At some point I started going back to look at some old posts and adding the label "embarrassing archives." In the spirit of self-examination and personal growth and admitting my mistakes, I'll highlight this recent addition to my embarrassing archives. This is probably one of the most embarrassing moments of my brief fling with mainstream political liberalism. That was posted in April of 2007, but by a year later I had figured things out a bit better.
Now I'll say this. As far as paid killers go, it might be that Tillman was better than most. He seemed to value knowledge and was even willing to skeptically examine the righteousness of the cause he had given up quite a lot to fight for. That does take courage. (Hell, if he had lived he might have even come to realize that both wars were "fucking illegal" and be an active protester.) And the way his death was lied about is of course disgraceful.
But men who go fight wars of aggression aren't heroes, even if their personal character away from the battlefield is admirable, and even if they do things on a battlefield that require a certain kind of bravery, and even if they fight and die for something they believe in very strongly. Tillman could have done a lot of great things with his life (and I'm not talking about football) but he threw his life away by choosing to go fight an unjust war. I feel very sorry for him and his family on a personal human level, but I'm no longer willing to glorify his life or death. He wasn't a hero; he was a sucker.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
spending someone else's money
I haven't looked at the numbers recently as to exactly how much the Iraq invasion and occupation has cost, but I'd guess offhand that $10,000 per US taxpayer is the right ballpark. Maybe double that. Now, if the idiot Emperor had gone before the nation and announced that we were going to war and that it was going to cost each of you 5 figures, there's no fucking way he could have pulled it off. Everyone would have gone ape shit, no matter how much we all just wanted to kill some brown people.
Of course he didn't do that because he doesn't have to. They never have to. They can just go to war whenever the fuck they want, and we have to pay for it no matter what we think of it. This is morally wrong. I can think of no possible justification for the government forcibly taking taxes out of every paycheck before I even get it, and using that money to pay for a war that I don't approve of. And it is a betrayal of every tax payer that these fucking clowns can just spend as much as they want and borrow the difference if tax revenues don't cover it. That borrowing is offensive enough when we aren't using it to slaughter families while they sleep and anally rape shackled prisoners who've been locked up without charges for 5 years. But that's exactly what we are using our credit to pay for. The depths of depravity of our government are beyond words.
The only way to opt out of the whole sickening mess without risking imprisonment is to leave the country. I was able to do that, but that's a really fucking hard option to choose, no matter how pissed off you are. And it fucking sucks that it had to come to that.
Of course up here the same logic applies. There is just a significant difference in the amount of damage being done with the income the government steals.
Of course he didn't do that because he doesn't have to. They never have to. They can just go to war whenever the fuck they want, and we have to pay for it no matter what we think of it. This is morally wrong. I can think of no possible justification for the government forcibly taking taxes out of every paycheck before I even get it, and using that money to pay for a war that I don't approve of. And it is a betrayal of every tax payer that these fucking clowns can just spend as much as they want and borrow the difference if tax revenues don't cover it. That borrowing is offensive enough when we aren't using it to slaughter families while they sleep and anally rape shackled prisoners who've been locked up without charges for 5 years. But that's exactly what we are using our credit to pay for. The depths of depravity of our government are beyond words.
The only way to opt out of the whole sickening mess without risking imprisonment is to leave the country. I was able to do that, but that's a really fucking hard option to choose, no matter how pissed off you are. And it fucking sucks that it had to come to that.
Of course up here the same logic applies. There is just a significant difference in the amount of damage being done with the income the government steals.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Why I won't vote: mob lawyers and mob thugs
Here's an analogy I'm working on. Let's consider it a part of my "why I won't vote" series.
Democrats are dirty mob lawyers; Republicans are the mob enforcers. In the power struggle to be the next don, people get to choose between the no-neck tough guy (McCain) or the smooth-talking debonair schmoozer (Obama).
Think about what the mafia is. They operate in a geographical area, using a combination of violence, fear, and pay-offs to get whatever they want for the people who control the organization. It is a corrupt power structure run by amoral men to advance their own interests at the expense of everyone else. That is what government is too. Same thing.
People who live in a community where organized crime operates have to pay their taxes, and then they mostly can stay out of trouble. They're told these taxes are for their own protection. And that's true, though mostly for illegitimate reasons. There might be occasional threats - thieves, rapists, whatever - and the mafia will come down hard on those people. But that's only because those people are taking the mafia's action. The primary threat to the community is the mafia itself, its hired thieves and rapists.
So then when you in the community are generously offered a say in who takes over as the next don, you're too excited for a chance to participate to notice that you're never offered a choice to disband the mafia entirely. No, you're just offered two choices - a tough guy or a lawyer. Some of you look at the clenched jaw and the dead eyes of the brute and then at the nice smile and eloquent prose of the white-collar charmer and decide that it really isn't a contest. Yeah we'd rather have better choices, but surely the lawyer is better. He's very nice and you can invite him to a dinner party without scaring the guests. So maybe we should just support the lawyer. He's the lesser evil.
Until you realize that the mob is always run by either a lawyer or a tough-guy, and that they always advance the same basic agenda. They're always going to steal from you, threaten violence, and use violence. The lawyer's purpose is to conceal as much of it as he can, and make complex arguments about why the rest of it is really not that bad. They work within the accepted system, exploiting it for their own cynical advantage. The thug's part is to scare the shit out of people so they don't fight back. In periods of time where the lawyers are on the top, everyone is a little more comfortable, and they don't fight back as much as the mafia slowly dips its fingers into more and more things. After all, it is that nice shiny lawyer running things, and violence isn't really his style. But you're forgetting that when the next don is a thug, he'll take that increased access and ramp up the violence, use all that extra influence to take even more for himself, and everything is worse than ever. That's how the cycle has worked for centuries, and that is always how it will work. But short term choices will always make it seem like one or the other is better. But you're forgetting that the thugs can't do their thing without the lawyers. The lawyers make the thugs possible. The lawyers are thugs too. They're the same.
And so what not enough people realize is that they don't have to put up with the mafia at all. There are way more of us than there are of them, even if they have more guns. But that's why the mafia relies on fear. You're afraid that if you stand up to them, not enough people will get your back, and you'll go down alone. The mafia counts on this, and that's why they make examples out of a few trouble-makers every once in a while. That scares people, and they retreat and pay their tax and don't say anything too serious.
Democrats are dirty mob lawyers; Republicans are the mob enforcers. In the power struggle to be the next don, people get to choose between the no-neck tough guy (McCain) or the smooth-talking debonair schmoozer (Obama).
Think about what the mafia is. They operate in a geographical area, using a combination of violence, fear, and pay-offs to get whatever they want for the people who control the organization. It is a corrupt power structure run by amoral men to advance their own interests at the expense of everyone else. That is what government is too. Same thing.
People who live in a community where organized crime operates have to pay their taxes, and then they mostly can stay out of trouble. They're told these taxes are for their own protection. And that's true, though mostly for illegitimate reasons. There might be occasional threats - thieves, rapists, whatever - and the mafia will come down hard on those people. But that's only because those people are taking the mafia's action. The primary threat to the community is the mafia itself, its hired thieves and rapists.So then when you in the community are generously offered a say in who takes over as the next don, you're too excited for a chance to participate to notice that you're never offered a choice to disband the mafia entirely. No, you're just offered two choices - a tough guy or a lawyer. Some of you look at the clenched jaw and the dead eyes of the brute and then at the nice smile and eloquent prose of the white-collar charmer and decide that it really isn't a contest. Yeah we'd rather have better choices, but surely the lawyer is better. He's very nice and you can invite him to a dinner party without scaring the guests. So maybe we should just support the lawyer. He's the lesser evil.
Until you realize that the mob is always run by either a lawyer or a tough-guy, and that they always advance the same basic agenda. They're always going to steal from you, threaten violence, and use violence. The lawyer's purpose is to conceal as much of it as he can, and make complex arguments about why the rest of it is really not that bad. They work within the accepted system, exploiting it for their own cynical advantage. The thug's part is to scare the shit out of people so they don't fight back. In periods of time where the lawyers are on the top, everyone is a little more comfortable, and they don't fight back as much as the mafia slowly dips its fingers into more and more things. After all, it is that nice shiny lawyer running things, and violence isn't really his style. But you're forgetting that when the next don is a thug, he'll take that increased access and ramp up the violence, use all that extra influence to take even more for himself, and everything is worse than ever. That's how the cycle has worked for centuries, and that is always how it will work. But short term choices will always make it seem like one or the other is better. But you're forgetting that the thugs can't do their thing without the lawyers. The lawyers make the thugs possible. The lawyers are thugs too. They're the same.And so what not enough people realize is that they don't have to put up with the mafia at all. There are way more of us than there are of them, even if they have more guns. But that's why the mafia relies on fear. You're afraid that if you stand up to them, not enough people will get your back, and you'll go down alone. The mafia counts on this, and that's why they make examples out of a few trouble-makers every once in a while. That scares people, and they retreat and pay their tax and don't say anything too serious.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Help this guy
Probably the only blogger I'm willing to pay to read is desperately in need of donations. Consider giving him a few bucks.
Thursday, June 19, 2008
silence the artists
This would be shocking, if we lived in a civilized country. But we don't, so it is merely outrageous.
Short version: A professor's wife died suddenly. He called 911. Police noted his history of political protest, noticed unusual art supplies (harmless bacteria; his specialty is the intersection of art and science) and some Arabic writing on an invitation to an art exhibit. He was arrested by the FBI and faced various outrageously made-up charges for 4 years, first for bioterrorism and when that was too ridiculous, mail fraud, which was also ridiculous, as the judge finally acknowledged.
This is your America, motherfuckers. Enjoy it.
