Last night was the Berkman Thursday meeting.#
Notes: OPML Version and HTML Version.
Jake Savin has links to audio files (MP3 format?) and links to Marc Nozell who posts a chat log. (The meeting was audio-webcast.)
Ryan Overbey comments,
This Thursday's Berkman Meeting was a riot. We had webcasting running, as well as an IRC channel, so Dave's demo for Channel Z and the ideas behind it got to reach a wider audience. We were also graced with the presence of Aaron Swartz, who discussed tomorrow's big meeting on alternative compensation methods for downloading media.
Christopher Lydon posts a new interview.#
John Pilger writes about the Myth of Objectivity surrounding the BBC and other large media companies.#
A search of the BBC's coverage of the causes and effects of the 13-year embargo on Iraq has failed to produce a single report spelling out that which Madeleine Albright, Bill Clinton's secretary of state, put so succinctly when asked if the deaths of half a million children were a price worth paying for sanctions. "We think the price is worth it," she replied.
There was plenty of vilifying of the "Beast of Baghdad," but nothing on the fact that, up to July 2002, the United States was deliberately blocking more than $5bn worth of humanitarian and reconstruction aid reaching Iraq — aid approved by the UN Security Council and paid for by Iraq. I recently asked a well-known BBC correspondent about this, and he replied: "I've tried, but they're not interested."
There are honourable exceptions to all this, of course; but just as BBC production values have few equals, so do its self-serving myths about objectivity, impartiality and balance have few equals — myths that have demonstrated their stamina since the 1920s, when John Reith, the BBC's first director general, secretly wrote propaganda for the Tory Baldwin government during the General Strike and noted in his diaries that impartiality was a principle to be suspended whenever the established order and its consensus were threatened.
Hans-Hermann Hoppe writes about democracy and freedom.#
The central subject of the following studies is the modern American system of a constitutional democratic state. Almost all Americans are convinced of the superiority of their political system. The American neo-conservatives, that group of formerly extreme left and now social-democratic intellectuals who first came to fame and influence during the Reagan administration and who presently exercise a dominating influence on the Bush administration, go even further. They believe that the constitutional democratic state, exemplified by the USA, represents the highest, unsurpassable form of social organization. To them, no social system is conceivable that is principally superior to a constitutional democratic state. With the acceptance of the American system, then, the "end of history" is reached, constitutionally and ideologically. (It is no wonder that the neo-conservatives are always at the forefront of American warmongers: democracy must be exported, if need be by military might, into misbehaving, un-American regions. This is what theWeltgeist demands.)
[...]
The American model — democracy — must be regarded as a historical error, economically as well as morally. Democracy promotes shortsightedness, capital waste, irresponsibility, and moral relativism. It leads to permanent compulsory income and wealth redistribution and legal uncertainty. It is counterproductive. It promotes demagoguery and egalitarianism. It is aggressive and potentially totalitarian internally, vis-à-vis its own population, as well as externally. In sum, it leads to a dramatic growth of state power, as manifested by the amount of parasitically — by means of taxation and expropriation — appropriated government income and wealth in relation to the amount of productively — through market exchange — acquired private income and wealth, and by the range and invasiveness of state legislation. Democracy is doomed to collapse, just as Soviet communism was doomed to collapse.
Belle writes about Toddlers and their Logic.#
Last night, after I (politely) got off the phone with someone wanting to change my mom's long distance service, Zoe asked who it was. I explained that it was someone trying to sell me something and that I really hated it when people did that. She was silent for a minute, and then said, "Mommy, you like to go shopping. Maybe somebody is calling you to say, 'come in my store and buy something.' Then you should like it." I was at a loss. She seems to have me there.
Carly write about dance and Fermilab.#
I had to some research today for my job (yes, I know, how pitiful that I have work to take home from my student job) about the shows that we have coming up in our spring season, and one of them is Hubbard Street Dance from Chicago. Which...if you've never seen them, you should try to, definitely. They're...amazing. And they happened to have videos of their current repertoire on the site and...wow. Oh god, do I wish I could do that right now. Go watch them for yourself. Watch all of them, but then go back and pay special attention to "Call the Whole Thing Off," "Group Therapy" and especially especially especially "counter/part." Not that I was ever as good as these people, but the fact that I used to be able to at least sort of recreate that is amazing to me.
