transmissible and seems to be blowing back to all the likely perpetrators. That makes it more likely to show up, which, as I pointed out, could be part of the point. Besides helping to outline associates of the target, having it discovered could be part of the message: we can damage you.
This is an inherent shortcoming of unconventional warfare. Once you use a non-lethal weapon, the enemy knows what it is and can defend against it or use it himself. Any weapon that can spread itself, like computer and real viruses, can blow back.
Feature or bug? One more of the many questions.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
More Stuxnet Speculation and the Limits of "Cyberwarfare"
The Stuxnet worm has infected tens of thousands of Iranian computer systems, along with systems in other countries. It is being unraveled by computer security companies and Siemens, the maker of industrial equipment that is its target.
The exact target is not known, but speculation tends to settle on the Bushehr civilian nuclear power plant and the Natanz enrichment plant, leading to the more speculative conclusion that Israel or the United States is responsible for it. Both have stated that they are using various means to attempt sabotage of Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
But let's look at another possibility: Russia. Russia has direct access to the Bushehr plant, since they are supplying it. Russia also has a great concentration of outstanding computer programmers, many of which have taken to the production of malware. Russia is a prime suspect in the distributed denial of service attacks in Estonia during the controversy over a Soviet monument in Tallinn and in Georgia during their short war. So a motive for the attack in Iran might be to test another sort of attack, against industrial infrastructure. Relations between Russia and Iran over Bushehr have been rocky over the many years it has taken to build the reactor; that's why it has taken so long.
If the code was furnished by Israel or the United States with the intention of harming a particular plant, it is highly irresponsible to make the code in the form of a worm, which can propagate itself. The ultimate protection against computer infection, of course, is the air gap: if a computer isn't connected to any other computers, it can't be infected. The air gap is used for security in many industrial plants. But memory sticks can be infected, and they can transmit the worm, which seems to be the main route of Stuxnet infection.
So why make a worm? It could be that the perpetrators didn't have access to the targeted facility, in which case infection would be necessary. Or perhaps the perpetrators wanted to trace the routes of infection, which might provide some clues as to who might be providing questionably-legal support to Iran's nuclear program. Transmission via memory sticks would be slow enough to outline the importance of various providers. The Guardian provides a map. Interesting connections to India and Indonesia.
Stuxnet is one more demonstration of how difficult cyberwarfare is. Estonia was inconvenienced for a week or two; the attack on Georgia seemed to be less effective. Siemens is introducing correctives to Stuxnet. Warfare has to be more than a one-off, but it is in the nature of an attack to be noticed, and, once noticed, responded to. A great many non-governmental individuals and organizations have as much fun countering malware as others do developing it, and governments have their resources as well. Like the attacks on Estonia and Georgia, Stuxnet is very difficult to trace to its perpetrator, perhaps impossible. So there is no retaliation. And transmissible malware can blow back on the perpetrator. Looks like there are Stuxnet infections in all the major suspects.
Defense works. Sticking possibly infected memory sticks into USB ports is dumb; the air gap applies to memory sticks too. And there are better defenses that most of us have on our home computers. As malware does its damage, it is detected and countered, an emerging and evolutionary process rather than a catastrophe.
The exact target is not known, but speculation tends to settle on the Bushehr civilian nuclear power plant and the Natanz enrichment plant, leading to the more speculative conclusion that Israel or the United States is responsible for it. Both have stated that they are using various means to attempt sabotage of Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
But let's look at another possibility: Russia. Russia has direct access to the Bushehr plant, since they are supplying it. Russia also has a great concentration of outstanding computer programmers, many of which have taken to the production of malware. Russia is a prime suspect in the distributed denial of service attacks in Estonia during the controversy over a Soviet monument in Tallinn and in Georgia during their short war. So a motive for the attack in Iran might be to test another sort of attack, against industrial infrastructure. Relations between Russia and Iran over Bushehr have been rocky over the many years it has taken to build the reactor; that's why it has taken so long.
If the code was furnished by Israel or the United States with the intention of harming a particular plant, it is highly irresponsible to make the code in the form of a worm, which can propagate itself. The ultimate protection against computer infection, of course, is the air gap: if a computer isn't connected to any other computers, it can't be infected. The air gap is used for security in many industrial plants. But memory sticks can be infected, and they can transmit the worm, which seems to be the main route of Stuxnet infection.