Short version: A professor's wife died suddenly. He called 911. Police noted his history of political protest, noticed unusual art supplies (harmless bacteria; his specialty is the intersection of art and science) and some Arabic writing on an invitation to an art exhibit. He was arrested by the FBI and faced various outrageously made-up charges for 4 years, first for bioterrorism and when that was too ridiculous, mail fraud, which was also ridiculous, as the judge finally acknowledged.
This is your America, motherfuckers. Enjoy it.
Fuck you, Obama
I'm fucking pissed off today. Everyone's favorite Saintly Messiah of Democracy is really on a roll. I've been such an asshole these last few months by telling you how pathetic and worthless Obama is, what a liar, what a fucking Imperialist stooge. So I don't imagine you're paying attention now.
Obama says:
NAFTA is awesome, sorry I was harsh on it before
The best way to change our genocidal warmongering foreign policy is to hire a bunch of genocidal warmongers!
I'll campaign for Bush Democrats!
Yeah he's really changing the fundamental nature of politics. He's a real progressive visionary! Now that he's got the primary wrapped up, time to stop pretending to care about anything the left cares about. On with Empire!
Fuck you, Obama, and fuck everyone who supports you.
Obama says:
NAFTA is awesome, sorry I was harsh on it before
The best way to change our genocidal warmongering foreign policy is to hire a bunch of genocidal warmongers!
I'll campaign for Bush Democrats!
Yeah he's really changing the fundamental nature of politics. He's a real progressive visionary! Now that he's got the primary wrapped up, time to stop pretending to care about anything the left cares about. On with Empire!
Fuck you, Obama, and fuck everyone who supports you.
"weak Democrats" my ass
I've been meaning to write this up more formally but I'm just going to jot down some notes. Perhaps I'll come back and fill in links and more reasoning later.
- Read through the last few days of Greenwald's columns, covering Democrat leader Steny Hoyer's back-room maneuvers to force immunity through telecoms through Congress, while publicly lying about it, and while also arranging to be able to actually vote against the deal he creates so he'll be able to falsely claim he didn't support it.
- Meanwhile Obama is doing nothing to stop it, but is issuing bland statements that mildly oppose it.
- Internet progressives continue to lament the "spinelessness" or the "weakness" of the Democratic Party. Liberal blog hero Digby just can't understand why Democrats won't stop shredding the Constitution and figures there must be some deep dark secret that they're afraid will be let out or something.
- Wake the fuck up! Democrats WANT this shit. They don't care about the Constitution. They WANT telecom immunity! They WANT domestic spying! Their highest levels of leadership work to make it happen, while maintaining in public that they don't want it but can't help it.
- They'd rather you think they're weak than have you realize what they really want. That way you can believe that they're really good people deep down, but if only they had more courage...
- This shit is so fucking obvious, but every day you hear a new complaint about how bumbling and cowardly the Democrats are. The media perpetuates this narrative because they're in on it too.
- Remember how the Democratic takeover in 2006 was supposed to end the war but instead the war was escalated? That's because the Democrats don't want to end the war. They want to get votes from people who want the war to end. So they say they want to end the war, then they discretely make sure the war goes on, while they publicly pretend that they just couldn't fight the bully Republicans, but maybe if we elect even more Democrats then maybe they'll be able to stand up for themselves. Bullshit. Same with torture, rendition, domestic spying, Iran, and everything else. More Democrats won't do any better.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Gore compares Obama to Genocidal Maniacs
Sunday, June 15, 2008
FISA, Obama, same old story
Greenwald continues to document how the Democrat-led Congress is all set to immunize telecoms for their illegal role in Bush's domestic spying program. Congress is essentially saying that the laws they pass can be broken by anyone if the President says so. Remind me what function Congress actually serves at this point.
Meanwhile, the great hope of the Democratic party, Saint Barrack Obama the First, is prepared to lead a great crusade against this travesty, threatening to filibuster and use all of his popularity and power to thwart the passage of this bill.
No wait, I got that wrong. He isn't doing anything.
Oh I suppose he might make a few mild comments, and he'll cast a meaningless vote against it once the margin of victory has been assured. That way his deluded supporters can convince themselves he opposes this kind of thing, deep down in his pure heart, where no Republican smear tactics can tarnish him and no media figures can call his principles divisive. There, he's a champion of freedom and accountability and peace and fairness and liberty and hygiene; it is only the pressures of the corrupt campaign process that force him to hide the feelings in his heart. In his heart he wants the same things I want, I just know it! But never fear! The way he uses the power of the most powerful office in human history will surely be much different than the way he's used his ever-growing power before, and the way he's using it now, and the way he'll use it before his inauguration, and the way his party leadership uses it, and the way every other Democrat President has used it. He's different! He told me so!
Meanwhile, the great hope of the Democratic party, Saint Barrack Obama the First, is prepared to lead a great crusade against this travesty, threatening to filibuster and use all of his popularity and power to thwart the passage of this bill.
No wait, I got that wrong. He isn't doing anything.
Oh I suppose he might make a few mild comments, and he'll cast a meaningless vote against it once the margin of victory has been assured. That way his deluded supporters can convince themselves he opposes this kind of thing, deep down in his pure heart, where no Republican smear tactics can tarnish him and no media figures can call his principles divisive. There, he's a champion of freedom and accountability and peace and fairness and liberty and hygiene; it is only the pressures of the corrupt campaign process that force him to hide the feelings in his heart. In his heart he wants the same things I want, I just know it! But never fear! The way he uses the power of the most powerful office in human history will surely be much different than the way he's used his ever-growing power before, and the way he's using it now, and the way he'll use it before his inauguration, and the way his party leadership uses it, and the way every other Democrat President has used it. He's different! He told me so!
Saturday, June 14, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Impeach? Waste of time say Democrats
As far as I know it hasn't gotten much mainstream coverage but Dennis Kucinich brought articles of impeachment against Bush on Monday. Beside being abundantly deserved, impeachment might be one of the only ways to prevent attacks on Iran (not to mention Pakistan). So the Democrats must be pretty excited about this, what with them being the opposition party who love truth and justice and all, right?
As they have previously, Democratic leaders staunchly oppose Kucinich's impeachment effort. They expect to table the resolution by referring it to the Judiciary Committee, where they expect it to die.Why, it is almost as if the Democrats don't care about the law, the Constitution, justice or preventing wars. Boy that Obama guy gives some inspirational speeches though!
House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) suggested yesterday that engaging in a lengthy debate over impeaching Bush in the waning days of his administration is not a productive use of the House's time.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
shut down The Fed?
Coming from an undergraduate economics background, I was raised to love The Fed and worship Alan Greenspan. I hadn't thought much about that in a while, but this is an interesting case that The Fed is a tool of tyranny. Check it out.
The pernicious role of The Fed was also examined in The Conservative Nanny State,
which is well worth the read, and a real bargain at $0.00.
The pernicious role of The Fed was also examined in The Conservative Nanny State,
which is well worth the read, and a real bargain at $0.00.
girl dies so we can drink $2 bottles of wine
This is a terrible story.
A pregnant 17-year old girl was worked to death on a California grape farm. The owners made her and other laborers work for 4 hours in 95 degree weather without water or shade, in violation of multiple labor laws. When she was finally being rushed to a hospital with a temperature over 108 degree, the foreman instructed the driver to say that she had been jogging and not a worker.
The owners of this vineyard make Charles Shaw wines, the very cheap wines that Trader Joe's sells.
Here is a list of things you can do about it.
A pregnant 17-year old girl was worked to death on a California grape farm. The owners made her and other laborers work for 4 hours in 95 degree weather without water or shade, in violation of multiple labor laws. When she was finally being rushed to a hospital with a temperature over 108 degree, the foreman instructed the driver to say that she had been jogging and not a worker.
The owners of this vineyard make Charles Shaw wines, the very cheap wines that Trader Joe's sells.
Here is a list of things you can do about it.
Sunday, June 08, 2008
Moving to Canada, sort of a before-and-after
I started writing this a few days before I moved, but never finished.
This will probably be my last chance to blog before the move to Canada. I had considered writing some big manifesto about why I'm doing what I'm doing, but that hasn't happened yet. I do have a lot of swirling emotions about the whole thing though, so I want to get down a few thoughts.I don't really feel like finishing it, but I will say a few more things. I drink a lot less beer here than I did in Ohio. It is more expensive here and I've yet to find much of a good selection. I've also been eating differently and walking ~5.5 miles most days, so I've lost some weight I think. Most of that walk is through the woods next to a stream, amidst an assortment of happy wildlife. I joined a softball team. It is fun but I prefer basketball, tennis and soccer. Their smallest bills in Canada are $5 and they have $1 and $2 coins. I like that arrangement. I'm going to buy a used bicycle. I have no idea about Canadian politics yet. Concern for environmental practices is pervasive around here, and not just among the University crowd. I've eaten asparagus just about every day. I like the people in my department a lot so far.
I'm making several life-changing transitions here. I'm moving to a new country. I'm going back to school. And I'm totally changing career paths.
The easiest one to discuss is the going back to school part. I've been thinking about that ever since I finished undergrad, and I pretty much always figured I'd be back eventually. It took six years. A whole lot has happened in that time, and I think I'm much better for it.
My reason for going back to school is mainly because of the changing career paths, though there are other parts. Basically I don't know of any ways to make a living that I'm currently capable or qualified to do that I want to do. I think I like doing research (at least somewhat), and I like the idea of getting paid to learn, so it seems to me that being a professor might be a good gig. I'm not sure of that, but going to grad school is the first step, and it seems pretty low-risk to get a Masters degree. A big open question for me at this point will be how much bullshit I'll be able to tolerate (and how much of what I might be required to do will I see as bullshit). I'm heading in with an open mind and a desire to learn, but who knows what will happen to that.
