Walker reflects the sad inability of WI's good people to move ahead and adapt to change. We have sentenced ourselves to become quaint and curious relics--sorta like Hillbillies. Even Thompson--not the sharpest tool in the shed--advocated back in 2000 for changing direction to move into more high tech, genetic, med-based research. He cited Milwaukee, Madison, and Marshfield as hubs of change.
Sadly the people here await the return of the buffalo--farming and manufacturing--like the Ghost Shirt Society. MN continues to beat us at every game. Our population ages more quickly (in the sense of constituting a higher proportion of the total), our children continue to flee the state, and our net growth lags to the point where will will continue to lose representatives at the federal level. Walker is giving people what they want. Stagnation and decay under the pretense of stability.
--LL
Thursday, July 18, 2013
Eugenics history snippets
With the recent revelation that prison doctors illegally sterilized female inmates in California, and the ongoing full-court press of anti-woman's health legislation in Ohio, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Texas it may be a "teachable moment" as they say to discuss how much fun elite children of darkness have had in the past with "selective breeding."
On the occasions I have had to lecture on the history of eugenics the first reaction of my audience has usually been shock that there ever was such a thing in the United States. But yes, this supposedly free country has seen its share of restrictions on freedom. In my high school we had to pee in a cup to participate in sports and there was a ban on hats and jackets, but what the heck right? Students can't vote. Once the shock wears off that yes, many states had the power to sterilize citizens deemed unfit to have children because of mental or physical defect, one can almost start to see their brains turning; "hmm, who would I prevent from having children?"
The truth is that eugenics, the pseudo-scientific program of weeding out "bad genes" or encouraging the proliferation of good ones, was all the rage in the US around the turn of the Twentieth Century. The idea that society should have some degree of control over reproduction and raising children is an old one. In the western world the ancient Greeks charged the polis or city with responsibility for raising children to be good Hellenes and the Spartans in particular had detailed instructions on not only who could have children but how mothers are to take care of themselves during pregnancy to ensure strong and healthy kids. Eugenics itself is based on the Greek word for "good in birth" however humanity had to wait until Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species to really get the modern movement rolling. Sociologist Herbert Spencer adapted Darwin's ideas to humans, within the species, not between species. This was a big reason "Social Darwinism" was garbage, junk science.
Contemporaneously with Spencer, Darwin's cousin Francis Galton was studying the bloodlines of "genius" especially among nobility and found a tendency among very intelligent families to refuse to reproduce at rates that would increase the genius of mankind. On the other hand, Galton hypothesized that the poor (and obviously less-intelligent) were having children at a rate which would crowd out the gifted. It was therefore a rare occurrence in human history that "progress" could be made, more smart people and fewer dummies but it could never last as the differential birthrates meant a regression toward the mean. See where this was going? Why should not society regulate reproduction to maximize intelligence and ability?
Progress was the watchword of the day. Progress for the race. And it should not be a surprise that in America it was "Progressives" that latched onto the idea of improving mankind, but as with all human endeavors, the dark side got into the act as well. While deciding who would be prohibited from having children and who would get public subsidies to grow their families is an inherently elitist and paternalist fancy, in America there was a racist component as well. This was not Galton's intention, ogre that he was, Galton wanted to reserve his program for Anglo-Saxons and so did many in America. But this was a time of "scientific racism" where the so-called races of mankind were ranked and the light-skinned peoples of Northern and Western Europe were "naturally" the world's masters, justifying imperialism and abhorring the melting pot of ethnicities.
One would think that the South would be the epicenter of eugenics in America, given its history, however you would be wrong. By and large Progressives in the South were thwarted in their attempts to segregate or sterilize the unfit. It was their history that prevented eugenic ideas from taking hold. Long established churches, tight-knit communities, and the tradition of individual freedom was a barren place for the eugenic seed. But what about race you say? Well, eugenics was always considered a means of improvement of the white race against all others. While some social workers and doctors were able to sneak through a few outliers, it was not what popular memory holds.
California, on the other hand, was a different story. In the Golden State there were no long-established traditions and other checks on the onrush of eugenics, therefore California was the place to be for every crackpot attempt at social engineering. World War II and the revelations of Nazi horrors dampened enthusiasm for eugenics but for many years, especially during the Great Depression, the poor, disabled, prisoners, and anyone deemed "unfit" had much to fear from the authorities. Therefore, given that eugenics became a tradition in California, it is unsurprising that it resurfaced in their prison system. Legal or not, the impulse among certain people to decide for others whether or not they can have children is going to persist.
On the occasions I have had to lecture on the history of eugenics the first reaction of my audience has usually been shock that there ever was such a thing in the United States. But yes, this supposedly free country has seen its share of restrictions on freedom. In my high school we had to pee in a cup to participate in sports and there was a ban on hats and jackets, but what the heck right? Students can't vote. Once the shock wears off that yes, many states had the power to sterilize citizens deemed unfit to have children because of mental or physical defect, one can almost start to see their brains turning; "hmm, who would I prevent from having children?"
The truth is that eugenics, the pseudo-scientific program of weeding out "bad genes" or encouraging the proliferation of good ones, was all the rage in the US around the turn of the Twentieth Century. The idea that society should have some degree of control over reproduction and raising children is an old one. In the western world the ancient Greeks charged the polis or city with responsibility for raising children to be good Hellenes and the Spartans in particular had detailed instructions on not only who could have children but how mothers are to take care of themselves during pregnancy to ensure strong and healthy kids. Eugenics itself is based on the Greek word for "good in birth" however humanity had to wait until Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species to really get the modern movement rolling. Sociologist Herbert Spencer adapted Darwin's ideas to humans, within the species, not between species. This was a big reason "Social Darwinism" was garbage, junk science.