Bleh. I fear I've lost any and all talent I ever had for dancing since I left it behind nearly three years ago, which sucks. But then I end up doing random things like pique turns down an empty hallway on a bored Friday or doing my eighth grade Christmas assembly dance and it makes me want to go sign up for a class right away.
The videos truly are dazzling.
Jon Husband links to Chris Corrigan who writes about Thomas King talking about various creation myths - namely the Native American and Judeo-Christian.#
You are perhaps more familiar with the second than the first, and of course there are many, many complexities to both stories, but we are dealing with archetypes here. So on to Tom King's quote.
After he recounts these stories in this lecture called "You'll Never Believe What Happened" he concludes by pointing out that these stories create two worlds, both of which we dwell in:
So here are our choices: a world in which creation is a solitary, individual act, or a world in which creation is a shared activity; a world that begins in harmony and moves toward chaos, or a world that begins in chaos and moves towards harmony; a world marked by competition or a world marked by co-operation."
These are pretty stark conclusions but you get the point. These stories can inform everything, and especially the expectations of people in situations where things go wrong. We can choose in those situations to look for the answer from above, from some omnipotent deity that will set things right again, or we can accept the invitation of the animals: we don't have much, but we have a solid foundation, and with a little help from everyone, we can create a safe place to live.
I wish Chris Corrigan had an RSS feed.
Jon Husband writes about William Whyte's The Organization Man.#
Written in 1956 by William F. Whyte (the editor of Fortune magazine), "The Organization Man" made quite a splash back then.
The basic premise of the book was that "we", by then, had moved into a society where "the organization" (I think he meant what we know as the corporation) had assumed a central place in most peoples' lives, and that the organization's agenda became theirs (but not vice-versa). And specifically, much of the organization's agenda with respect to its employees was to force them to fit in, to adapt to a certain kind of gilded servitude, in attitude, in practice and less consciously, in spirit.
He also wrote quite a bit in the book about the ongoing encroachment of the practical, vocationally-oriented curriculum into the educational system, in service to the organization...and this from an editor of Fortune magazine ?! Foresight that has been expanded most notably by John Taylor Gatto, he goes on to call strongly for an increase in liberal arts education and the development of critical thinking skills, at the same time as he is doubting that it will happen.
Deane at Gadgetopia writes about how Generic Content Management Isn't Realistic.#
It's true — there is no one single bullet. As much as we all want a generic solution that will wrap itself around every site, it's not going to happen.
Content management is a patchwork. Certain parts of a site may run from a purchased content management system, other parts may run from a custom app, still other parts may be generated from a WYSIWYG editor.
A funny thought about software that advertises itself as "customizable" - They are basically saying, "We've guaranteed that you won't like the way this works out of the box and have provided a platform for consultants to rip you off with."
Dean Esmay contrasts how bloggers and traditional journalists view the news.#
It's worth contemplating whether weblogs will change not just the pace of the cycle on matters like this, but also, long-term, how politicians respond to questions and accusations. Professional reporters who work the political beat are used to hearing sonorous, vague, and sometimes evasive responses from politicians. Webloggers, as a rule, generally have far less patience for it. They are also far less likely to simply report a politician's response, and to immediately point out anything they see wrong with it.
[...]
Politicians just aren't, as a rule, so blunt and self-critical. Reporters are used to hearing far more airy and vague and equivocal things come out of politicians they've interviewed.
Real Live Preacher publishes part two of the Christmas Story, Uncut.#
Joseph speaking to Mary:
"Although, I do seem to recall that some of the greatest women of our faith often found themselves in, uh, shall we say, 'interesting' predicaments. I mean, there was Rahab, who…well, you know. And Lot's daughters - oh my God! And there was Ruth; don't forget Ruth. She and Boaz…well… and she was a gentile! And Rahab too, uh, was a gentile. And what about Queen Esther? She didn't exactly live the life of an innocent Jewish girl, and yet God used her to save our people. None of these women were exactly pure in the eyes of their neighbors, if you know what I mean."