So why make a worm? It could be that the perpetrators didn't have access to the targeted facility, in which case infection would be necessary. Or perhaps the perpetrators wanted to trace the routes of infection, which might provide some clues as to who might be providing questionably-legal support to Iran's nuclear program. Transmission via memory sticks would be slow enough to outline the importance of various providers. The Guardian provides a map. Interesting connections to India and Indonesia.
Stuxnet is one more demonstration of how difficult cyberwarfare is. Estonia was inconvenienced for a week or two; the attack on Georgia seemed to be less effective. Siemens is introducing correctives to Stuxnet. Warfare has to be more than a one-off, but it is in the nature of an attack to be noticed, and, once noticed, responded to. A great many non-governmental individuals and organizations have as much fun countering malware as others do developing it, and governments have their resources as well. Like the attacks on Estonia and Georgia, Stuxnet is very difficult to trace to its perpetrator, perhaps impossible. So there is no retaliation. And transmissible malware can blow back on the perpetrator. Looks like there are Stuxnet infections in all the major suspects.
Defense works. Sticking possibly infected memory sticks into USB ports is dumb; the air gap applies to memory sticks too. And there are better defenses that most of us have on our home computers. As malware does its damage, it is detected and countered, an emerging and evolutionary process rather than a catastrophe.
Quote of the Day
Daniel Patrick Moynihan personal and confidential memorandum for John D. Ehrlichmann and H. H. Haldeman, July 24, 1970:
I would argue that in such circumstances the first [rule] of patriotism is the willingness not to worsen things, even when the provocation is outrageous, even when there may appear to be a short-term advantage to be gained. This is not just the measure of patriotism, it is the measure of prudence as well.
Truth and Commonwealth
Here in India we've been hearing for months about the problems -- the profound bureaucratic inefficiency, the graft and corruption, the pervasive half-assedness -- with this year's Commonwealth Games in Delhi. Yeah, in a country where millions are starving and where cellphones outnumber toilets comfortably, where children work to build roads and live, without access to water or education, in migrant slums, where filthy, overcrowded hospitals struggle to address each year's fresh outbreaks of dengue and malaria, yeah, here, they've decided to 'showcase' their new status as a world power by hosting the Commonwealth Games.
I'm thinking it'll showcase something.
I've been considering writing a piece on this for the last few days, but it's big and complicated. Fortunately, Jim Yardley at the New York Times has written an excellent summary of the action so far. Here's a nice bit:
But my perspective on the whole affair is colored by my preoccupation with Tea Party idiocy in my home country. Most frustrating about that 'movement' is its deep commitment to delusion, its skill at lying to itself about taxes, governance, economics, President Obama. Perhaps the link between my thinking about the Commonwealth Games and my thinking about the anti-intellectual conservative fringe is Dinesh D'Souza, the right's favorite Desi lapdog -- though he's less a lapdog, I guess, than a human version of Cuddles, the Anglo-identified Chatterjee family's mean-spirited mutt kept chained to the piano in A Suitable Boy. I mean, what D'Souza does, what Glenn Beck does, all of them: they simply make shit up. And then they tell people that shit they made up as though it were natural fact.
And this is exactly what Indian officials -- and I mean at every level, from those who work at the driver's license office to those overseeing the preparations for the Games -- this is exactly what they do: they make shit up. And they say it and it gets quoted in the paper and [universal hand-dusting gesture] that's that. And it works here, for a variety of reasons. It works because of the terrible illiteracy in this country, the perception of powerlessness among the institutionally and socially oppressed, the far-reaching commitments to keeping that institutional oppression intact. It works because lots of Indians are too busy trying to find something to eat to worry about whether or not India really is one of the world powers, now. It works because an ascendant middle-class wants desperately for it to be true.
And that's all well and good, I guess. Until the audience changes. India can lie to itself until the water buffalo come home, but it's finding it difficult to lie to others. Its fictions, its delusional pronouncements are now daily confronted, in Delhi, by reality, by the gaze of the world looking in and saying: "hey, WTF?"
But, frankly, India isn't my concern. My concern is the U.S., where we're seeing an entire political movement in the model of Indian politics: D'Souza, Beck, Palin. What they're 'building' is an open-sewer of rank dishonesty, a self-deluded, self-convinced, and self-righteous mob of angry people. They lie to increasing numbers of Americans who want to believe what they're hearing. Worst of all, they're building on the legacy of an administration caught lying baldly, internationally. And they're saying: "it doesn't matter what the world thinks. What matters is we're the greatest . . . blah blah blah. We're paying too much in taxes . . . blah blah blah. Obama is a socialist . . . blah blah blah. If you can't afford health care you probably wish you were dead anyway, blah blah blah."