Contemporaneously with Spencer, Darwin's cousin Francis Galton was studying the bloodlines of "genius" especially among nobility and found a tendency among very intelligent families to refuse to reproduce at rates that would increase the genius of mankind. On the other hand, Galton hypothesized that the poor (and obviously less-intelligent) were having children at a rate which would crowd out the gifted. It was therefore a rare occurrence in human history that "progress" could be made, more smart people and fewer dummies but it could never last as the differential birthrates meant a regression toward the mean. See where this was going? Why should not society regulate reproduction to maximize intelligence and ability?
Progress was the watchword of the day. Progress for the race. And it should not be a surprise that in America it was "Progressives" that latched onto the idea of improving mankind, but as with all human endeavors, the dark side got into the act as well. While deciding who would be prohibited from having children and who would get public subsidies to grow their families is an inherently elitist and paternalist fancy, in America there was a racist component as well. This was not Galton's intention, ogre that he was, Galton wanted to reserve his program for Anglo-Saxons and so did many in America. But this was a time of "scientific racism" where the so-called races of mankind were ranked and the light-skinned peoples of Northern and Western Europe were "naturally" the world's masters, justifying imperialism and abhorring the melting pot of ethnicities.
One would think that the South would be the epicenter of eugenics in America, given its history, however you would be wrong. By and large Progressives in the South were thwarted in their attempts to segregate or sterilize the unfit. It was their history that prevented eugenic ideas from taking hold. Long established churches, tight-knit communities, and the tradition of individual freedom was a barren place for the eugenic seed. But what about race you say? Well, eugenics was always considered a means of improvement of the white race against all others. While some social workers and doctors were able to sneak through a few outliers, it was not what popular memory holds.
California, on the other hand, was a different story. In the Golden State there were no long-established traditions and other checks on the onrush of eugenics, therefore California was the place to be for every crackpot attempt at social engineering. World War II and the revelations of Nazi horrors dampened enthusiasm for eugenics but for many years, especially during the Great Depression, the poor, disabled, prisoners, and anyone deemed "unfit" had much to fear from the authorities. Therefore, given that eugenics became a tradition in California, it is unsurprising that it resurfaced in their prison system. Legal or not, the impulse among certain people to decide for others whether or not they can have children is going to persist.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Huh?
What the hell does this even mean? I noticed a few years ago the move to "reverse racism" by white conservatives. Did they just drop the "reverse" part since Barack Obama's election?
Tuesday, July 16, 2013
Social Justice tolls for thee
The Reactionary Libertarian/ Tea faith as regards social justice is conceal, carry, and stand your ground. The Liberal faith in social justice means preventing stand your ground with education, housing, and employment.
At the heart of the matter, the right wing does not accept humanism in any of its forms--and by humanism I mean the movement that developed in renaissance Europe. I cannot imagine any of the right wing posters agreeing with John Donne's concern for people beyond his own kith and kin. Nor can I see the Tea/GOP and their ilk endorsing the lines, "Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee."
"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were. Any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. . . ."
from Meditation 17
--LL
1 Response from CB
I can imagine these mopes with a lifeboat from the Titanic machine gunning those in the water with the slogan: "You should have saved your money and traveled first class. Tough cookies!"
At the heart of the matter, the right wing does not accept humanism in any of its forms--and by humanism I mean the movement that developed in renaissance Europe. I cannot imagine any of the right wing posters agreeing with John Donne's concern for people beyond his own kith and kin. Nor can I see the Tea/GOP and their ilk endorsing the lines, "Ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee."
"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were. Any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. . . ."
from Meditation 17
--LL
1 Response from CB
I can imagine these mopes with a lifeboat from the Titanic machine gunning those in the water with the slogan: "You should have saved your money and traveled first class. Tough cookies!"
Monday, July 15, 2013
Let the hate flow through you
Is it even a surprise? An extremely divisive case begets an extremely divisive reaction to the verdict. A case that provides an horrific instance that not only is extreme polarization causing the United States to be ungovernable, but lawless as well. When anyone can pick up a gun, shoot anyone who "threatens" them, real or imagined, and get away with it; that is the state of nature imagined by Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan. A war of all against all.The FB post where I took this meme from was decidedly anti-Martin, but this one is decidedly double-edged. Take this comment by "B. Oblamer" on a Politico story:
The jury did a fine responsible job and found for the defense based on the overwhelming evidence. A very fair trial.And this was a very, very tame one.
Later, a decidedly liberal philosophy professor I know posted the exact meme, somehow I do not think he would suffer the fools, now "instant lawyers" and experts on legal defense all over the interwebs, very gladly. Lawyers deal with the law, however poorly the laws are constructed or for whose benefit they are enforced. Even the above comment from "Oblamer" who probably put as much intellectual punch into that derp which his hamster brain could muster, manipulates anyone who reads it. "Responsible... fair... overwhelming evidence," this has got to be the racists' finest hour. Not only did they vicariously murder a proxy Barack Obama, but they got away with it. Cue the victory lap of gloating.