Joseph's eyes began to sparkle with excitement. He looked at Mary in a new way.
RLP explains the stories of Rahab, Lot's Daughters, Ruth, and Esther. What is interesting is that they are all "not pure" because of something to do with sex.
In Real Live Preacher's Story he wrote something that makes me think hard,#
In our world we have separated mind from body to our great loss. Here a man may betray his wife and neglect his children, but say he loves them "down inside".
Bullshit. There is no "down inside." Love is something you do, not something you feel.
Likewise, we think having faith means being convinced God exists in the same way we are convinced a chair exists. People who cannot be completely convinced of God's existence think faith is impossible for them.
Not so. People who doubt can have great faith because faith is something you do, not something you think. In fact, the greater your doubt the more heroic your faith.
Krystal! Read This.
Friedrich of 2blowhards quotes Nietzsche and Pinker on people's fears of genetics.#
The final fear is the fear of nihilism. If it can be shown that all of our motives and values are products of the physiology of the brain, which in turn was shaped by the forces of evolution, then they would in some sense be shams, without objective reality. I wouldn't really be loving my child; all I would be doing is selfishly propagating my genes. Flowers and butterflies and works of art are not truly beautiful; my brain just evolved to give me a pleasant sensation when a certain pattern of light hits my retina. The fear is that biology will debunk all that we hold sacred.
[A proper physio-psychology has to contend with unconscious resistance in the heart of the investigator, it has "the heart" against it: even a doctrine of the reciprocal dependence of the "good" and the "wicked" drives causes (as refined immorality) distress and aversion in a still hale and hearty conscience—still more so, a doctrine of the derivation of all good impulses from wicked ones.--Nietzsche]
Michael Blowhard writes about design,#
When you buy Design, you aren't buying a functional something that has some aesthetic appeal. No, you're buying aesthetics, with some vestigial function attached. Usually, of course, what winds up getting purchased is a carrot-peeler with a big, sleek translucent handle; or a big, sleek, translucent wall clock that's hard to read; or an umbrella decorated in big, sleek, color-theory 101 colors. You'll never actually use any of them.
Kevin Drum writes about how to write.#
It's a funny thing. People frequently ask me how they can become better writers, and of course there's no easy answer. There just aren't any formulas for it.
But if I had to give one piece of advice — well, I wouldn't. I'd give two pieces of advice. The first is to ignore anyone who tells you to write like you talk. This is possibly the worst writing advice ever to gain wide popularity. Honest.
But the second piece of advice — the real one — is so simple it seems almost silly to even say it: know what you want to say. This doesn't have to take the form of the dreaded outline, it can just be a few words jotted down on a piece of paper. Or it can be entirely in your head. But somewhere, somehow, whether you're persuading, describing, mocking, or whatever, you have to know what you want to say before you try and find the words to say it.
Atrios quotes Paul Krugman.#
The prevailing theory among grown-up Republicans — yes, they still exist — seems to be that Mr. Bush is simply doing whatever it takes to win the next election. After that, he'll put the political operatives in their place, bring in the policy experts and finally get down to the business of running the country.
But I think they're in denial. Everything we know suggests that Mr. Bush's people have given as little thought to running America after the election as they gave to running Iraq after the fall of Baghdad. And they will have no idea what to do when things fall apart.
Frank J. sends his research team in search of Liberals.#
* Some liberals still think Communism is good. I guess we should threaten them with nuclear missiles just like we did the Soviets.
* In a fight between Aquaman and liberals, liberals would have Aquaman fined for disturbing the habitat of endangered fish. He would then sulk about it to the great annoyance of the Aquawife.
* Liberals like to sympathize with terrorists. Keep them away from Gitmo, or there will be nothing but sympathizing.
* I've heard vicious rumors that liberals also like the French, but that might just be slander against liberals.