That more or less addresses that side of things, at least in a shallow way, but the manifesto was mainly supposed to focus on the leaving the country part. Here are a few dimensions that are on my mind:The decision to apply to schools in Canada was partially my solution to the first 3 items, which are goals that I've been pursuing for maybe 2 years now. The fourth is a downside of my chosen solution. Anyway, some thoughts on each item...
- Disassociating myself from the US Government, in a moral sense.
- Avoiding the perils of US domestic life, in terms of personal health and safety.
- Searching for a culture that I can feel comfortable in.
- Being physically far removed from my family and friends.
The first point is something that I've felt strongly about at times, but I've also felt like it is futile and/or self-obsessed. Will being a grad student in Canada for at least 2 years make me feel like I've accomplished anything in this regard? Will I care? I don't know. Do I currently have any moral responsibility for the evils committed by the USG? I've paid taxes and voted for politicians, so I think I do. Would I if I was a grad student in the US? Any more than I would as a US Citizen going to school in Canada? I don't know. I guess if nothing else, it makes a statement, but I don't know how many people are listening to it.
The second point, about avoiding the perils of life in the US, is obviously about pure self-interest without the moral dimension of the first point. Our economy is going to shit with little hope of recovery in sight, and bombing Iran will only make that worse. Aside from that, life in the US is a major health risk. I read somewhere that breast milk of the average US mother contains so many toxins that you wouldn't be able to sell it as food. That just seems so fucked up to me, and is a perfect way to summarize how bad things are here. Our food and household products are poisons, and our healthcare system is a joke. Violent crime rates here are alarming as well. How much of all that is better in Canada? Well I know crime is much better. My understanding is that they have stricter food safety regulations than the US, and much better healthcare. Their economy is probably very heavily linked to ours, so that isn't good, but I think they're a lot more energy independent so that ought to be good for something. Another safety aspect is our increasingly authoritarian domestic policies, which I think might be getting worse in Canada too, but probably not nearly as bad as here.
The point about culture is related to the first two, but it is basically about personal preferences, rather than concerns for morality or safety. From what I've seen, Canada is just a nicer place (than places I've spent much time in the US). People are more friendly. They're more liberal and less religious. They care about environmental issues. They drink beer. I just think I'll be generally more at ease with my surroundings there.
blogs are a threat
Thinking out loud:
Blogs are a major threat to the establishment. They're like the new printing press. It used to be that the average person couldn't really contribute to public political dialog, until the printing press drastically reduced the cost of reaching lots of people. The printed word was power for a long time, until TV came along and everyone stopped reading and started getting all their information from TV. Highly concentrated wealth owns the broadcasting networks, and the average person can't really contribute. Now blogs come along and suddenly anyone with an email address can put their ideas out there. Good ideas draw an audience. Ideas different than those allowed on TV draw an audience. This is a threat, which is why mainstream media figures are so derisive towards bloggers.
So blogs are a weapon in the war of ideas, which is one reason I'd urge everyone to participate. Read blogs. Comment on blogs. Make your own. But an open question is whether the urge to sit in front of a computer and read or write a blog is taking away from the urge to go smash shit up in the streets.
Blogs are a major threat to the establishment. They're like the new printing press. It used to be that the average person couldn't really contribute to public political dialog, until the printing press drastically reduced the cost of reaching lots of people. The printed word was power for a long time, until TV came along and everyone stopped reading and started getting all their information from TV. Highly concentrated wealth owns the broadcasting networks, and the average person can't really contribute. Now blogs come along and suddenly anyone with an email address can put their ideas out there. Good ideas draw an audience. Ideas different than those allowed on TV draw an audience. This is a threat, which is why mainstream media figures are so derisive towards bloggers.
So blogs are a weapon in the war of ideas, which is one reason I'd urge everyone to participate. Read blogs. Comment on blogs. Make your own. But an open question is whether the urge to sit in front of a computer and read or write a blog is taking away from the urge to go smash shit up in the streets.
Against the State
A Philosophical Challenge
My irritating yet astounding new book Against the State (SUNY Press) argues that all the arguments of the great philosophers (Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hume, Hegel, Rawls, Nozick, and Habermas, among others), are, putting it kindly, unsound.The state rests on violence: not the consent of the governed, not utility, not rational decision-making, not justice.
Not only are the existing arguments for the legitimacy of state power unsound; they are shockingly fallacious, a scandal, an embarrassment to the Western intellectual tradition.
So I issue a challenge: Give a decent argument for the moral legitimacy of state power, or reconstruct one of the traditional arguments in the face of the refutations in Against the State.If you can't, you are rationally obliged to accept anarchism.
I'd offer a huge cash prize, but I'm broke.
Henceforward, if you continue to support or observe the authority of government, you are an evil, irrational cultist.
You're an anarchist now, baby, until further notice.
e-mail responses to c.sartwell@verizon.com
Yours in anarchy,
Crispin Sartwell
Thursday, June 05, 2008
live blogging my visit to Obama's website
After reading Chris Floyd's recent post, where he mentions that Obama's website "calls for fighting the War on Terror in a 'smarter way,'" I decided I'd visit this website and see how Obama presents himself. I've watched very little of his speeches (though I've read the text of many), and haven't really watched any TV coverage or commercials, so this is one of my first experiences of Obama as he wants to be seen. Let the fun begin.
I googled "Obama" and found his official site. The first thing that happens is that he asks you for money. In exchange he offers a "new direction for America" and says that "This is our time to turn the page on the policies of the past." Which policies he'll be changing are not yet mentioned, nor is the direction of the new direction. But the new direction will be new. We know that much.
Before clicking through to skip the donation page I noticed something odd. The suggested donation denominations: $5, $25, $50, $100, $250, $1000, $2300. Uh, $2300? I'm guessing there's some weird explanation for that. Obama is from Chicago right? A shout-out to Michael Jordan perhaps? Anyway.
The first thing I notice on the next page is this quote. "I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington... I'm asking you to believe in yours." He's also asking you to believe in fairies! If you believe, clap, clap your hands!
I look around the main page a bit more and find a part that asks where I'm from. I notice "American Samoa" on the list and click that, hoping against hope that it will detail Obama's position on issues of importance to the brave Samoans. Nope, just links to join local Obama teams. Back to the main page.
At the top there's a tab for "issues." On the drop down list is "faith." I click that. This should be good. The faith page tells us that Obama has made glorious speeches about faith. There's a link to "Barack's faith principles." There we learn that GOD is always present in our lives, and not only that, GOD is a constant source of hope. Wait, isn't Obama's campaign all about hope? This must mean GOD is for Obama! Next we learn that progressives ought to be approaching religion "boldly" which he explains means that "we" ought to be using it for our own partisan ends, so as to prevent others from using it for their own partisan ends. Truly brilliant stuff here. Back to main page.
Let's get into the meaty stuff. Issues --> Foreign Policy. Click.
We already know from Floyd that he has no problem whatsoever with the basic formulation of the US waging a war on an abstract concept. He just thinks we need to be smarter about it. So he's off to a good start.
He says he will end the war in Iraq. He also says he will leave troops in Iraq. Don't let that confuse anyone though; the war will definitely be over! He says he will "make it clear" that we won't have any permanent bases in Iraq. He also says we'll need to guard our embassy (the largest embassy in the history of the galaxy, which some people might mistakenly think was more like a permanent base, but it totally isn't). He also mentions humanitarian aid, which I suppose is nice, considering all the slaughter we've been doing. That ought to make us even.
He tells us that Iran has sought nuclear weapons. Dick Cheney says that too! He tells us Iran's leaders have threatened Israel. He doesn't mention if Israel's leaders have threatened Iran. They probably haven't.
He tells us that the gravest threat to the American people is a terrorist attack with nuclear weapons. I would have gone with global warming or heart disease or automobile accidents or a crippling recession. But terrorism is much more scary, allowing you to invoke disturbing images of Arabs, and you can spend lots of money on that without pissing off big business, so I guess recession and heart disease aren't as grave. That's why I now say that Africanized Killer Bees are the gravest threat to America!
Obama says he will strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Maybe that means he'll adhere to it, unlike every other President. He says countries that break the rules should face sanctions, specifically mentioning Iran and North Korea (hey didn't someone include them in an "axis of evil" at some point?), but doesn't mention whether the US should face sanctions for breaking the rules. I think we should just assume that he'll follow the laws and accept the same justice he wants to apply to everyone else. That seems like a safe assumption, given his lack of comment on the matter.
Obama says that we need a bigger military. Whew, I was worried that spending more on military than the rest of the world combined was kind of too much already, maybe even a huge fucking waste, and that when you carry a gigantic fucking hammer everything starts to look like a nail (and by "look like a nail" I mean "we better bomb the shit out of that shit"). Good to know I was wrong about that. Obama will massively swell our military into an erect stabbing machine, suitable for deep penetration into the most dangerous of deployment regions. This will arouse the passionate love of country that Americans used to feel deep in their loins, and bring us all to a quivering climax of safety and love and relaxing naps. I suspect the neighbors won't appreciate all the noise, but they're just prudes so who gives a fuck, right? Cock-blockers.
Obama specifically mentions that he support Israel's right to self defense. He doesn't mention whether the people of the occupied territories have this right. Or the people or Iraq, or Iran, or Somalia, or Cuba, or Ecuador, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan. I'll assume that they don't. Just Israel.
Obama calls for a brutal warlord to be brought to justice. So he is interested in that kind of thing. I wonder if any brutal warlords who deserve to be brought to justice will be residing anywhere in the US during an Obama Presidency? Hmmm... probably not. Better just worry about the former Liberian President.
Alright well that's about all the BarrackObama.com I can stomach for now, as fun as this has been. I've truly witnessed a new page in history, one very different from the old pages. Obama boldly offers ambiguous notions that lend themselves to whatever glorious interpretation his supporters want to hear, while never actually committing to anything that would deviate from the imperial agenda, which I think is definitely a new direction for America.
