Clay Shirky on Governance Models
July 18, 2008 | Cooperatives | Governance
Noted for the future: Chris Heuer interviews writer and speaker Clay Shirky. The important moment for me come in at around 10:15, continuing to the end, where he desires a new model for governance and corporate structures. He wants a co-op model, but doesn't know it yet. I plan to educate him.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Crusty old out-of-it white guy
June 4, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
History Train: "It really will say something about this country if Obama, with all his intellect, his verbal gifts and his strategic canniness, ends up losing to a crusty old out-of-it white guy who left his principles in the dumpster years ago and has nothing to offer this country but the chance for conservatives to go on playing Jack Bauer and G.I. Joe for another four years."
Permalink | Comments (0)
Obama's Electoral Map
May 21, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Must read for any political junkie. via Dave Winer
Permalink | Comments (0)
Summary of political pundantry today
May 16, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
In only four minutes!
Matt Yglesias: "Conservative radio host Kevin James is on Hardball to call Barack Obama and appeaser, and Chris Matthews hits upon the nice idea of asking James to explain what it was that Chamberlain did wrong at Munich. As becomes apparent, James has no idea! He just likes to say "appeasement" a lot, but doesn't know what it means, what the context was, what was wrong with it, or how it might possibly apply today. Basically, he's an idiot, which is no surprise, but it is rare to see these things so amply demonstrated."
Permalink | Comments (0)
US politics snapshot, all you need to know edition
April 25, 2008 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
Permalink | Comments (0)
Moving On
March 18, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
A smart take on the super-delgates:
Superdelegates can worry about the party, or they can preen and carry on about the importance of their role. They can't do both. The only thing the Clinton and Obama campaigns agree on is that neither can secure the nomination with pledged delegates alone. So the uncommitted superdelegates wringing their hands in the Times are the same ones who will ultimately decide the nominee. Why wait until August? If they truly cared about ending the primary, they could do so in a matter of days or weeks. All they need to do is declare their allegiance now.
If all the 352 uncommitted superdelegates (CNN's number) chose Obama, he'd have 1970 delegates and need 55 more to secure the nomination. Slate's Delegate Counter says he could draw a paltry 35 percent of the vote in Pennsylvania and still secure that many. Once superdelegates declared, the race would be over, and the remaining primaries a mere formality. The party could focus on John McCain. The same holds true for Clinton. If the uncommitteds swung her way, she'd have 1,831 delegates to Obama's 1,618. She'd need only reasonable showings through May 6th to cross the delegate finish-line.
The story is quoteing the Sunday NY Times piece, which certainly left a bad taste in this household when we read it that morning.
Permalink | Comments (0)
You Can't Be Serious
March 18, 2008 | Arts & Culture | Governance | People & Society
From the middle section of a longer interview with the rapper DMX:
Are you following the presidential race?
Not at all.You’re not? You know there’s a Black guy running, Barack Obama and then there’s Hillary Clinton.
His name is Barack?!
Barack Obama, yeah.
Barack?!Barack.
What the fuck is a Barack?! Barack Obama. Where he from, Africa?Yeah, his dad is from Kenya.
Barack Obama?Yeah.
What the fuck?! That ain’t no fuckin’ name, yo. That ain’t that nigga’s name. You can’t be serious. Barack Obama. Get the fuck outta here.You’re telling me you haven’t heard about him before.
I ain’t really paying much attention.I mean, it’s pretty big if a Black…
Wow, Barack! The nigga’s name is Barack. Barack? Nigga named Barack Obama. What the fuck, man?! Is he serious? That ain’t his fuckin’ name. Ima tell this nigga when I see him, “Stop that bullshit. Stop that bullshit” [laughs] “That ain’t your fuckin’ name.” Your momma ain’t name you no damn Barack.So you’re not following the race. You can’t vote right?
Nope.Is that why you’re not following it?
No, because it’s just—it doesn’t matter. They’re gonna do what they’re gonna do. It doesn’t really make a difference. These are the last years.But it would be pretty big if we had a first Black president. That would be huge.
I mean, I guess…. What, they gon’ give a dog a bone? There you go. Ooh, we have a Black president now. They should’ve done that shit a long time ago, we wouldn’t be in the fuckin’ position we in now. With world war coming up right now. They done fucked this shit up then give it to the Black people, “Here you take it. Take my mess.”Right, exactly.
It’s all a fuckin’ setup. It’s all a setup. All fuckin’ bullshit. All bullshit. I don’t give a fuck about none of that.We could have a female president also, Hillary Clinton.
I mean, either way it doesn’t matter. I don’t care. No one person is directly affected by which president, you know, so what does it matter.Yeah, but the country is.