Geoffrey Allen links to Zell Miller who speaks for him with regards to voting for Bush.#
This is a president who understands the price of freedom. He understands that leaders throughout history often have had to choose between good and evil, tyranny and freedom. And the choice they make can reverberate for generations to come. This is a president who has some Churchill in him and who does not flinch when the going gets tough. This is a president who can make a decision and does not suffer from "paralysis analysis." This is a president who can look America in the eye and say on Iraq, "We're not leaving." And you know he means it.
This is also a president who understands that tax cuts are not just something that all taxpayers deserve, but also the best way to curb government spending. It is the best kind of tax reform. If the money never reaches the table, Congress can't gobble it up.
Dawn Olsen worries about her baby boy.#
Will I warp him by breastfeeding him? I mean Lily still thinks that my breasts some how belong to her - and it's been a year since she was breastfed.
Speaking of Lily, she doesn't seem to like me anymore. Actually she doesn't seem to like ANYONE anymore. Everything that comes from her mouth is either "No", "I Don't Want To", "Whatever", "I Don't Care", or "You can't tell me what to do". Oh, and my teenage son has confessed to his father that the baby is just one more person to take attention away from him.
Is this baby doomed or what? He may never want to come out, and I wouldn't blame him ONE DAMN BIT.
Jane writes about Latin and dead languages.#
my favorite was Catullus. last year i started a novel about Catullus. i wrote a pop song based on one of his poems. the Sapphic one. there's something about him - his tone, alternating between joy, despair, whimsey and cynicism - which really resonated with me as a teenager. the mood swings, the intensity of feeling, the pasison - these lend themselves naturally to poetry.
and Latin is such a subtle language, prone to puns, multiple meanings, occlusions. like Japanese in that way. i developed flexibility in the brain, an ability to accept shifts and shades in meaning, a tolerance for ambiguity. i'm all for clarity in prose but sometimes, meanings can only be hinted at. the world, after all, is not black and white. it doesn't improve always from exposure to harsh light. some mysteries are best left in shadow.
Ryan Overbey loves the Allure of Old Tongues as well.
I feel the same way about Greek and Sanskrit- there's something about classical Indo-European languages that pulls at me. The familiarity, the resonances with English. But more compelling is the eroticism of time and death- these words of dead men and women are charged with life, they speak to us across millennia, they fill us with passion, with dread, with wonder, with desire. We utter them anew, we speak the words of ghosts. We become willingly possessed.
Don Park invents WakaWaka.#
Our latest invention is WakaWaka, the new standard for walking. As you know, the old way of walking was poorly documented and under-specified, opening the door to all kinds of funny walks. WakaWaka is simply the right way to walk, designed to make you look beautiful whether you are walking to your death or to the restroom. Also, every fine aspect of WakaWaka is documented so you'll never walk funny again.
To encourage you to walk the WakaWaka way, we have also designed WakaWakaThisWay, a walkway technology designed to enforce the WakaWaka walking style. Since we care more about your life than you do, we will be ripping up old roads and replacing them with WakaWakaThisWay. No need to thank us. It's our job to care more about your life than you do.
Wendy Koslow is going to hell. Just Kidding.#
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm just anti all Christian, all the time. I was raised in a town that was mostly Catholic, and I was told in fourth grade by a classmate that since I didn't believe in Jesus, I was going to hell. This is what we want to try to avoid, people - we want to teach our kids (and a lot of people let TV teach their kids, don't delude yourself) that there are lots of ways to live your life in a moral way. Open minds, people. Particularly the young people need to have them right now.
Susan Mernit links to Andrew Baio who finds information about Cannibal Communities on the Internet.#
Justin Hall writes about Queer Eye for The Straight Guy.#
We watched a tv personality assume a new wardrobe and disposition at the hands of five articulate men, who identify themselves as homosexuals. It's entertaining to watch this cultural exchange, as they've set it up: gay mentoring. The unspoken agreement of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy is that gay folks are more self-aware and work harder to be beautiful. Behind that presumption is a history of bitter estrangement; learning to wear masks in public. And now they are sharing that skill back into the mainstream?
[...]