Just survey the comment section of any news story on the subject, this one from Daily Banter is representative. His/her name is Michale, this individual has deemed it their mission to respond to absolutely every comment even slightly critical of the jury's decision. If there is a single person fitting the "instant lawyer" description implied by the above meme, this is it. All I can say is in a million years I could not hope to have the kind of free time to waste that this individual has spent in the past few days locking down any chance of honest and rational debate. What kind of passionate hatred could drive this commitment? How much is he/she being paid by some authoritarian outfit to spend this much time here? Just a small sample.
cfdman said:
17. But for the man chasing and pursuing the teen, there would haveMichale replied: "Your list of "undisputed evidence" is very much in dispute..
been no physical confrontation.
18. But for the physical confrontation, there would have been no fight.
19. But for the fight, the man would not have shot the teen.
20. But for the shot, the teen would be alive.
3. The man was told by the police not to chase and pursue the teen.
The man was ADVISED by a police operator not to follow the SUBJECT. A police operator has absolutely NO authority to tell on sight security personnel ANYTHING..
4. The man decided to chase and pursue the teen anyway.
Inaccurate. The man, at that point, turned around and started to return to his vehicle. In other words, he followed the advice of the police operator, even though he was under absolutely NO legal obligation to do so.
11. The man and the teen met in a physical confrontation.
Inaccurate. The teen initiated aggravated assault (with Hate Crime special circumstance) against the man while the man was returning to his vehicle.
12. The man and the teen fought, wrestled to the ground, and punches
were exchanged.
Inaccurate. No punches were exchanged. Martin was the only one throwing punches.
14. The man shot the teen while both were on the ground.
Inaccurate. The man shot the teen while the man was on the ground and the teen was on top of the man.
17. But for the man chasing and pursuing the teen, there would have
been no physical confrontation.
Accurate as far as it goes. It is equally accurate to say that there would have been no confrontation if the teen hadn't doubled back and attacked the man. It's also equally accurate that there would not have been any confrontation if the teen hadn't been kicked out of school for drugs and violence.
20. But for the shot, the teen would be alive.
And if the teen hadn't attacked the man, the teen would ALSO be alive.."
He/she continued:
"One problem with your scenario.
Martin attacked Zimmerman.
That tiny little, but oohh so important detail completely decimates your argument.."
The comment thread goes on and on with this individual injecting these kinds of faux legal sounding shout-downs everywhere. I scanned through page after page of this crap. How many of these idiots are out there? They have just been waiting and waiting for the chance to frame their racism through a legal case like this. "No, I'm not a racist, I am supporting the 'justice' system." For authoritarians, this is a dream come true, wonderful cover to aggress against the enemy, the ability to openly and honestly express their prejudice couched in legalese, and prostrate themselves to authority when they like the result. So, in response I say: "Are there any circumstances under which you can support the verdict, actively, not just passively accepting the outcome, and not be a racist?" I ask because I honestly cannot think of any. and flipping the circumstances of the crime around... Would he/she be asserting the opposite as vehemently, or would he/she suddenly notice that GZ is not white enough?
And how stupid does all that gloating look in light of the fact that GZ was acquitted, not exonerated. There was enough reasonable doubt not to convict, this was not a vindication. Thank goodness for all the racists that tomorrow will bring a new outrage and everyone will move on (sarcasm font) and not notice how completely full of shit people like Michale are in their whacked out assertions.
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Anarchy, Florida, and the monopoly of violence
I say it too often, "the blade itself incites to violence."
In ancient Rome, the authority to wield deadly force was called Imperium. It was a legal concept that restrained the ability of military commanders to order troops to use violence. Imperium was confined to a specific geographical area and during a specific temporal period. Legates in charge of the legions were not legally authorized by the Senate and People of Rome to command armed men outside of these parameters. The Romans also divided the power of Imperium between several commanders and did not allow them to overlap.
What is the point of that little tale of ancient history? First, authority to wield deadly force was delegated from the lawful authority of the state. Second, the state could revoke this power at any time but it was known when and where violence could be exercised. Third, no one man could command absolute power over violence in the state. The state itself held the monopoly on the power to do violence. The United States, a republic, based its system of government on that of the Romans. The Founders were specifically concerned about Imperium, wielding deadly force, because of course technology makes violence easier for individuals to use. That is why the commander-in-chief of the US Armed Forces is a civilian.
With the Zimmerman verdict, that is all out the window. Imperium can now be exercised by anyone. No lawful authority delegated to George Zimmerman the power to be judge, jury, and executioner. He took it, and used it, and now got away with it. The state tried to recover its monopoly on violence by trying Zimmerman for murder... and failed. The precedent is now set. Militias or lone vigilantes can now use the case to kill and not be held accountable because the Imperium is now scattered across the land for anyone to pick up like the ashes of our founding principles.
Lincoln Log posted this to his Facebook earlier.
The operational definition of anarchy is loss of the monopoly of force by the state, represented by all the American people. Special interests lobbied for and got these "stand-your-ground" laws passed for various reasons but by diluting the public's capacity for justice; all of them are unjust.
In ancient Rome, the authority to wield deadly force was called Imperium. It was a legal concept that restrained the ability of military commanders to order troops to use violence. Imperium was confined to a specific geographical area and during a specific temporal period. Legates in charge of the legions were not legally authorized by the Senate and People of Rome to command armed men outside of these parameters. The Romans also divided the power of Imperium between several commanders and did not allow them to overlap.