I guess. The president is a puppet anyway. The president don’t make no damn decisions.The president…they don’t have that much authority basically?
Nah, never.But Bush pretty much…
You think Bush is making fuckin’ decisions?He did, yeah, he fucked up the country.
He act like he making decisions. He could barely speak! He could barely fuckin’ speak! Can’t be serious. He ain’t making no damn decisions.Well Barack has a good chance of winning so that might be something.
Good for him, good for him.
Then come the comments!
crocker says: fucking wow. DMX has lost his fucking mind.
sooch says: why didn’t he just bark through the interview?
DirtDogggy says: Only naive young fucks wouldn’t understand what hes talking about, the wiser you get the tougher life is, he’s far from dumb, he knows who Obama is retards, he was trying to make a point, that it doesn’t mean fuck all no matter who wins the election. I’ve bin saying the presidents a puppet on a string for years, finally someone said it, it doesn’t even matter who wins it’s just a matter of timing whether people like them or not, presidents just push the button they make no decisions on their own or have any origional ideas. I have a feeling X is right, the black mans going to take the heat for fucking up the US/world but it’s really a big chain reaction of recent years of fuckery by all the politicians and presidents put together.
Diz says: Man, what the fuck kind of interview is this. I know the interviewer was ready to get the hell out of there. DMX has lost his fucking mind. But you know what they say, some of the best artists are fucked up anyway. Hopefully good music is on the way.
Real Talk says: X is on drugs, it’s no secret. He’s got a drug problem. It’s sad but that’s rock n roll man. If a normal person is on drugs, they can’t eat. If a musician is on drugs, they still got money coming in. He’s like Ozzie Osborn wit it. Hopefully he’s not completely gone, you know? I hate to see people become just a shell of what they used to be.
Permalink | Comments (0)
A Call for Journalistic Courage
March 18, 2008 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
Important essay by Walter Pincus on the role of the press in a free society:
Today’s mainstream print and electronic media want to be neutral, unbiased and objective, presenting both or all sides as if they were on the sidelines refereeing a game in which only the players—the government and its opponents—can participate. They have increasingly become common carriers, transmitters of other people’s ideas and thoughts, irrespective of import, relevance and at times even accuracy.
At a time when it is most needed, the media, and particularly newspapers, have dropped the idea of having experienced reporters provide analysis and context and turned instead to retired public figures or so-called experts to provide commentary. It was not always this way.
From the 1950s through the 1980s, I could name reporters and columnists whose experience on their beats or in their areas made them thoughtful and respected commentators. Younger reporters today are regularly shifted around from beat to beat, never really having enough time to master totally complex subjects, such as health, public education and environmental policies. Coverage then depends on statements and pronouncements by government sources or their critics.
Jay Rosen posts a long and thoughtful comment (here quoting Josh Marshall): "The important thing is to show integrity-- not to be a neuter, politically. And having good facts that hold up is a bigger advantage than claiming to reflect all sides equally well."
Related, and best headline of the day: MSM Still In Trouble–Also Generalissimo Francisco Franco Is Still Dead.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Olbermann Goes Off On Clinton
March 12, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
OMG awesome liberal screed against racism being promulgated by the Clinton campaign.
Ten minutes of literate rage like you haven't ever seen on TV. Finally, someone with a pulpit speaks the truth.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Strategic Wasteland
February 27, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Now, however, as Obama has gained steadily in the polls, the Clinton campaign has reversed field. Top Clinton aides are pleading with uncommitted super delegates to hold off making any commitments, fearful that any commitments they make would be to back Obama, not Clinton.
In language that could have been lifted from the Obama playbook just a few weeks ago, the email says Clinton backers should make the case to super delegates that: "If House, Senate and DNC members try to end this process now, it would be very damaging to those institutions, the Democratic Party and our chances in November."
It's kind of sad, at this point, as long as that sympathy doesn't earn her votes. She and her advisors (and her, um, husband, not to put too fine a point on it) were completely, utterly, and devastatingly out-smarted at every turn. Next Wednesday Clinton's entire staff should immolate themselves so we never have to watch this level of bumbling incompetence again.
I have watched this race up close here in NH for over ten months. From feet-on-the-street, to backoffice technology; from knowing when to hold your cards to knowing when to take the high road, Team Obama's bottom-up decentralized aim-high campaign has won the competition for ideas, if not quite yet the nomination. This win came from a virtually unknown young man with a funny name, against the most powerful political couple of the past 20 years. One million people have donated to his campaign. Obama is not creating our desire for a new way, he is simply channeling it.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Reactionaries
February 25, 2008 | Governance
Texas A & M students shut down a major highway as they march seven miles from campus to vote, where the Republican political machine had located the polls. I love YouTube.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Blueprint for Change
February 11, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
A lot of people say, "I don't know what Barack Obama stands for; he's all vague and lofty and aspirational. What are his actual policies?"