I like to imagine all the papers being written in English departments across the United States - "Queering the Straight Eye: Politics of Sexual Identity in Post-Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell Television." I am curious to explore how this show, and its seeming popularity, reflects changing attitudes towards homosexuality.
The Black Saint also writes about Queer Eye For the Straight Guy...
No, viewers appear most interested in gays when they play supporting roles to heterosexuals. In this regard, they have managed to supplant blacks as the modern-day Magic Minority.
The Magic Negro has been a mainstay on TV and film for decades, providing either spiritual guidance (The Legend of Bagger Vance) or implied "hipness" (Scrubs) to the white leads. Whoopi Goldberg made a career out of playing both ends of the Magic Negro spectrum. Remember when she acted as Patrick Swayze's link to the physical world in Ghost and delivered the "funk" to those stiff nuns in Sister Act?
[...]
Queer Eye for the Straight Guy ultimately demonstrates to the viewing public just how useful gay men (lesbians don't quite fit into the equation yet) can be to heterosexuals ("hey, look, they'll even clean your bathroom!"). As far as the media goes, this is the core argument in any plea for "tolerance" of a disenfranchised group. Like the Magic Negro, gays in the media are wonderfully supportive and even look fabulous while dispensing their sage advice.
Stirling Newberry writes about the new politics and the old politics and how the transformations have been similar.#
[Theodore White] felt that the American political system, as it moved away from the "professional politicians" to being in the hands of the media and the activists had lost a fundamental strength and self-confidence. He admitted that the older election system of the 1950's was unfair, but it was also more confident, stronger and produced stronger figures.
But this is, to some extent, unfair to TH White - who was, underneath all, a reporter - from IF Stone, who was, above all a thinker. 1960 was the year where the old and new were still in tension - where a new politics had emerged, but people could still dream of a victory by old means. For all of the public memory of 1960 as the year that "the debate" on television shaped the election, in truth, if Kennedy had not been a master of what was then the old political game, someone else would have been standing on that podium arguing with Richard Nixon. Why? Because for all of Kennedy's winning of primaries in the "modern" primary system - his quest for the nomination was capped with a classic convention fight, not unlike the one which brought FDR to a stage in Chicago to pledge himself to "a New Deal" for all Americans.
Jorrit Wiersma writes about feeling guilty and parenting.#
Saskia and I were discussing how being a parent can be stressful sometimes. She was reading an article in one of these women's magazines and said that she recognized much of what was in it. One example, in particular, was how women tend to feel guilty when they leave the parenting of their children to others (for example, day care, baby-sitters, family). This probably has a lot to do with expectations that other people have (apart from mother instinct). For example, both Saskia and I work four days a week. The reaction of a lot of people to Saskia is "oh, that's still quite a lot, isn't it?" whereas with me their reaction is more like "yeah, that must be great to be able to spend some time with your kid." I guess emancipation still has a ways to go.
Richard writes about linking things as "Not Safe For Work."#
Relatedly, I have a problem with people who link to stuff and explicitely say simply "NSFW". Who knows, maybe you work for an employer who encourages visiting such websites. In fact, ErosBlog has touched on this and suggests "not safe for sex-hostile environments". But even "not safe for sex-hostile environments" is pretty silly, because maybe sex-hostile environments are the type of environments that need a little shaking up! My proposal is to simply to say something like "contains nudity" or "contains descriptions of sex" or something else a little more factual rather than judgemental. So you can judge for yourself whether clicking is in your best interest. That way, environments that are intentionally sex-hostile (e.g. schools, some people's employers, etc.) can browse at their own risk while those who find themselves in environments which are unintentionally sex-hostile (such as, evidently, my apartment) can do something to change that.
Richard Tallent writes about utility services as natural monopolies.#
As a McCloud might say, "There can be only one." Physical competition is unreasonable (who wants five electric utilities [running] wires through our right-of-ways?). Republican-minded people tend to then suggest publicly-permitted corporate monopolies, but monopoly power breeds monopoly prices (high), monopoly service (low), and the use of sole-source government contracts leads to government corruption through lobbying, campaign contributions and endorsements, etc.
[...]