What is the point of that little tale of ancient history? First, authority to wield deadly force was delegated from the lawful authority of the state. Second, the state could revoke this power at any time but it was known when and where violence could be exercised. Third, no one man could command absolute power over violence in the state. The state itself held the monopoly on the power to do violence. The United States, a republic, based its system of government on that of the Romans. The Founders were specifically concerned about Imperium, wielding deadly force, because of course technology makes violence easier for individuals to use. That is why the commander-in-chief of the US Armed Forces is a civilian.
With the Zimmerman verdict, that is all out the window. Imperium can now be exercised by anyone. No lawful authority delegated to George Zimmerman the power to be judge, jury, and executioner. He took it, and used it, and now got away with it. The state tried to recover its monopoly on violence by trying Zimmerman for murder... and failed. The precedent is now set. Militias or lone vigilantes can now use the case to kill and not be held accountable because the Imperium is now scattered across the land for anyone to pick up like the ashes of our founding principles.
Lincoln Log posted this to his Facebook earlier.
1. How did he [Zimmerman] define the possible danger with Martin--and what bothers me, how is this tied to the idea of "trespass" vis-a-vis the rather loose construct of "neighborhood? And how does one trespass in public space?If one can now trespass in public space, then the local appropriation of Imperium by any scared, prejudiced person will make movement very problematic. What happens when I venture across a sidewalk patrolled by someone who does not like Cephalopods?
2. What function did Zimmerman think he served--and what were the limits to his "territory? " Or was he a no-bounds auxiliary/ vigilante? There are serious implications that stem from definitions of public space, trespass, and "perceived danger." All of them very disturbing.
The operational definition of anarchy is loss of the monopoly of force by the state, represented by all the American people. Special interests lobbied for and got these "stand-your-ground" laws passed for various reasons but by diluting the public's capacity for justice; all of them are unjust.
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Government dependency
Dear Congresscritters,
You're doing it wrong.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-03/lawmakers-benefit-from-farm-subsidies-congress-seeks-to-overhaul.html
Bullies and the death of shame
Yes, this is an actual tweet from an actual fascist. Stay classy asshole.
By Liberals I'm sure he meant women, and yes he is telling them to stock up on wire coat hangers in the wake of the fascist crackdown on freedom in TX and elsewhere.
If there is a hell...
Friday, July 12, 2013
Tension on the coil
Have we now become South Africa?
The Zimmerman trial is almost over and our rightist Afrikaners are chomping at the bit for race riots. (See here, here, and here) John Amato may phrase the issue as a question: Why Are Conservatives Hoping For Racial Violence If Zimmerman is Acquitted? And Lauren Williams presented it as fear instead of hope: Zimmerman Verdict: Why Is the Right Worried About Race Riots?
While I am not an expert on South Africa, I have been reading as much as I can on the history of that republic. And the hypothesis I have found so far seems to be that race relations in the Cape are what America's would be without at least some acceptance by the majority of principles of equality, individual rights, and fairness. Good Americans feel guilty over injustice, it is our tradition that justice should be served. Prejudice should be suppressed and however imperfect, the justice system has safeguards that a real police state would laugh at. South Africa has always been minority white, but unity has rarely been the case among whites. And anyone that could cheer on Zimmerman's acquittal renders himself an American Boer, outside the civilized society.
When prejudiced people are making the laws and the prejudice is apparent in legislation, things get sticky to say the least. "Stand your ground" was just a disaster waiting to happen. Along with the other crazy gun laws that dilute the state's monopoly on violence, Florida's special dispensation to the NRA and racists represented a return to the good ole' days (sarcasm font) of the state looking the other way while lynch mobs roamed the land. The difference between the two racist states of South Africa and the Confederacy lies in the motivation of violence. Afrikaners could never fully relax and not fear a final racial showdown. All of the charged rhetoric and race-baiting from right-wing media seems to be laying the groundwork for that final showdown in America.
I make no prediction about the verdict and highly doubt there will be rioting or any violence from the African-American community. There will be protests for sure if Zimmerman walks, and rightfully so. There will be petitions to change the law that triggered the fat bastard's thrill-kill crusade. And barring that, there will be increased motivation for everyone to get out the vote next year. The media will continue to be awful, especially the right-wing noise machine which has peddled the fear story for all it is worth. And that seems to be the point, up or down, look at what they have gotten away with!
Worst case scenario for democracy and the continuance of the republic: Zimmerman not guilty, riots do break out, and instead of the police or national guard restoring order vigilante gangs respond. In that case, the streets will run red. Such is the case when the monopoly on violence is lost.
The Zimmerman trial is almost over and our rightist Afrikaners are chomping at the bit for race riots. (See here, here, and here) John Amato may phrase the issue as a question: Why Are Conservatives Hoping For Racial Violence If Zimmerman is Acquitted? And Lauren Williams presented it as fear instead of hope: Zimmerman Verdict: Why Is the Right Worried About Race Riots?
While I am not an expert on South Africa, I have been reading as much as I can on the history of that republic. And the hypothesis I have found so far seems to be that race relations in the Cape are what America's would be without at least some acceptance by the majority of principles of equality, individual rights, and fairness. Good Americans feel guilty over injustice, it is our tradition that justice should be served. Prejudice should be suppressed and however imperfect, the justice system has safeguards that a real police state would laugh at. South Africa has always been minority white, but unity has rarely been the case among whites. And anyone that could cheer on Zimmerman's acquittal renders himself an American Boer, outside the civilized society.