I googled "Obama" and found his official site. The first thing that happens is that he asks you for money. In exchange he offers a "new direction for America" and says that "This is our time to turn the page on the policies of the past." Which policies he'll be changing are not yet mentioned, nor is the direction of the new direction. But the new direction will be new. We know that much.
Before clicking through to skip the donation page I noticed something odd. The suggested donation denominations: $5, $25, $50, $100, $250, $1000, $2300. Uh, $2300? I'm guessing there's some weird explanation for that. Obama is from Chicago right? A shout-out to Michael Jordan perhaps? Anyway.
The first thing I notice on the next page is this quote. "I'm asking you to believe. Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington... I'm asking you to believe in yours." He's also asking you to believe in fairies! If you believe, clap, clap your hands!
I look around the main page a bit more and find a part that asks where I'm from. I notice "American Samoa" on the list and click that, hoping against hope that it will detail Obama's position on issues of importance to the brave Samoans. Nope, just links to join local Obama teams. Back to the main page.
At the top there's a tab for "issues." On the drop down list is "faith." I click that. This should be good. The faith page tells us that Obama has made glorious speeches about faith. There's a link to "Barack's faith principles." There we learn that GOD is always present in our lives, and not only that, GOD is a constant source of hope. Wait, isn't Obama's campaign all about hope? This must mean GOD is for Obama! Next we learn that progressives ought to be approaching religion "boldly" which he explains means that "we" ought to be using it for our own partisan ends, so as to prevent others from using it for their own partisan ends. Truly brilliant stuff here. Back to main page.
Let's get into the meaty stuff. Issues --> Foreign Policy. Click.
We already know from Floyd that he has no problem whatsoever with the basic formulation of the US waging a war on an abstract concept. He just thinks we need to be smarter about it. So he's off to a good start.
He says he will end the war in Iraq. He also says he will leave troops in Iraq. Don't let that confuse anyone though; the war will definitely be over! He says he will "make it clear" that we won't have any permanent bases in Iraq. He also says we'll need to guard our embassy (the largest embassy in the history of the galaxy, which some people might mistakenly think was more like a permanent base, but it totally isn't). He also mentions humanitarian aid, which I suppose is nice, considering all the slaughter we've been doing. That ought to make us even.
He tells us that Iran has sought nuclear weapons. Dick Cheney says that too! He tells us Iran's leaders have threatened Israel. He doesn't mention if Israel's leaders have threatened Iran. They probably haven't.
He tells us that the gravest threat to the American people is a terrorist attack with nuclear weapons. I would have gone with global warming or heart disease or automobile accidents or a crippling recession. But terrorism is much more scary, allowing you to invoke disturbing images of Arabs, and you can spend lots of money on that without pissing off big business, so I guess recession and heart disease aren't as grave. That's why I now say that Africanized Killer Bees are the gravest threat to America!
Obama says he will strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Maybe that means he'll adhere to it, unlike every other President. He says countries that break the rules should face sanctions, specifically mentioning Iran and North Korea (hey didn't someone include them in an "axis of evil" at some point?), but doesn't mention whether the US should face sanctions for breaking the rules. I think we should just assume that he'll follow the laws and accept the same justice he wants to apply to everyone else. That seems like a safe assumption, given his lack of comment on the matter.
Obama says that we need a bigger military. Whew, I was worried that spending more on military than the rest of the world combined was kind of too much already, maybe even a huge fucking waste, and that when you carry a gigantic fucking hammer everything starts to look like a nail (and by "look like a nail" I mean "we better bomb the shit out of that shit"). Good to know I was wrong about that. Obama will massively swell our military into an erect stabbing machine, suitable for deep penetration into the most dangerous of deployment regions. This will arouse the passionate love of country that Americans used to feel deep in their loins, and bring us all to a quivering climax of safety and love and relaxing naps. I suspect the neighbors won't appreciate all the noise, but they're just prudes so who gives a fuck, right? Cock-blockers.
Obama specifically mentions that he support Israel's right to self defense. He doesn't mention whether the people of the occupied territories have this right. Or the people or Iraq, or Iran, or Somalia, or Cuba, or Ecuador, or Afghanistan, or Pakistan. I'll assume that they don't. Just Israel.
Obama calls for a brutal warlord to be brought to justice. So he is interested in that kind of thing. I wonder if any brutal warlords who deserve to be brought to justice will be residing anywhere in the US during an Obama Presidency? Hmmm... probably not. Better just worry about the former Liberian President.
Alright well that's about all the BarrackObama.com I can stomach for now, as fun as this has been. I've truly witnessed a new page in history, one very different from the old pages. Obama boldly offers ambiguous notions that lend themselves to whatever glorious interpretation his supporters want to hear, while never actually committing to anything that would deviate from the imperial agenda, which I think is definitely a new direction for America.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Debate
I've been having an interesting and intense conversation with my friend Trakker that has spilled over between several posts on his blog and mine. Check out these posts and comment sections:
http://trakker.typepad.com/neon_gods/2008/05/a-stupid-tone-deaf-remark-a-thoughtless-apology.html
http://trakker.typepad.com/neon_gods/2008/05/cleaning-up-after-the-bush-occupation.html
http://trakker.typepad.com/neon_gods/2008/06/lefty-obama-supporters-are-viciously-dangerously-nauseatingly-self-deluded.html
http://seeforyourself.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-i-wont-vote-every-conversation-with.html
I argue that Democrats in general and Obama in particular don't deserve support. I say not voting is better than voting for them, and that national elections are a huge distraction from meaningful political issues, designed to create the false appearance of democracy.
Trakker says that the system might be broken, but our only option is to fix it or replace it. He says that Obama represents the best chance we have of fixing it, and so is worthy of support. And since President Obama is the only realistic alternative to President McCain, we especially should support Obama.
While I admire Trakker's passion and his ultimate goals, I think he's chosen a bad strategy in pursuit of those goals. I think his arguments are weak, mostly misleading emotion, and don't really address the points I've made. But, I would think that, since I'm arguing against him, so feel free to tell me otherwise. Good debate is healthy. Go check it out!
http://trakker.typepad.com/neon_gods/2008/05/a-stupid-tone-deaf-remark-a-thoughtless-apology.html
http://trakker.typepad.com/neon_gods/2008/05/cleaning-up-after-the-bush-occupation.html
http://trakker.typepad.com/neon_gods/2008/06/lefty-obama-supporters-are-viciously-dangerously-nauseatingly-self-deluded.html
http://seeforyourself.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-i-wont-vote-every-conversation-with.html
I argue that Democrats in general and Obama in particular don't deserve support. I say not voting is better than voting for them, and that national elections are a huge distraction from meaningful political issues, designed to create the false appearance of democracy.
Trakker says that the system might be broken, but our only option is to fix it or replace it. He says that Obama represents the best chance we have of fixing it, and so is worthy of support. And since President Obama is the only realistic alternative to President McCain, we especially should support Obama.
While I admire Trakker's passion and his ultimate goals, I think he's chosen a bad strategy in pursuit of those goals. I think his arguments are weak, mostly misleading emotion, and don't really address the points I've made. But, I would think that, since I'm arguing against him, so feel free to tell me otherwise. Good debate is healthy. Go check it out!
Tomgram: Chris Hedges, War and Occupation, American-style
This Tomgram by Chris Hedges is a must-read.
This is what our war is:
And this:
And this:
I'm sure this was all done with the best of intentions.
This is what our war is:
"This unit sets up this traffic control point, and this 18 year-old kid is on top of an armored Humvee with a .50-caliber machine gun," remembered Sgt. Geoffrey Millard, who served in Tikrit with the 42nd Infantry Division. "And this car speeds at him pretty quick and he makes a split-second decision that that's a suicide bomber, and he presses the butterfly trigger and puts two hundred rounds in less than a minute into this vehicle. It killed the mother, a father, and two kids. The boy was aged four and the daughter was aged three.
"And they briefed this to the general," Millard said, "and they briefed it gruesome. I mean, they had pictures. They briefed it to him. And this colonel turns around to this full division staff and says, 'If these f---ing hajis learned to drive, this sh-t wouldn't happen.'"
And this:
Iraqi families were routinely fired upon for getting too close to checkpoints, including an incident where an unarmed father driving a car was decapitated by a .50-caliber machine gun in front of his small son. Soldiers shot holes into cans of gasoline being sold alongside the road and then tossed incendiary grenades into the pools to set them ablaze. "It's fun to shoot sh-t up," a soldier said. Some opened fire on small children throwing rocks. And when improvised explosive devices (IEDS) went off, the troops fired wildly into densely populated neighborhoods, leaving behind innocent victims who became, in the callous language of war, "collateral damage."
And this:
MejÃa also watched soldiers from his unit abuse the corpses of Iraqi dead. He related how, in one incident, soldiers laughed as an Iraqi corpse fell from the back of a truck. "Take a picture of me and this motherf---er," said one of the soldiers who had been in MejÃa's squad in Third Platoon, putting his arm around the corpse.
The shroud fell away from the body, revealing a young man wearing only his pants. There was a bullet hole in his chest.
"Damn, they really f---ed you up, didn't they?" the soldier laughed.
The scene, MejÃa noted, was witnessed by the dead man's brothers and cousins.
I'm sure this was all done with the best of intentions.
Tuesday, June 03, 2008
Why I won't vote: every conversation with an Obama supporter
Why shouldn't I support Obama? He's way better than McCain or Hillary!
Well I think it is more complicated than just comparing the few viable candidates. The first thing you need to do is let go of your idea that the United States of America is a democracy. It isn't. Look, Dr. Chomsky says so:
He's really fucking smart, so you ought to really give this notion some consideration. America isn't a democracy.