Well, he's got this thing called a website, maybe you've seen one? Even better, here's a 64-page pdf you can download and print out and read in the water closet that lays it all out in bullet points and details.
But for me, it hardly matters what the specifics are, because getting law through Congress is non-trivial – plans will change. I'd rather learn how someone thinks, how they approach problems, how they evaluate their options. From that point of view the website and the Blueprint are useful. But if you disagree with anything in it, don't worry too much, it's unlikely to end up as it begins.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Clinton's Feminism
February 4, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton had a teary-eyed moment on the campaign trail today during a nostalgic visit to Yale, where she graduated from law school nearly 35 years ago. [...] Mrs. Clinton, looking teary, raised her left hand to her cheek and brushed something away with her finger.
Wow, teary-eyed, the very day before a critical election. What a coincidence. This happened one other time, here in NH:
The emotional moment echoed a similar one in New Hampshire last month, when Mrs. Clinton’s eyes welled with tears as she talked about the tensions of running for president.
Funny, with 35 years in public service (sic, coughwalmartboardcough) you'd think these teary episodes wouldn't happen so much when the chips are down and everyone's watching. Unless, of course, it's part of the sell.
Hillary Clinton's definition of feminism: Cry when you want to get your way, and when the going gets tough send your husband out to bully the mean kids (coughfairytailsouthcarolinajessejacksoncough).
I am all for heartfelt emotion, but not for strategic emotional cues designed to manipulate other people. With all that's happened to Hillary Clinton, if she were genuinely a heartfelt person, she would tear up more often then just the day before an election when all the media are watching. Gag me.
Andrew Sullivan says it better than I can.
Permalink | Comments (0)
On Politics
January 28, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Worth it:
Kennedy Endorsements of Barack Obama (42 min, and worth it)
The Billary Road to Republican Victory
Races Entering Complex Phase Over Delegates
In Open Nomination, ‘Superdelegates’ May Hold Key to Victory
Clinton’s Camp Seeks Gentler Role for Ex-President
TPMtv: Sunday Show Clinton Pile-On (Snark alert)
Permalink | Comments (0)
Bill Clinton uncut
January 23, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
A fascinating CNN video of Bill Clinton, running nearly five minutes, uncut. The reporter asks him a question, and he just goes on and on, and on. He's pissed, but he smiles, and talks and rebuts, and all in all gets down and does some hard-core political jiving.
This video supports my long-held belief that political figures should be allowed in the media only when the clips are a minimum of five or ten minutes, unedited. Soundbites would be outlawed. Then you'd get to see them think, see their character and personality, get a better sense of who they were. Would that not be better? I used to like Bill Clinton. Today, not so much.
Obama: "I have no doubt that once the nomination contest is over, I will get the people who voted for her. Now the question is can she get the people who voted for me?"
From Notio's point of view, the answer is very likely, "no."
Permalink | Comments (0)
Sigh
January 9, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Oh well. It's not over yet.
About the polls: IMHO "Strategic" voting doesn't work. Vote for who you want to win. Trying to game the system always fails.
Net-net: The Republicans are relieved, they might get to run against Clinton in the fall. She would lose in a Clinton vs. McCain contest.
Finally, they didn't randomize the order of the candidate names!?!? That's got to matter.
A photo of where I spent election night.
Permalink | Comments (2)
My Home Town
January 7, 2008 | Governance
Permalink | Comments (0)
Could Be Game Over
January 7, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Hillary Clinton sez:
Dr. King’s dream began to be realized when President Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act,” Mrs. Clinton said [...]. “It took a president to get it done.”
And a commenter at Andrew Sullivan's responds:
That's right. It wasn't the courage of King and local Montgomery residents standing up to legalized white supremacy in their hometown that began to change America, it was the white man. It wasn't Rosa Parks who had enough and refused to sit in the back of the bus that got things started, it was the white man. It wasn't John Lewis and others facing down billy clubs and tear gas in Selma, it was the white man. [More]
If this story gains momentum in the next news cycle, coupled with a strong NH Obama win, it could be bad news for Hillary.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Emotive Politics Mediascape
January 7, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Beyond his policy positions and rhetorical mad skillz, Barack Obama is setting a new standard for excellence in mass communication propaganda. Go to Barack TV and check out the "Generation Obama" video. It's just under 15 min long, documentary style, and a fascinating example of aspirational politics.