When prejudiced people are making the laws and the prejudice is apparent in legislation, things get sticky to say the least. "Stand your ground" was just a disaster waiting to happen. Along with the other crazy gun laws that dilute the state's monopoly on violence, Florida's special dispensation to the NRA and racists represented a return to the good ole' days (sarcasm font) of the state looking the other way while lynch mobs roamed the land. The difference between the two racist states of South Africa and the Confederacy lies in the motivation of violence. Afrikaners could never fully relax and not fear a final racial showdown. All of the charged rhetoric and race-baiting from right-wing media seems to be laying the groundwork for that final showdown in America.
I make no prediction about the verdict and highly doubt there will be rioting or any violence from the African-American community. There will be protests for sure if Zimmerman walks, and rightfully so. There will be petitions to change the law that triggered the fat bastard's thrill-kill crusade. And barring that, there will be increased motivation for everyone to get out the vote next year. The media will continue to be awful, especially the right-wing noise machine which has peddled the fear story for all it is worth. And that seems to be the point, up or down, look at what they have gotten away with!
Worst case scenario for democracy and the continuance of the republic: Zimmerman not guilty, riots do break out, and instead of the police or national guard restoring order vigilante gangs respond. In that case, the streets will run red. Such is the case when the monopoly on violence is lost.
Wednesday, July 10, 2013
Dry economics report
From Media Matters for America:
Broadcast and cable evening news coverage touched upon a variety of economic topics, including deficit reduction, economic growth, and entitlement reform throughout the second quarter of 2013. A Media Matters analysis shows that many segments lacked proper context or input from economists, while some topics went largely underreported.
Perhaps the economic reporting on news is not as sexy as what celebrities are up to, or the latest republican shenanigans in their war on women and minorities, and democracy, and the constitution, public safety, etc. But state of the economy news is vitally important in our society. For one thing, a job is about the only way for the vast majority of us to survive, period. There is little chance of many Americans even starting their own business today, let alone prosper by it. So when jobs are scarce, prices are rising, and we regular folks cannot get what we need through our labor, what exactly are we to do?
The options are remarkably few. First, when the information we get from the widely available sources looks like the above graph it is understandable that so many Americans are in the dark about what is actually going on outside of their small circles of understanding. The economy is an incredibly complex machine and in our jobs we only see a small part of it. No matter how clever you are, no matter how observant, for economics you need facts. And facts come from effective and accurate reporting. Only after facts are known, the statistics and other hard numbers of what is supplied, what is demanded, the level of equality in the exchange, debt, wealth, and so on can analysis be made. And that analysis should be made by competent economists, 14 of 423 just won't cut it. Economics is often called "the dismal science" because it is often even more chaotic than weather forecasting. There are many economists who would do well to try out the life of a simple worker to see the human side of their models and graphs, at the same time regular people should take an interest in learning economics for the inverse reason.
I have two pet peeves, the first is people walking on line in crowded stores or narrow sidewalks, it is just rude. The other is people with not the first clue how economics works yammering on with forceful assertion that they have got it all figured out. Taxes! Overregulation! Unions! Lazy people on welfare! Government! Social media is full of wannabe Adam Smiths, whose sheer force of assertion combines (or stems from) the sorry state of economic reporting and news in America to the point where people have forgotten fundamental truths, if they ever knew them in the first place. The knowledge is not hidden, simply shrouded in mystification and buried by propaganda.
I for one am really tired of being kicked around by the economy over and over, then being lied to about what the hell is causing it by corporate media. Aren't you?
Appealing to the feminine voters
Perhaps the right wing is correct. Unless enough people get up off their fat asses and vote, then it stands to reason that folks are satisfied with the way things are. Unless they elect representative who do what is really important for them and hold them accountable, then they must love the way the system works.
So, women, you are 52% of the population. You don't like men's vaginal politics? Kick 'em out. Poorly paid workers? Get organized and fight and vote. Otherwise, too damned bad. Every moment of acquiescence proves Karl Rove the Koch Brothers right. Public employees? Work down to your wages.
--Lincoln Log
So, women, you are 52% of the population. You don't like men's vaginal politics? Kick 'em out. Poorly paid workers? Get organized and fight and vote. Otherwise, too damned bad. Every moment of acquiescence proves Karl Rove the Koch Brothers right. Public employees? Work down to your wages.
--Lincoln Log
Failure by all standards of measure or decency
The recent rush to push through anti-choice legislation is only one more example of how the Tea Party and radical GOP supporters aim to use the law to enforce their own religious values.
The most offensive of these recent laws involves the ultrasound probe of women who seek to terminate a pregnancy. Given that these women have already consulted with a physician, this law is not founded on good medicine. It is, in fact, a waste of time and money. It provides no new information of any medical value. The enforced invasion mandated by this act serves little more than a show of power.
The Tea Party/GOP attack on the freedom of choice for women stems from a religious view alone; this is not science. This is not medicine. This is a senseless assault on women. If such beliefs are practiced in private, that is their right. However, imposing these religious values and beliefs with the power of the state smacks of an inquisition. The fact that the bill’s authors, sponsors, and advocates are overwhelmingly male, suggests a deeper problem with the legislators who support it.
It is likely that this bill also takes attention away from Walker’s failed economic policies. It is an old trick. Divert attention away from serious failures and give people something else to occupy their minds. Walker needs to distract the voters from his gross incompetence. He and his supporters can only show the continued failure in job creation along with an assault on education, jobs, and creating an environment for economic innovation.