Yeah, but, like, we have elections. We get to vote, right? That makes it a democracy!
Not really. All elections mean is that the public has a choice between various candidates. It doesn't mean that those candidates represent the interests of the people, or that the people have any say in the decisions that are important to them. All elections mean is that people can choose between candidates. The real power is in who chooses the candidates.
Uh, so... who chooses the candidates?
Well, first look at a what all the candidates have in common. You might notice that they're all politicians. They all have lots of money behind them. They're all Democrats or Republicans.
Yeah but wait, if they're all the same, how come there are Democrats and Republicans?
They aren't all exactly the same. There are some minor differences between them, perhaps even some major ones. But even major differences are dwarfed by their profound similarities. And the reason they have so many similarities is because the big money that backs them generally comes from people with very similar interests.
So now to answer the question, there are Democrats and Republicans for a few reasons, but two main reasons stand out. First, while the people who make the decisions have vast areas of common interests, they do have some differences. And so factions form that compete with each other over those minor areas of disagreement.
But far more importantly to you and me, there are Democrats and Republicans because it creates the illusion of choice for the public. The interests of the people in power, the people who control both the Democrat and the Republican parties, are very different than the interests of the public. So it is important that they make it seem as if the public has meaningful choices. Parties are kind of like marketing gimmicks. They create appealing slogans that generates enthusiasm, and use various methods of deception to get the public to overlook the fact that their actions and their rhetoric don't match. The vast majority of their actions favor the interests of those elite few, at the expense of the general public and the rest of the world.
Ok, well that all makes sense, and I kind of agree. But still, Obama is way better than McCain.
He certainly wants you to think that. It is possible that it is true, though I think it is much harder to predict than most people seem to think. Like Chomsky says, the campaigns are designed to highlight character qualities, rather than positions on meaningful issues. It seems to me that Obama has been highly evasive on issues, and quite willing to outright lie.
Regardless, putting your efforts, your time, your money, your hope, into Obama is putting your efforts, your time, your money, your hope into the Democratic party. And that Democratic party is a crucial part of that whole corrupt and disorienting system that gives the illusion of choice without actually providing one. Its primary function is to attract the votes of progressive/liberal-minded people. It does this by saying things that progressives like to hear, and very rarely by passing measures that progressives like (so long as they don't conflict with the interests of the elites), but then primarily using their electoral success to serve the interests of the elites and maintain their own personal and party power.
Yeah, I kind of felt that way after the last election...
Exactly! In 2006 you supported Democrats because you wanted them to end the Iraq war. The war escalated. You wanted Democrats to stop the US from torturing people and holding them without charges. They not only stopped it, they legalized it. You wanted them to impeach Bush and Cheney for their obvious crimes, but they said impeachment was off the table.
So just because Democrats have always claimed to offer a better alternative to Republicans, just because they've said they stand for the things that are important to me, and just because they've never actually done a single thing to back up those claims, and just because there's an extremely painful recent example for me to dwell on... wait but Obama is changing everything. He's different!
Argh! Nobody gets to the position he's in without being completely a creature of the system. Big business is pouring money into his campaign; he's selling out his friends because they say true things that are politically inconvenient; he wants to increase the size of the military; he refuses to acknowledge the turmoil wrought by Israeli action in the Middle East; the list goes on forever. He's not different.
But he's better than McCain!!
Again, he very much wants you to think that, but I'm not sure I see how. You could certainly look at one very narrow issue and conclude that Obama would handle things better in than McCain in that domain. A popular example of that is military belligerence. It might well be the case that Obama is less likely to bomb Iran, for example, although Obama seems quite unwilling to advocate non-aggression. Even if Obama is less likely to launch another war of aggression, he could be more likely to inflict massive harm on people through economic sanctions, as Bill Clinton did in Iraq. Or he might be more inclined to use his beefed up military for "humanitarian" interventions, which never seem to have humanitarian outcomes. Or Obama might have the acquiescence of a Democratic Congress that allows him to pass various measures that cause long-term harm, whereas a McCain presiding with a Democratic Congress wouldn't allow much of anything to pass, preventing harmful measures from proceeding. Or....
The point of that isn't to argue that Obama will be worse or as bad as McCain, but to illustrate the difficulty in figuring it out. Which is once again why I say supporting Democrats is a huge fucking waste of any good intentions you have, because you're supporting the system that allows a decision that is seemingly so important to be contested by people who offer you no meaningful commentary on the important issues.
So you're just saying I shouldn't support anyone? I shouldn't vote? Well then what should I do? You aren't offering any alternatives.
Why does pointing out the massive flaws of the system have to be accompanied by a specific plan of alternative action? Whatever causes you support, whatever ideals you hold that you think Obama might be slightly more likely to represent than the other idiot, you'd be better served pursuing them in other ways. Presidential elections don't change that shit. They're a huge brick wall between you and your vision, and you're just slamming your head into that wall by supporting candidates. If I come along and point out that slamming your head against the wall isn't going to knock it down, isn't that pretty fucking useful information right there? But I guess some people have hit their head so many times that they can't even recognize the futility.
I'm still going to vote for Obama.
I know you are. That's the fucking diabolical beauty of the system.
Well I think it is more complicated than just comparing the few viable candidates. The first thing you need to do is let go of your idea that the United States of America is a democracy. It isn't. Look, Dr. Chomsky says so:
He's really fucking smart, so you ought to really give this notion some consideration. America isn't a democracy.
Yeah, but, like, we have elections. We get to vote, right? That makes it a democracy!
Not really. All elections mean is that the public has a choice between various candidates. It doesn't mean that those candidates represent the interests of the people, or that the people have any say in the decisions that are important to them. All elections mean is that people can choose between candidates. The real power is in who chooses the candidates.
Uh, so... who chooses the candidates?
Well, first look at a what all the candidates have in common. You might notice that they're all politicians. They all have lots of money behind them. They're all Democrats or Republicans.
Yeah but wait, if they're all the same, how come there are Democrats and Republicans?
They aren't all exactly the same. There are some minor differences between them, perhaps even some major ones. But even major differences are dwarfed by their profound similarities. And the reason they have so many similarities is because the big money that backs them generally comes from people with very similar interests.
So now to answer the question, there are Democrats and Republicans for a few reasons, but two main reasons stand out. First, while the people who make the decisions have vast areas of common interests, they do have some differences. And so factions form that compete with each other over those minor areas of disagreement.
But far more importantly to you and me, there are Democrats and Republicans because it creates the illusion of choice for the public. The interests of the people in power, the people who control both the Democrat and the Republican parties, are very different than the interests of the public. So it is important that they make it seem as if the public has meaningful choices. Parties are kind of like marketing gimmicks. They create appealing slogans that generates enthusiasm, and use various methods of deception to get the public to overlook the fact that their actions and their rhetoric don't match. The vast majority of their actions favor the interests of those elite few, at the expense of the general public and the rest of the world.
Ok, well that all makes sense, and I kind of agree. But still, Obama is way better than McCain.
He certainly wants you to think that. It is possible that it is true, though I think it is much harder to predict than most people seem to think. Like Chomsky says, the campaigns are designed to highlight character qualities, rather than positions on meaningful issues. It seems to me that Obama has been highly evasive on issues, and quite willing to outright lie.
Regardless, putting your efforts, your time, your money, your hope, into Obama is putting your efforts, your time, your money, your hope into the Democratic party. And that Democratic party is a crucial part of that whole corrupt and disorienting system that gives the illusion of choice without actually providing one. Its primary function is to attract the votes of progressive/liberal-minded people. It does this by saying things that progressives like to hear, and very rarely by passing measures that progressives like (so long as they don't conflict with the interests of the elites), but then primarily using their electoral success to serve the interests of the elites and maintain their own personal and party power.
Yeah, I kind of felt that way after the last election...
Exactly! In 2006 you supported Democrats because you wanted them to end the Iraq war. The war escalated. You wanted Democrats to stop the US from torturing people and holding them without charges. They not only stopped it, they legalized it. You wanted them to impeach Bush and Cheney for their obvious crimes, but they said impeachment was off the table.
So just because Democrats have always claimed to offer a better alternative to Republicans, just because they've said they stand for the things that are important to me, and just because they've never actually done a single thing to back up those claims, and just because there's an extremely painful recent example for me to dwell on... wait but Obama is changing everything. He's different!
Argh! Nobody gets to the position he's in without being completely a creature of the system. Big business is pouring money into his campaign; he's selling out his friends because they say true things that are politically inconvenient; he wants to increase the size of the military; he refuses to acknowledge the turmoil wrought by Israeli action in the Middle East; the list goes on forever. He's not different.
But he's better than McCain!!
Again, he very much wants you to think that, but I'm not sure I see how. You could certainly look at one very narrow issue and conclude that Obama would handle things better in than McCain in that domain. A popular example of that is military belligerence. It might well be the case that Obama is less likely to bomb Iran, for example, although Obama seems quite unwilling to advocate non-aggression. Even if Obama is less likely to launch another war of aggression, he could be more likely to inflict massive harm on people through economic sanctions, as Bill Clinton did in Iraq. Or he might be more inclined to use his beefed up military for "humanitarian" interventions, which never seem to have humanitarian outcomes. Or Obama might have the acquiescence of a Democratic Congress that allows him to pass various measures that cause long-term harm, whereas a McCain presiding with a Democratic Congress wouldn't allow much of anything to pass, preventing harmful measures from proceeding. Or....
The point of that isn't to argue that Obama will be worse or as bad as McCain, but to illustrate the difficulty in figuring it out. Which is once again why I say supporting Democrats is a huge fucking waste of any good intentions you have, because you're supporting the system that allows a decision that is seemingly so important to be contested by people who offer you no meaningful commentary on the important issues.