But then there's the world outside; in its atmosphere, these fictions, they wither.
India wants to cling to its fictions, its narratives of growth and market domination, but it also wants to be a part of the world outside. This is a good thing, an opportunity to calibrate those narratives, to review and revise. Press freedom, for one thing, is clearly pretty healthy in India. That's going to help.
At home, from my perspective here, it feels too much like we're moving in the opposite direction, retreating from the world -- when we're not bombing it from unmanned drones. Like we're locking ourselves in our still-overstocked pantries and telling stories about the way it is.
I'm thinking it'll showcase something.
I've been considering writing a piece on this for the last few days, but it's big and complicated. Fortunately, Jim Yardley at the New York Times has written an excellent summary of the action so far. Here's a nice bit:
India had hoped the Commonwealth Games, a quadrennial athletic competition among nations of the former British Empire, would serve as a public relations vehicle to show off the economic progress that has made the country a rising power. Instead, the world is witnessing an ugly spectacle of bureaucratic dysfunction that only confirms the image of governmental ineffectiveness that Indian leaders hoped to dispel.That's pretty much it in a nutshell. But read the whole article, especially if you're interested in seeing a weird sort of reverse cultural relativism applied to standards of hygiene.
But my perspective on the whole affair is colored by my preoccupation with Tea Party idiocy in my home country. Most frustrating about that 'movement' is its deep commitment to delusion, its skill at lying to itself about taxes, governance, economics, President Obama. Perhaps the link between my thinking about the Commonwealth Games and my thinking about the anti-intellectual conservative fringe is Dinesh D'Souza, the right's favorite Desi lapdog -- though he's less a lapdog, I guess, than a human version of Cuddles, the Anglo-identified Chatterjee family's mean-spirited mutt kept chained to the piano in A Suitable Boy. I mean, what D'Souza does, what Glenn Beck does, all of them: they simply make shit up. And then they tell people that shit they made up as though it were natural fact.
And this is exactly what Indian officials -- and I mean at every level, from those who work at the driver's license office to those overseeing the preparations for the Games -- this is exactly what they do: they make shit up. And they say it and it gets quoted in the paper and [universal hand-dusting gesture] that's that. And it works here, for a variety of reasons. It works because of the terrible illiteracy in this country, the perception of powerlessness among the institutionally and socially oppressed, the far-reaching commitments to keeping that institutional oppression intact. It works because lots of Indians are too busy trying to find something to eat to worry about whether or not India really is one of the world powers, now. It works because an ascendant middle-class wants desperately for it to be true.
And that's all well and good, I guess. Until the audience changes. India can lie to itself until the water buffalo come home, but it's finding it difficult to lie to others. Its fictions, its delusional pronouncements are now daily confronted, in Delhi, by reality, by the gaze of the world looking in and saying: "hey, WTF?"
But, frankly, India isn't my concern. My concern is the U.S., where we're seeing an entire political movement in the model of Indian politics: D'Souza, Beck, Palin. What they're 'building' is an open-sewer of rank dishonesty, a self-deluded, self-convinced, and self-righteous mob of angry people. They lie to increasing numbers of Americans who want to believe what they're hearing. Worst of all, they're building on the legacy of an administration caught lying baldly, internationally. And they're saying: "it doesn't matter what the world thinks. What matters is we're the greatest . . . blah blah blah. We're paying too much in taxes . . . blah blah blah. Obama is a socialist . . . blah blah blah. If you can't afford health care you probably wish you were dead anyway, blah blah blah."
But then there's the world outside; in its atmosphere, these fictions, they wither.
India wants to cling to its fictions, its narratives of growth and market domination, but it also wants to be a part of the world outside. This is a good thing, an opportunity to calibrate those narratives, to review and revise. Press freedom, for one thing, is clearly pretty healthy in India. That's going to help.
At home, from my perspective here, it feels too much like we're moving in the opposite direction, retreating from the world -- when we're not bombing it from unmanned drones. Like we're locking ourselves in our still-overstocked pantries and telling stories about the way it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