Make no mistake. Walker is using WI to seek a national stage and he doesn’t care who he uses: the poor, children, and women. He is happy to turn the religious beliefs of his followers into state law at the expense of human rights and dignity.
--Lincoln Log
The most offensive of these recent laws involves the ultrasound probe of women who seek to terminate a pregnancy. Given that these women have already consulted with a physician, this law is not founded on good medicine. It is, in fact, a waste of time and money. It provides no new information of any medical value. The enforced invasion mandated by this act serves little more than a show of power.
The Tea Party/GOP attack on the freedom of choice for women stems from a religious view alone; this is not science. This is not medicine. This is a senseless assault on women. If such beliefs are practiced in private, that is their right. However, imposing these religious values and beliefs with the power of the state smacks of an inquisition. The fact that the bill’s authors, sponsors, and advocates are overwhelmingly male, suggests a deeper problem with the legislators who support it.
It is likely that this bill also takes attention away from Walker’s failed economic policies. It is an old trick. Divert attention away from serious failures and give people something else to occupy their minds. Walker needs to distract the voters from his gross incompetence. He and his supporters can only show the continued failure in job creation along with an assault on education, jobs, and creating an environment for economic innovation.
Make no mistake. Walker is using WI to seek a national stage and he doesn’t care who he uses: the poor, children, and women. He is happy to turn the religious beliefs of his followers into state law at the expense of human rights and dignity.
--Lincoln Log
Tuesday, July 9, 2013
Podcasts
Another case of the Kraken being behind the times.
Something valuable came to my attention recently almost by accident that I thought I would pass on to anyone who might find utility in it. I think I was vaguely aware of podcasts before but it took a jolt to actually look into it.
I was a fan of Bob Cesca's work on Huffpo and started following him on a new site called The Daily Banter. Then found out he did a podcast with Chez Pazienza and stumbled onto it through Google. All of a sudden a new world opened on the ITunes store, there are podcasts for just about every subject and most of them are free to subscribe to. So, The Bubble Genius Bob and Chez Show features the two hosts bantering (pun intended) back and forth about the news of the day. No guests, no phone-ins but I guess the thing that caught my attention is their left-realist perspective reminiscent of Arthur Schlesinger Jr. and Reinhold Niebuhr. It is a strand sorely lacking in American media today, tough and pragmatic, and unwilling to play the weasel-word "both sides" meme of corporate media. Niebuhr himself would have found the irony in a committed atheist in 2013 regularly quoting him, as Chez does, especially since he Chez expressed no knowledge of Niebuhr's work when I contacted him about it. Bob is as idealistic and pure as Schlesinger ever was, but neither man was ever naïve about the real world. Cesca also has a keen interest in history, particularly the American Civil War, further strengthening the comparison with Arthur Schlesinger. Someday I will dedicate more analysis to this inquiry.
Other podcasts I have found to keep me occupied during all the time I spend in the car include: The Talking Dead, two incredibly polite and nice Canadian fellows who spend their time talking about death and apocalypse on AMC's The Walking Dead; Full of Sith, Star Wars and comics; Rachel Maddow's audio highlights from her MSNBC show since I no longer have cable; and the intriguing My History can beat up your politics, more or less a lecture formatted 'cast comparing contemporary events to historical ones. Then I just discovered The Alton Browncast, anyone who ever watched AB's show Good Eats or his other appearances on Food Network knows that he is very well-spoken and knowledgeable. I learned how to cook from him and a heck of a lot about cultures and food history over the years. Mr. Brown is from Atlanta and trained himself to speak without a Southern Accent for television, he records the 'cast from his garage which is very punk rock. The first episode he was speaking really fast at times, which is easy to do in this format but slowed down in the second so there is definitely a lot of promise here.
So if you spend too much of your time in a car or doing work that requires your hands and eyes but not necessarily your ears, podcasts might be a good (and often free) investment. This does not mean I have lessened my support of audiobooks but let's be honest, not everyone can stay focused during a long time recitation of a book. 'Casts are usually 45 minutes to an hour, so about the same as a music album.
Something valuable came to my attention recently almost by accident that I thought I would pass on to anyone who might find utility in it. I think I was vaguely aware of podcasts before but it took a jolt to actually look into it.
I was a fan of Bob Cesca's work on Huffpo and started following him on a new site called The Daily Banter. Then found out he did a podcast with Chez Pazienza and stumbled onto it through Google. All of a sudden a new world opened on the ITunes store, there are podcasts for just about every subject and most of them are free to subscribe to. So, The Bubble Genius Bob and Chez Show features the two hosts bantering (pun intended) back and forth about the news of the day. No guests, no phone-ins but I guess the thing that caught my attention is their left-realist perspective reminiscent of Arthur Schlesinger Jr. and Reinhold Niebuhr. It is a strand sorely lacking in American media today, tough and pragmatic, and unwilling to play the weasel-word "both sides" meme of corporate media. Niebuhr himself would have found the irony in a committed atheist in 2013 regularly quoting him, as Chez does, especially since he Chez expressed no knowledge of Niebuhr's work when I contacted him about it. Bob is as idealistic and pure as Schlesinger ever was, but neither man was ever naïve about the real world. Cesca also has a keen interest in history, particularly the American Civil War, further strengthening the comparison with Arthur Schlesinger. Someday I will dedicate more analysis to this inquiry.