So you're just saying I shouldn't support anyone? I shouldn't vote? Well then what should I do? You aren't offering any alternatives.
Why does pointing out the massive flaws of the system have to be accompanied by a specific plan of alternative action? Whatever causes you support, whatever ideals you hold that you think Obama might be slightly more likely to represent than the other idiot, you'd be better served pursuing them in other ways. Presidential elections don't change that shit. They're a huge brick wall between you and your vision, and you're just slamming your head into that wall by supporting candidates. If I come along and point out that slamming your head against the wall isn't going to knock it down, isn't that pretty fucking useful information right there? But I guess some people have hit their head so many times that they can't even recognize the futility.
I'm still going to vote for Obama.
I know you are. That's the fucking diabolical beauty of the system.
Monday, June 02, 2008
sweet freedom
No more cell phone for me. We have a house line and there's a phone in my lab on campus, and that's it. I won't be instantly reachable all the time, but I expect that somehow life will continue.
Friday, May 30, 2008
bummer: no LOST for me
We missed the last 3 episodes of LOST before we moved, figuring we could just watch them online when we get here. But ABC.com doesn't let you watch them from Canada, so now we're like 5 episodes behind. I'll have to find some way to download them or something. In the meantime, nobody tell me anything important about it.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
bullshit
I noticed this article in hwong14's shared items and the headline caught my attention: "Does Power Corrupt? Absolutely Not." So I read the article and was a bit confused because the headline has basically nothing to do with the article. So then I went and read the paper featured in the article.
The experiments in the paper manipulate people's feelings of power, inducing them to feel temporarily powerful or powerless, and then gives them tasks. It generally found that people who feel powerful perform better than those who feel powerless. Read the paper for the details. One of the paper's authors, Adam Galinsky, has done other work on power, for example finding that feeling powerful is associated with reduced tendency to understand how other people think. I can see how that would bear on the corruption issue. But I don't see any way the featured research justifies a headline like that. It has nothing at all to do with corruption, though Galinsky does say it has "direct implications" on power and corruption. Aside from the headline, the lede sentence, and that quote, no other mention of corruption is made.
Coincidentally, the article was published in Time Magazine, a powerful and corrupt publication.
The experiments in the paper manipulate people's feelings of power, inducing them to feel temporarily powerful or powerless, and then gives them tasks. It generally found that people who feel powerful perform better than those who feel powerless. Read the paper for the details. One of the paper's authors, Adam Galinsky, has done other work on power, for example finding that feeling powerful is associated with reduced tendency to understand how other people think. I can see how that would bear on the corruption issue. But I don't see any way the featured research justifies a headline like that. It has nothing at all to do with corruption, though Galinsky does say it has "direct implications" on power and corruption. Aside from the headline, the lede sentence, and that quote, no other mention of corruption is made.
Coincidentally, the article was published in Time Magazine, a powerful and corrupt publication.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
miscellaneous blogging from Canada
I've been in Canada for a few days now, and life here is good. The only slight negative is that we're not going to get cable TV so I can't watch the NBA playoffs. I guess I could go to a sports bar, but I don't want to sit there for 2 hours and pay $6 for mediocre beer. All food and beverage is pretty expensive here actually. I'm going to my advisers' house for dinner tonight; every free meal is going to be quite helpful.
Speaking of good life, Man Beard Blog seems to have lurched back to life, at least for a day. This must be very exciting for someone.
Speaking of lurching around like a worthless jackass, this seems to be a perfect summary of what the Democratic Party is all about. The key passage:
Speaking of good life, Man Beard Blog seems to have lurched back to life, at least for a day. This must be very exciting for someone.
Speaking of lurching around like a worthless jackass, this seems to be a perfect summary of what the Democratic Party is all about. The key passage:
I think its very mendacity is the secret of its success. Crucially, it claims to offer an alternative -- however half-hearted and feeble -- to the utter, absolute, complete and comprehensive lordship of plutocracy. As crucially, it actually does nothing of the kind.
It's fundamentally just a matter of algebra. This is a country designed -- very ably and successfully designed -- to be ruled by an oligarchy of wealth. Yet public consent to this arrangement requires representing it as a democracy. The gap between representation and reality requires some term to fill it up and make the equation come out right.
That's the structural need the Democratic Party fills, and that, I think, is the explanation for its longevity. We've always needed something like like that -- some democratic cloak for our oligarchic nakedness -- and presumably we always will, at least until something changes in a big way. It's a dirty job, but somebody's got to do it. Some institution must be built, and staffed with people who either don't mind the dirt, or can convince themselves it's not dirt at all.
He also comments of where Saint Obama and the Clintons fit into that scheme.
I'm starting basically a full time job this week doing some kind of research (details TBD) in the lab, so I'm not really sure what my blogging output will be. Also I'm using stolen wireless internet right now, so I don't know what my access will be at home until our own connection is installed (hopefully tomorrow).Friday, May 16, 2008
Horus is cracking!
I just scratched the side and top of his head for about 20 seconds before he got scared and ran away.
Thursday, May 15, 2008
schedule
The move is approaching quickly. Saturday we pick up the truck and start loading, and Tuesday morning we hit the road. I won't miss Ohio, though tomorrow night we're seeing Flight of the Conchords in Columbus.
It will be awesome.
It will be awesome.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Why I Won't Vote: Endless Slaughter Everywhere
McCain, Clinton, Obama, they all support this. And I'm supposed to concern myself about the lesser evil? Read all the gory details: the gang rapes of young women, the mutilation of children, the crushed testicles of men, and then realize that this is a course of action that all three of those monsters agree on. How hopelessly wrong is it that we obsess over the tiny differences between them while this is what is going on in the world? Fuck the media, fuck the candidates, fuck all of their wars, and fuck their worthless ballots.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Glory to the killers
Most of these "heroes," however, are dupes. They think they are fighting for our freedoms when instead they are helping to destroy our freedoms. They think they are retaliating for 9/11 when instead they are paving the way for another terrorist attack. They think they are preventing terrorism when instead they are making terrorists. They think they went to Iraq to fight al-Qaeda when instead al-Qaeda came to Iraq because of them. They think they are protecting Israel when instead they are contributing to increased hatred of Israel. They think that our cause is just when instead it violates every just war principle ever formulated. They think they are fighting injustice when instead they are committing a crime against the Iraqi people. They think they are defending the United States when instead they are helping to destroy it.I don't quite agree with all of that, but its basic thrust is a point that needs to be made. US soldiers aren't heroes. They are murderers with uniforms and medals.
Friday, May 09, 2008
catch up blogging: NPR, Jeremiah Wright, Iran, voting
- I listened to about half an hour of NPR while I was home and was disgusted. 20 minutes of it was spent analyzing exactly how black Obama is, and how that mattered for his electability. The "issues" were mentioned once, as something that Obama would like to run on, but there was concern that "the media" wouldn't let him. Gee, NPR, I wonder how that would happen?
- The other 10 minutes were spent on how crazy and polarizing Jeremiah Wright is and what damage he is doing to the Obama campaign. No examination of what he says, of course. (Not that I care if Obama gets elected. His denunciations of Wright, with various lies packaged in, are pathetic and reveal him for what he really is, not that it wasn't already obvious.) I had a recent conversation about Wright with one of my more open-minded family members, who lamented how "divisive" he is, and yet seemed quite unaware of what the man has actually said. Gee, NPR, I wonder how that would happen?
- For typically excellent writing about Wright/Obama check out Floyd and Silber.
- I might comment more on this in a "why I won't vote" post, but check out the conversation here and at the post it links to. Is this the best the opposition has to offer?
- War with Iran seems inevitable, as I've said for a while now. I really feel like I want to be out of here before it happens. I don't exactly know why. My moving date is in 11 days, so... hooray I'll be in complete comfort in a slightly different wealthy nation before thousands of people are senselessly slaughtered! That's the boundless narcissism this blog was built upon.
Thursday, May 08, 2008
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Cat food warning
Since I love cats and I love his blog, I'll pass along this word of warning for cat owners.
When we first adopted our boys, we did a lot of research and decided on a diet similar to what Hodgkins recommends. My understanding is that much of the cat food industry is basically based on the idea that cats are the same as dogs. They aren't. Dogs are omnivores; cats are obligate carnivores. Their systems aren't meant to ingest large amounts of grain, and health complications result. We're convinced the best diet for our cats would be a raw diet that includes organ meat and ground bone (good for dental health), but for now we use a high quality canned food that is mostly protein and fat. It is a bit more expensive than cheap dry food, but even by cold hard economic reasoning we figure in the long run it will save vet expenses.
It seems like most veterinarians don't know much about these dietary concerns, which isn't too surprising since they sell the mass-produced dry food in their lobbies. So you might never have even heard about this issue. Do some research and make good decisions for your cats!
update:
Kira posted about our food decisions as we were going through it. That post was before we fully figured things out, and we've been using Innova Evo for a long time now. We're considering another switch in the near future.
When we first adopted our boys, we did a lot of research and decided on a diet similar to what Hodgkins recommends. My understanding is that much of the cat food industry is basically based on the idea that cats are the same as dogs. They aren't. Dogs are omnivores; cats are obligate carnivores. Their systems aren't meant to ingest large amounts of grain, and health complications result. We're convinced the best diet for our cats would be a raw diet that includes organ meat and ground bone (good for dental health), but for now we use a high quality canned food that is mostly protein and fat. It is a bit more expensive than cheap dry food, but even by cold hard economic reasoning we figure in the long run it will save vet expenses.