There's plenty of room for capitalism. You can outsource construction and maintenance. You can (for electricity or Internet) bid out for the "juice." You can hire contractors for customer service and billing. In the Internet world, the city might provide DNS servers, but email and web hosting services should be left up to individual subscribers, or someone may be able to come in and offer wireless as an alternative to the city's MAN. In the end, though, the land, wires, equipment, pipes, airwaves, and poles are public infrastructure and public resources that should be owned directly by the people.
I would argue that five electric utilities SHOULD be allowed and they should have to pay the owner of every piece of land that they want to put telephone wires on as a way of compensating for the convenience - with any contract that the owner decides. Just because something is a monopoly now, doesn't mean it always has to be. We shouldn't be afraid to fundamentally change the rules governing certain things if they new method may be better.
Tony Pierce on internet strip tease.#
i dont have the most confidence in a lot of areas of my life. strangely, that can be liberating.
a few hot chicks, as ive reported, have been kind enough to show me their nude bods on their web cams. one of them was so generous as to get me a web cam off my amazon wish list. so naturally yesterday when it arrived i did a funny little strip show for her and even gave her the much-promised bonercam shot.
i was shocked how easily i stripped down for this virtual stranger.
Tony Pierce writes about Blook II and editors.#
id also like to address the idea of editors and blogs. many people define the blog as something that is typically not edited. it's one way that "real" journalists can seperate themselves from we lowly internet scribes... who dont matter... who arent important... who have nothing to say... who cant write... because we dont have editors.
obviously i disagree with their theories and i can simply point to lil rags like the new york times who have floors of editors and still wind up making gigantic gaffs and exposing themselves as being mere mortals.
here at the busblog, and in the blogosphere, we have no problem telling you that whatever you read in here you should take with a grain of salt, editor or no.
David Czarnecki writes about why Channel Z isn't much different from blojsom and blosxom.#
The index page: In Dave's new view for Scripting news, you see what's "on" today. In other words, you see the current day's entries. This would certainly be possible in blojsom. I could envision a change to the calendar filter plugin to support showing only the current day's posts if no date is provided. I don't know if Dave has done this in Channel Z, but blojsom supports category mapping for the index "page" or what I consider the default or "/" category. In blojsom, what you can do is present entries from all entries (up to a certain depth), some (a chosen subset of categories from within your category hierarcy), or use the root "/" category as a category itself. Furthermore, blojsom's flavors allow you to define a new flavor ("geek") setup to say render as HTML, and then choose the "/java", "/blogging/formats/RSS", and "/blogging/formats/Atom" categories to be shown when the "geek" flavor is requested. I could envision supporting dynamic flavors so that users could setup their own RSS feeds for the categories they wanted to see from my blog. That shouldn't be a problem at all.
To me, Channel Z is powerful for three major reasons: (1) You can have posts be in multiple categories at the same time - not just hierarchically. Blos[xj]om doesn't do this. (2) You are posting with an outliner and can have finer structure to your posts. (3) It is very easy to categorize posts with the outliner - right click and click!
Channel Z, I think, will not be a single product/project that does these things... it will be the prototype for a new type of blogging tool that will be copied and improved by tools like blosxom and MovableType.
Mark Bernstein writes about the problem with movie rating systems and why the interpretation of "Porn" matters.#
The current movie rating system is pernicious, because sometimes you'd like to make a movie that really is for grownups, that talks about things you don't want to discuss around the children. And, today, you can't.
Ratings are dangerous, too, because the people who hand out R ratings do it without rules or reason or accountability. Lately, for example, I've heard that they won't pass anything that suggests females under 21 can have orgasms. What's going to happen to us when a film can't get an R rating (and so you can't see it in theatersor on TV or rent it from Blockbuster, even if it somehow gets made) because it talks about secret American prison camps? Or portrays the American military in an unflattering light? Or advocates a criminal act, like taking a drug the FDA hasn't approved -- perhaps a contraceptive or a cancer treatment that some influential lobby dislikes?
What's to stop them?