Other podcasts I have found to keep me occupied during all the time I spend in the car include: The Talking Dead, two incredibly polite and nice Canadian fellows who spend their time talking about death and apocalypse on AMC's The Walking Dead; Full of Sith, Star Wars and comics; Rachel Maddow's audio highlights from her MSNBC show since I no longer have cable; and the intriguing My History can beat up your politics, more or less a lecture formatted 'cast comparing contemporary events to historical ones. Then I just discovered The Alton Browncast, anyone who ever watched AB's show Good Eats or his other appearances on Food Network knows that he is very well-spoken and knowledgeable. I learned how to cook from him and a heck of a lot about cultures and food history over the years. Mr. Brown is from Atlanta and trained himself to speak without a Southern Accent for television, he records the 'cast from his garage which is very punk rock. The first episode he was speaking really fast at times, which is easy to do in this format but slowed down in the second so there is definitely a lot of promise here.
So if you spend too much of your time in a car or doing work that requires your hands and eyes but not necessarily your ears, podcasts might be a good (and often free) investment. This does not mean I have lessened my support of audiobooks but let's be honest, not everyone can stay focused during a long time recitation of a book. 'Casts are usually 45 minutes to an hour, so about the same as a music album.
Monday, July 8, 2013
On "Being Cool"
Let not the last post fool you. I hold a considerable amount of contempt for most of humanity, especially those residing in the United States. I don't even hold particular animus for teenagers, after all older generations made the world they grew up in and they have to live in it. Then there are the baby boomers, so many trees have given their lives in the service of plumbing the secrets of this singularly obnoxious group of entitled, spoiled, greedy, rotten, depraved, drug-addicted assholes that there is no way the youth of today could compare as a waste of material.
By contrast Jessica Wright wrote a great analysis of her own millennial generation, stating:
So is it even the generational status that makes one "cool?" Probably not. I just walked outside for a minute and heard a loudmouthed old guy screaming and swearing about... nothing. From a block away. Grumpy, loud, and obnoxious; definitely not cool.
That brings me to the young man I wrote about in my last post. It was not my intention to offend the band Decrepit Birth, or Jungle Rot, or any other group that unfortunately got into the metal game after more than half a century of band names. I used to always think Pink Floyd was a great name because it meant that some normal name was still available for another group. But this guy is all "death metal" clearly to compensate for being small. And the first time I met him he spent at least an hour going through The Misfits' boxed set and railing about how lame they were. This is where being judgmental and ignorant crash into a wall.
I get it, each high school class or generation or whatever has to prove it is harder than the last. Since most are puny runts as freshmen they have to jump on something else to make them feel "cool." But this definition of cool is not what I had in mind. This is the juvenile cool that leads practitioners to mindlessly put down others' tastes. "THEY SUCK!" "THAT'S GAY!" Perhaps the latter not so much anymore, I hope anyway.
To the point as simply as possible. No Misfits, no Decrepit Birth. Each new thing has to have built on something. For my Dad it was Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention, for me it was Slayer. The Misfits practically invented the whole death metal horror speed thing. Sure you can give British bands like Venom or Motorhead a lot of credit too.But Glenn Danzig, Jerry Only, and the other misfits injected the kitschy violence and death imagery of B-horror films that has become the standard of the genre.
Ignorance is one thing, informed judgment is important but being a judgmental prick when you do not have a clue is just screaming and swearing from across the block like some grizzled old man.
By contrast Jessica Wright wrote a great analysis of her own millennial generation, stating:
To be a millennial is to hear constantly about how awful your generation is.Depending on where you cut off the arbitrary generational lines I'd have to agree with Wright, they are nice. William Strauss and Neil Howe put the dates at 1982 and 2004, which I guess makes 1965 to 1981 Generation X. Yeah, how unhelpfully nonspecific. Not to mention that the very size and diversity of the US makes even the broadest generalizations problematic.
And to agree, kind of politely.
So is it even the generational status that makes one "cool?" Probably not. I just walked outside for a minute and heard a loudmouthed old guy screaming and swearing about... nothing. From a block away. Grumpy, loud, and obnoxious; definitely not cool.
That brings me to the young man I wrote about in my last post. It was not my intention to offend the band Decrepit Birth, or Jungle Rot, or any other group that unfortunately got into the metal game after more than half a century of band names. I used to always think Pink Floyd was a great name because it meant that some normal name was still available for another group. But this guy is all "death metal" clearly to compensate for being small. And the first time I met him he spent at least an hour going through The Misfits' boxed set and railing about how lame they were. This is where being judgmental and ignorant crash into a wall.
I get it, each high school class or generation or whatever has to prove it is harder than the last. Since most are puny runts as freshmen they have to jump on something else to make them feel "cool." But this definition of cool is not what I had in mind. This is the juvenile cool that leads practitioners to mindlessly put down others' tastes. "THEY SUCK!" "THAT'S GAY!" Perhaps the latter not so much anymore, I hope anyway.
To the point as simply as possible. No Misfits, no Decrepit Birth. Each new thing has to have built on something. For my Dad it was Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention, for me it was Slayer. The Misfits practically invented the whole death metal horror speed thing. Sure you can give British bands like Venom or Motorhead a lot of credit too.But Glenn Danzig, Jerry Only, and the other misfits injected the kitschy violence and death imagery of B-horror films that has become the standard of the genre.
Ignorance is one thing, informed judgment is important but being a judgmental prick when you do not have a clue is just screaming and swearing from across the block like some grizzled old man.