It seems like most veterinarians don't know much about these dietary concerns, which isn't too surprising since they sell the mass-produced dry food in their lobbies. So you might never have even heard about this issue. Do some research and make good decisions for your cats!
update:
Kira posted about our food decisions as we were going through it. That post was before we fully figured things out, and we've been using Innova Evo for a long time now. We're considering another switch in the near future.
blaming the victims
The vast majority of the American people are victims of the elites who control us. We're crushed by economic and social policy that atomize and dehumanize us, and we're subject to massive propaganda campaigns that misinform us and make a clear understanding of the system almost impossible. A lot of political commentary, including much of my own I'm sure, tends to despair about the quality of a people who could let their nation reach its current state. "Americans are fat, stupid, arrogant, and apathetic." Maybe a lot of that is true, and if it is, it is true in large part because of the concerted efforts of a narrow but dominant segment of the population. Our freedom - to speak our minds, to organize ourselves, to spend our time as we choose, to work, to think, to make meaningful decisions about our own lives - is limited. Private and public tyrannies have extensive control over just about everything we do.
People under stress, captive people, often do stupid things, which doesn't excuse them, but it is important not to lose sight of the big picture. Remove those stresses, the shackles, and most of those problems go away and the recovery can begin.
People under stress, captive people, often do stupid things, which doesn't excuse them, but it is important not to lose sight of the big picture. Remove those stresses, the shackles, and most of those problems go away and the recovery can begin.
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Rooting for outrage
I think this might push me over the edge towards rooting for Hillary over Obama. They're almost completely indistinguishable, but one might result in massively lower voter turn-out, which is the only realistic victory I can hope for.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Clarification
Since the attempt at humor seems to have failed, I'll publicly clarify that I don't actually have 3 felony convictions.
A Clash of Kings
"What will you do when he crosses?"Yes, Sansa, they can be. Sorry.
"Fight. Kill. Die, maybe."
"Aren't you afraid? The gods might send you down to some terrible hell for all the evil you've done."
"What evil?" He laughed. "What gods?"
"The gods who made us all."
"All?" he mocked. "Tell me, little bird, what kind of god makes a monster like the Imp, or a halfwit like Lady Tanda's daughter? If there are gods, they made sheep so wolves could eat mutton, and they made the weak for the strong to play with."
"True knights protect the weak."
He snorted. "There are no true knights, no more than there are gods. If you can't protect yourself, die and get out of the way of those who can. Sharp steel and strong arms rule the world, don't ever believe any different."
Sansa backed away from him. "You're awful."
"I'm honest. It's the world that is awful. Now fly away, little bird, I'm sick of you peeping at me."
Wordless, she fled. She was afraid of Sandor Clegane... and yet, some part of her wished that Ser Dontos had a little of the Hound's ferocity. There are gods, she told herself, and there are true knights too. All the stories can't be lies.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Cat pictures
Katsu, Hattori, and Horus (from left to right). This was a pause in the middle of a massive three-way fight. Hattori is on his back because Katsu is about to pounce on him. Hattori will throw him off, and Katsu will retreat to the kitchen, strategically leaving Horus in between himself and Hattori. So Hattori will attack Horus, who will run frightened into the back room and hide under the bed.
He climbed up here today for the first time, and he's spent most of the day up there. For him to climb so high is a huge deal. He spent the first month mostly sneaking around the house in a low crouch when he dared leave his hiding spots, and we were so excited when he started to walk in an upright position. So now exploring vertical space seems like such a major breakthrough. If I were to walk further into that room, he'd definitely jump down and hide under the bed though.
The other day he came out to the main room and took a nap with me sitting a few feet away. That he's willing to lower his guard around us is big. He's started climbing that structure he's sleeping under here as well. Usually he gets near the top, then gets scared and runs away.
This picture was taken about a year ago. It is a nice contrast to the next one.
Hattori has lost a lot of weight, and Katsu has grown so much. But they still love looking out the windows and I spared you the sight of my ugly feet.
Katsu the pillow.
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Return of the personal rant
I haven't done a rambling bulleted blog post in a long time. Well I just enjoyed a delicious Bell's Hopslam and a heaping helping of stir-fried veggies and rice, and the full belly and 10% ABV IPA have inspired me.
- I just got back from a 4 day trip to Canada to line up an apartment. We found one we both like, but now we're realizing that our application includes barely any income, no recent job history, no Canadian bank accounts or credit history, and my 3 convicted felonies. So we're hoping to somehow work all that out.
- Canada is just a nicer place than this country. You notice this as soon as you cross the border. Their road signs are like "Hey pal, please drive safely! It makes everyone happy!" In the US the same sign is "ATTENTION INSIGNIFICANT PROLES: YOUR SPEED IS MONITORED BY RADAR AND AIRCRAFT. IMMEDIATE PRISON FOR VIOLATORS. WE WILL TASER YOUR GENITALS TOO." And everyone you talk to anywhere up there is friendly and soft-spoken. And all the women are beautiful (but virtuous) and the streets are paved with candy and diamonds.
- I've been rather overwhelmed by emotions over the last couple weeks as the impending move is starting to feel more real. I'm very excited about it in lots of ways, but I'm conflicted because I somewhat feel like I'm running away from problems too. Maybe I'll dig more into that some other time. Or maybe it will be a later bullet.
- I still can't quite believe how well this whole grad school thing worked out for me. I honestly still don't quite know how I got my advisers to accept me. And then this week they put us up in their home for our visit. These are people who a few months ago I just knew as legends in the field, and next thing I know I'm accepted to their lab and crashing at their place. And I didn't even know if I'd get into grad school anywhere. It is just very weird and hard to process.
- The Lakers are so much better than it seems like they should be. And Denver isn't as good as people think they should be. Lakers in 5.
- Horus has been making huge strides the last few weeks. He regularly hangs out around us, and loves playing with a lot of toys. He and Katsu play together very nicely, and Hattori is getting a lot better with shy Horus too. Horus is starting to climb and jump up above ground level more often (we have various cat-climbing things around), and he's even taken a couple naps in human-occupied beds. He still won't consent to be petted, but if you try to touch his head now he sometimes will swat at your hand with his claws retracted. So he's just giving you a playful high-five instead of shredding your hand. He does a lot of chattering to himself in his pathetic-sounding meow voice. Good times with feline #3.
- I have to say something political right? Umm... Whatever. Fuck everyone.
- There is an amazing sushi place about a 10 or 15 minute walk from the apartment we want. It is kind of expensive though. That's going to be a problem.
- We'd have a dishwasher in that apartment. Holy shit that will be awesome. I estimate we spend an average of 20 to 30 minutes per day doing dishes now, so that will be a massive time savings. Not to mention we'll probably use a lot less water that way, which is only noteworthy for environmental reasons, as our rent will include water.
Saturday, April 12, 2008
War Made Easy
War Made Easy
I just watched this 70 minute film, and I don't even know what to say. One thing that really shocked me was seeing television coverage of the early part of the Iraq invasion again. The glorification of the violence was sickening beyond my ability to express.
Watch the whole thing.
I just watched this 70 minute film, and I don't even know what to say. One thing that really shocked me was seeing television coverage of the early part of the Iraq invasion again. The glorification of the violence was sickening beyond my ability to express.
Watch the whole thing.
Bush: I lied. Heh heh heh!
Bush: I supported the troops by lying to them. Wouldn't you do the same?
Hey, asshole, if you're so worried about morale, here's an idea. Don't fucking send them to invade and occupy a country that doesn't want them there. Don't extend their tours indefinitely. Don't send broken men back into battle and hide their wounded comrades in roach-infested shitboxes. Don't put them in situations where torturing and slaughtering innocent civilians is bound to happen. Don't blame their PTSD on preexisting condition and make them repay their signing bonuses. Bring them all home, and make sure their medical and psychiatric care is fully funded.
Fuck you, you lying coward.
Hey, asshole, if you're so worried about morale, here's an idea. Don't fucking send them to invade and occupy a country that doesn't want them there. Don't extend their tours indefinitely. Don't send broken men back into battle and hide their wounded comrades in roach-infested shitboxes. Don't put them in situations where torturing and slaughtering innocent civilians is bound to happen. Don't blame their PTSD on preexisting condition and make them repay their signing bonuses. Bring them all home, and make sure their medical and psychiatric care is fully funded.
Fuck you, you lying coward.
Why I won't vote: Religion
Nobody gets elected without proclaiming a belief in an imaginary sky daddy. This means they either have a fundamental inability to understand the world around them, or they're willing to lie to the nation they aspire to purportedly serve. These aren't qualities of someone I'd want leading an organization that controls the entire world by force. Every candidate sucks.
Of course I don't think anyone should be leading an organization that controls the entire world, so the real role religion plays in this "why I won't vote" story is illustrating what a farce elections and governments are. We claim to value separation of church and state, claim to value a system of government where there is no religious test for public office, yet make a mockery of that notion every election season.
I won't analyze here what role the population and the media gatekeepers each play in this hypocrisy. But the whole process is an elaborate ritual, with everyone playing their part, that accords religion far more respect than it deserves, thereby giving superstition far too great an influence in decisions that have profound impact on all of us. I won't play my part. I won't vote.
Of course I don't think anyone should be leading an organization that controls the entire world, so the real role religion plays in this "why I won't vote" story is illustrating what a farce elections and governments are. We claim to value separation of church and state, claim to value a system of government where there is no religious test for public office, yet make a mockery of that notion every election season.
I won't analyze here what role the population and the media gatekeepers each play in this hypocrisy. But the whole process is an elaborate ritual, with everyone playing their part, that accords religion far more respect than it deserves, thereby giving superstition far too great an influence in decisions that have profound impact on all of us. I won't play my part. I won't vote.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Support the Troops?
"Support the troops" is simple sounding phrase that encompasses multiple layers of complicated bullshit. Anyone bothering to read my thoughts on the matter knows that fascist warmongers conflate any criticism of war with criticism of soldiers. And criticism of soldiers is the ultimate sin, so the standard response is that the criticism is directed at the civilians at the top of government who are making the choices to go to war, and maybe at some of the top generals, but certainly no maligning of the average 19 year old marine is intended.