Steve MacLaughlin gives style advice to men with regards to collars and suits.#
HELLO, my name is Scott! He wears a name tag ALL the time. (Via Ron Davis.)#
In the beginning, it all started out as an experiment. "What would happen if I wore a nametag all the time?" I wondered. Maybe people would be friendlier. Maybe people would be more willing to say hello. Maybe people would stare at me and think I was a complete weirdo!
Either way, I predicted that people's reactions to wearing a nametag would be pretty interesting. What I did not predict, however, was that wearing a nametag would become my own effective tool for increasing friendliness; especially in an isolated society that so desperately needs to hear more of the word "hello."
Strange Women Lying in Ponds links to a review of The Last Samurai.#
n the end, Katsumoto, with Algren by his side, faces a battle with newly industrialized forces. This is set up to showcase the uniquely Japanese value called "The Nobility of Failure," to quote the title of Ivan Morris's book on the subject, evidently an inspiration to Zwick. In the last battle of "The Last Samurai," Katsumoto, Algren and a few hundred others ride into Gatling guns. We're supposed to feel, I don't know, sorry for them, because their little con game is over, because Japan is achieving a central government and a unification under national leadership, along with other little things included in the bargain like education, medicine, and so forth.
This movie thinks that's terrible; it yearns for a medieval country to remain medieval. What sane person could buy into such absurdity? "The Last Samurai" stands for the Banality of Failure.
[...]
The samurai rebels of the Meiji Restoration were Japan's equivalent of the dead-enders and the Islamists that we see in Iraq, today; utterly opposed to modernity and the creation of the types of civic institutions that allow progress and, hopefully, democracy to flourish, they apparently hoped to drag society backward into a time when they acted with impunity over the lives of ordinary citizens.
Dean Esmay writes about why the Electoral College is a good idea.#
The electoral college is a very strong force for moderation in Presidential politics. In order to win the Presidency, you cannot concentrate on only getting Christian voters, or white voters, or the votes of everybody in one region. Instead, Presidential candidates are forced to travel the country, pay attention to numerous local issues, and pay more attention to minority interests and minority views than they ever would if they were simply required to get a popular vote majority.
Every Presidential candidate in our history (except Washington) has realized this. He has no choice but to find some sort of message that resonates not *just* with people who agree with his personal philosophy, but which *also* incorporates issues that matter a great deal to people scattered all over the nation.
What this inevitably means is that Presidents always tend to annoy people. The only way it is possible to get elected is to take a number of wishy-washy, and sometimes conflicting, stances. It is tempting to therefore think that this makes Presidential candidates dishonorable or unprincipled. But the best Presidents are neither. They are just people who have come to appreciate that they *must* compromise, that they *must* pay attention to issues all over the country, and that they *must* at times take pragmatic stances that are inconsistent. Because they *must* pay attention to conflicting viewpoints from all over this country. It also forces them to care as much about what people in Vermont and Arkansas think as what the people in New York and California think. It causes them to care as much about poor rural areas as wealthy urban areas.
Answer a poll: How many Weblogs do you follow?#
Don Park posts an amazing picture.#
Ryan Overbey explains why we should try to understand the "odd" and "eccentric" religions.#
Let's not pretend Western religions are fundamentally different from other religions. Western religions suffer from many of the same horrors, irrationalities, and superstitious magical practices that make African and Asian religions seem so weird. We've just learned to overlook them.
A note on the point of all these posts on African religion and Scientology and whatnot: Many people have suggested that I'm in the Ripley's Believe-it-or-Not school of religious studies. That my habit is to say Oh look at these weird people doing such weird things! But they're missing the point. I think these blinds that prevent us from really observing and evaluating our own religious traditions are remarkably strong. The only way to unblind ourselves is to study what is radically different, obviously magical and weird and even incorrect. Scientology is a great example of this. And once I've convinced you that it's OK to make evaluative claims, positive or negative, about Scientology; once I've convinced you that it's OK to use economic or sociological analysis to understand Scientology, then I can turn it around and say "Good. Now apply these tools to Judaism, and Christianity, and Islam. Go!" That's what's at stake when you study magic, and that's what makes it such a fun thing to study.