Preferring not to be a decrepit birth
I don't normally worry about matters of preference: coke vs. pepsi, ford vs. chevy, etc. but sometimes opinions are so jarring they must be addressed. Music is one of those preferences where no good can possibly come from arguing about it. Of course, people still endlessly debate the merits of bands or singers, "corporate" rock/pop, indies and the underground, or how hard one group is compared to another. Jello Biafra once said the reason the radical movements he was involved in never got anywhere was they were too busy arguing whether neurosis was more punk than screeching weasel. Or when he got jumped by some thugs and was injured he found a whole online discussion going back and forth whether or not he deserved it because he was some rich rock star.
In other words; petty, superficial, and completely meaningless. How is somehow "proving" that today's death metal is superior to twenty years ago going to accomplish anything? This is the kind of thing you hear from that most despised demographic in any society; teenage males. Leo Cawley, a professor of political economy and former marine squad leader in Vietnam, once said that Reagan, Gorbachev, and the Ayatollah could all agree that teenage boys are "undesirable." Hence why America starts a war every twenty years or so to kill off a bunch of them and throws many more in prison when at "peace." Any kind of in-depth discussion of generational strife would be silly, every generation has its alienated outliers. From beatniks to hippies to punks to the hipster, teenagers find a way to freak out their elders and bring condemnation to an entire generation by the assholes who hire and exploit the young.
What the hell happened to me? I used to believe I was the last person over thirty that could remember what it was like to be a teenager. That I could remember and identify with just how incredibly shitty it is to be between childhood and adulthood, responsibility but no rights, hormones messing with every aspect of physical and mental life, and trying to figure out what the point of life is. Maybe having a daughter and realizing that someday greasy boys will be fawning over her with the same ravenous hunger I once felt but could never act on. Yes, the military and prison are good places to store these rejects until they grow up a bit. Otherwise they are just going to think Decrepit Birth is a good name for a heavy metal band...
Those were the words emblazoned on the T-Shirt of the teenager seated across from me Saturday Night. I thought "Dear Christ, they really can just slap any two remotely tough sounding words together in drippy writing and call it a band name." I have no idea if they are any good or not, it is beside the point, I am not here to critique music. But I will say that the last time I saw Slayer play live, the opening acts were called American Head Charge and something Chimera. They were so incredibly awful I forgot why I was there in the first place. These decrepit babies are touring Europe right now with another facepalm named band, Jungle Rot. The fact that I went to high school with one of the jungle rottens changes not the fact that while that condition is horrifically metal it just sounds silly to say. Even worse is the silliness is not mitigated by drippy writing.
Twenty-five years ago Jello Biafra released his first spoken word album, No More Cocoons
. One of the tracks on that album was about band names, I highly recommend checking it out because it is both entertaining and poignant. Where the hell was I going with this post?
ROCK ON ALL YOU GOAT-SMELLING TEENAGERS!
SERIOUSLY, BLACK T SHIRTS WITH HORRIFIC IMAGERY GOT ME ALL KINDS OF CHICKS.
In other words; petty, superficial, and completely meaningless. How is somehow "proving" that today's death metal is superior to twenty years ago going to accomplish anything? This is the kind of thing you hear from that most despised demographic in any society; teenage males. Leo Cawley, a professor of political economy and former marine squad leader in Vietnam, once said that Reagan, Gorbachev, and the Ayatollah could all agree that teenage boys are "undesirable." Hence why America starts a war every twenty years or so to kill off a bunch of them and throws many more in prison when at "peace." Any kind of in-depth discussion of generational strife would be silly, every generation has its alienated outliers. From beatniks to hippies to punks to the hipster, teenagers find a way to freak out their elders and bring condemnation to an entire generation by the assholes who hire and exploit the young.
What the hell happened to me? I used to believe I was the last person over thirty that could remember what it was like to be a teenager. That I could remember and identify with just how incredibly shitty it is to be between childhood and adulthood, responsibility but no rights, hormones messing with every aspect of physical and mental life, and trying to figure out what the point of life is. Maybe having a daughter and realizing that someday greasy boys will be fawning over her with the same ravenous hunger I once felt but could never act on. Yes, the military and prison are good places to store these rejects until they grow up a bit. Otherwise they are just going to think Decrepit Birth is a good name for a heavy metal band...
Those were the words emblazoned on the T-Shirt of the teenager seated across from me Saturday Night. I thought "Dear Christ, they really can just slap any two remotely tough sounding words together in drippy writing and call it a band name." I have no idea if they are any good or not, it is beside the point, I am not here to critique music. But I will say that the last time I saw Slayer play live, the opening acts were called American Head Charge and something Chimera. They were so incredibly awful I forgot why I was there in the first place. These decrepit babies are touring Europe right now with another facepalm named band, Jungle Rot. The fact that I went to high school with one of the jungle rottens changes not the fact that while that condition is horrifically metal it just sounds silly to say. Even worse is the silliness is not mitigated by drippy writing.
 |
| But this is so stupid I pray for nuclear holocaust. |
Twenty-five years ago Jello Biafra released his first spoken word album, No More Cocoons
. One of the tracks on that album was about band names, I highly recommend checking it out because it is both entertaining and poignant. Where the hell was I going with this post?ROCK ON ALL YOU GOAT-SMELLING TEENAGERS!
SERIOUSLY, BLACK T SHIRTS WITH HORRIFIC IMAGERY GOT ME ALL KINDS OF CHICKS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)