Well I say fuck that. Why should I support any of them? I know that a large portion of the US Armed forces came from poor backgrounds and saw the military as a way out of a shitty situation. I know they've been deceived and intimidated and subject to various other shit that renders them sympathetic figures, pawns of the really evil people. But what they're doing on a daily basis in Iraq is fucking wrong, no matter how much they believe they're somehow defending my freedom. I don't support that. If that means I don't support them, then so be it.
But there are some troops I do support. I support Ehren Watada, a commissioned Army officer who refused deployment to Iraq. He did so knowing he could face a court-martial and years in prison. His case is currently working through some complicated legal procedures.
I support Matthew Diaz, a Navy lawyer who illegally sent a list of names of Guantanamo detainees to a civil rights lawyer. He did it because he knew the the Bush administration's refusal to provide such a list to the Red Cross was a crime against humanity. He served 6 months in jail, emerging jobless and bankrupt. The Pentagon is actively seeking to have him disbarred.
So Watada and Diaz are some brave troops who are actually fighting for something worthwhile. There are others like them who deserve support and respect. The rest of the sheep in Iraq may be brave, but their actions are immoral and not worthy of my support. However, here's how I would like to see them supported. I'd like all of them to be brought home immediately. Every wounded soldier should receive excellent medical care, and every soldier should receive excellent psychiatric care. Lots of it.
And then every crime they committed against innocent civilians should be investigated. "I'm just following orders" is not a defense for war crimes. Every solider who took part in those crimes should be prosecuted, though I would hope for some leniency for the more sympathetic and contrite figures. And if people higher in the chain of command are willing to plea guilty in exchange for more leniency for those under their command, I'd support that too.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Fuck you, Congress, Obama, Clinton and Democrats
More evidence of the Bush administration's crimes comes to light every day it seems like, lately with this Yoo torture documents, and every day Congress fails to do a damn thing about any of it. Every member of Congress should be doing everything they can to initiate impeachment and criminal trials. If Obama or Hillary (or McCain) were such great fucking leaders, worthy of the powers they seek, they'd be leading that fucking charge. But of course they won't.
And you want to vote for one of them?
Oh, that's right, somehow it is bad strategy for Democrats to try to impeach, because it would be so fucking divisive, which could cost them the chance to take the reins. That's way more important.
And you want to vote for one of them?
Oh, that's right, somehow it is bad strategy for Democrats to try to impeach, because it would be so fucking divisive, which could cost them the chance to take the reins. That's way more important.
Friday, April 04, 2008
see, it works!
Here are some success stories about people more or less trying to do things like I'd suggest.
adspar's how to
Mox:
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/2007/03/stop_traffic.html
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2007/10/break-goddamned-rules.html
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2007/11/you-may-as-well-break-goddamned-rules.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/sunday-sermon.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/children-of-revolution-part-one-zillion.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/grve.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/yutes.html
http://ajbenjaminjrbeta.blogspot.com/2008/03/stop-traffic.html
Next I'll note that previous posts here have offered answers to the question. I've tagged some of them with "Raging Against the Machine" to make them easier to find. There are probably more posts in the archives that deserve that tag, so I'll add them as I come across them.
I really would recommend reading the material at all of those links, but here are my own thoughts on the matter without any quoting of those other people or my previous entries.
---
The first thing you need to do, after recognizing the set of problems we're confronted with, is to realize two key points. 1) You're going to be confronted with these problems in almost all aspects of life on a daily basis, and 2) that you aren't going to solve these problems. There's no magical catharsis here. So the way I see it, all anyone can do is make the best of things, which involves some combination of fight and flight. Some of my suggestions for each are below.
Fight (a.k.a. disrupt the system)
Flight (a.k.a. enjoy life responsibly)
Adspar I'd like to see a post on what the options are for people who, like yourself, have principled objections to the laws they are subjected to. I know you're moving to Canada (and believe me, I have a lot of respect for someone who's really willing to move rather than support a regime they don't agree with), but I have the suspicion (given your recent anarchist bent) that Canada won't really scratch your political itch (even though it will be much better). What does one do when there is no nation (or region for non-statists) where one can go to that is well-aligned with one's own political ideals?I'll start off with a few links that do a better job of answering the question than I will:
http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org/2007/03/stop_traffic.html
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2007/10/break-goddamned-rules.html
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/2007/11/you-may-as-well-break-goddamned-rules.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/sunday-sermon.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/children-of-revolution-part-one-zillion.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/grve.html
http://whoisioz.blogspot.com/2007/10/yutes.html
http://ajbenjaminjrbeta.blogspot.com/2008/03/stop-traffic.html
Next I'll note that previous posts here have offered answers to the question. I've tagged some of them with "Raging Against the Machine" to make them easier to find. There are probably more posts in the archives that deserve that tag, so I'll add them as I come across them.
I really would recommend reading the material at all of those links, but here are my own thoughts on the matter without any quoting of those other people or my previous entries.
---
The first thing you need to do, after recognizing the set of problems we're confronted with, is to realize two key points. 1) You're going to be confronted with these problems in almost all aspects of life on a daily basis, and 2) that you aren't going to solve these problems. There's no magical catharsis here. So the way I see it, all anyone can do is make the best of things, which involves some combination of fight and flight. Some of my suggestions for each are below.
Fight (a.k.a. disrupt the system)
- Learn as much as you can about these problems, and speak about what you learn to anyone who will listen (and some people who won't). Spread the message. Knowledge is power. Raise awareness. Educate. Advocate. Inspire. All that shit. It matters.
- Call things what they really are. Up isn't down; black isn't white. Don't let words become meaningless. The US Military isn't fighting a war in Iraq; they're occupiers. America isn't a" democracy" in any meaningful sense. The Department of Defense doesn't defend; the Department of Education doesn't educate; the Homeland Security Department doesn't make us more secure; the Department of Justice doesn't provide justice. Intelligent design isn't science. There's nothing conservative about neo-conservatism, and there's nothing liberal about neo-liberalism. Hillary Clinton and Barrack Obama aren't anti-war. John McCain isn't a straight-shooter. Public Relations is propaganda. The Bible is a work of fiction. Declaring "war" on an abstract noun or certain kinds of chemicals literally makes no sense. The President of the United States is sworn to protect and defend the Constitution, not the nation. NAFTA isn't a "Free" "Trade" "Agreement." Collateral damage means innocent people were slaughtered. Enhanced interrogation techniques means fucking torture. Call things what they really are. Words mean something, and have tremendous power. The lies stop at you.
- Paper currency passes through your hands on a daily basis. It could look different when it leaves your possession. Lots of other people will see it. For example, should religious messages be legible on government-issued money?
- There's an important day for the federal government coming up in 11 days. You probably don't want to risk large fines or imprisonment, but aren't few little innocent mistakes bound to happen in such a confusing process?
- Minimize: driving, taxable income, electricity usage, non-essential purchases, paper trails, interaction with illegitimate authorities (including voting for them), processed food consumption, television, religion.
Flight (a.k.a. enjoy life responsibly)
- You'll never find a perfect place, but you can move some place more in line with your ideals, a place where you can be more comfortable with the consequences of your daily decisions. Keep fighting when you get there.
- Immerse yourself in an occupation or hobby (one that doesn't compromise your principles).
- Have sex.
- Buy as much of your food as possible from local and sustainable farms. Experiment with new recipes. Eat slowly.
- Self-medicate.
- Play sports. Go camping. Listen to music. Adopt a pet. Take a walk. Read a book. Join a club.
- Keep in mind that flight is actually a fight strategy too. You're leading by example, demonstrating that people can be more happy and healthy outside of the fucked up system.
Tuesday, April 01, 2008
Why I won't vote: Sham Democracy
Perhaps the most important factor in my decision not to vote is that democracy is a sham in the United States. Business interests, not popular opinion, control the machinery of government, regardless of which button we push every four years (I'll leave a discussion of how votes literally don't even count for another entry). Elections are an elaborate charade providing the illusion of choice, but issues of public concern are carefully avoided. The policies enacted by our federal government are widely opposed by the public, and yet incumbents rarely lose congressional elections. As a result of the way campaigns are conducted, with the mind-melting techniques of the public relations industry, public awareness of the positions of candidates on issues is abysmally low, while voters increasingly cite "character" or "values" as the reason for their selections. (Here's what I think about the character and values of politicians.)
To quote Noam Chomsky's discussion of public opinion and public policy in his 2006 book Failed States:
To quote Noam Chomsky's discussion of public opinion and public policy in his 2006 book Failed States:
A large majority of the public believe that the United States should accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the World Court, sign the Kyoto protocols, allow the United Nations to take the lead in international crisis, and rely on diplomatic and economic measures more than military ones in the "war on terror." Similar majorities believe the United States should resort to force only if there is "strong evidence that the country is in imminent danger of being attacked," thus rejecting the bipartisan consensus on "preemptive war" and adopting the rather conventional interpretation of the UN Charter reiterated by the UN's High-level Panel of December 2004 and the UN World Summit a year later. A small majority of the population even favors giving up Security Council vetoes, so that the United States would follow the UN's lead even if it is not the preference of the US state managers. On domestic issues, overwhelming majorities favor expansion of government programs: primarily health care (80 percent), but also funding for education and Social Security. Similar results on domestic issues have long been found in these studies conducted by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR). As noted, other mainstream polls report that large majorities support guaranteed health care, even if it would raise taxes. Not only does the US government stand apart from the rest of the world on many crucial issues, but even from its own population.I refuse to support this system and add to the illusion of its legitimacy. I won't vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)