- It opens with organizing a student meeting, generating questions for a conference call. It then moves to student discussion of the Virginia Tech meltdown. The question crafted for the conference call is about international relations.
- 4:00 - Students sitting around telling their story. All student conversation; no narration or voice-over.
- 6:00 - Today's college sophomores were seven years old at the time of the Oaklahoma City bombing, 11 years old at the time of the Columbine murders, and 13 years old on 9/11/2001. Video continues with their stories about 9/11 - all their ideas and opinions.
- 7:30 - Back to Virginia Tech. Students discussion the loss of safety.
- 9:00 - Serious mood is broken to outright humor as a student acts out and mocks Barack's 2004 speech. Making fun of him! Produced and promoted by the campaign—would Clinton ever make fun of herself?
- 10:00 - Obama appears for the first time, and we're into some stump speech territory.
- 12:00 - Barack backstage with the students, joshing about cell phone photos. This short film shows students learning the operations of political operations—how to move the people and levers of democracy. This is a legacy of the Dean campaign: increasing activism. Students trying to make sense of the world—struggling to find the right response; not simply black and white reactions. Students trying to make a difference—willing to put themselves out there and have fun at the candidate the meet 'n greet. Politics is fun people.
It was filmed on April 19th, but has only just now entered rotation, taking an implicit or subconcious position that he's been a consistent candidate, the same person since Spring. All of this is powerful political propaganda. Motivational, educational, instructional. The campaign filmed all this raw material and have been producing it in due time, rolling it out when the time feels right. It's a very powerful media strategy, deploying raw media material as the situation dictates. This one models active, positive, and good student behavior. Nearly zero specific policy discussion - you can read the data on the website. This was all emotion. Closing the sale.
I have been an Obama supporter since March or April last year, which you may have first noticed as a semi-amusing blog post:
"I heard you wanted an Obama bumper sticker," he said, as he handed me the goods. I nearly fell over. "Wow! This is like a precious commodity!," I exclaimed. "Yeah, they're really hard to get," he said. I said, "I went on the website, and I couldn't believe they weren't selling them." Then Dave said, "Yeah, I was talking with Graham, and he said you wanted one." I laughed out loud. "You were talking with Graham?!?!?" Like, this is the modern political campaign. Including intrastate backchannel discussion about getting Michael J. his Obama bumper sticker? My mind reeled. "Yeah," he said, "I came a couple of times last week, but you weren't here." Three words: O. M. G. I'm thinking, here's this guy, walking the streets of Hanover, searching for Michael J., with a single Obama bumpersticker in his hand! It's like they invented some weird, inefficient, but personal, and effective, distribution mechanism.
They have long been people-powered at the grass-roots, with advanced technology (targeted CRM, portable video, web distribution, online fundraising), expressing the messages that their own audience puts in their own words!. And now everyone else is paying attention. No need to say much in person, now. Show up and inspire, support the detail online. Stay connected on a human level. Voice your campaign with your audience's own words and faces.
So, he's getting my vote this round. It's brilliant, daaahling.
Permalink | Comments (0)
On The Obama Iowa Win
January 4, 2008 | Governance | People & Society
Nine percentage points. That's a strength you can't overlook. Look at the diversity in the slices:
- Obama beat Clinton among women 35% to 30%
- Obama beat Edwards among voters in union households 30%-24%
- Obama beat Clinton and Edwards among voters of almost every income level (Obama and Clinton tied among voters who make $15-30,000)
- As many voters age 17-29 as voters 65 and older participated last night -- in previous years senior participation has been 5-times greater than younger voters.
- Obama beat Edwards and Clinton among voters who want change (51%-20%-19%)
- Despite countless attacks and hundreds of thousands of dollars in negative mail, TV, and radio, Obama beat Clinton and Edwards (34%-30%-27%) among voters who say health care is the most important issue
- Obama won among those who said the economy was the most important issue (36%-26%-26%)
- Obama won over Clinton and Edwards (35%-26%-17%) among those who said Iraq was the most important issue
- Won across the ideological spectrum – winning among liberals, moderates and conservatives
- Won among high income and lower income voters among voters with household income below $50,000 (34%-32%-19%) and among those over $50,000 (41%-19%-28%)
If you live in NH and are undecided, please spend ten minutes watching this Obama propaganda piece. I say that with affection: I've supported this guy for nearly a year, and I continue to be very optimistic. If you are on the fence please have a look. If you're tossing a coin, do me a favor and just vote Obama.
On the video: Forgive the foolish mistake of the "Dartmouth University" (s/b "College") caption. Most of the footage was shot in the fall, demonstrating (by showing not telling) that they had a consistent message months ago. They don't have to explicitly say that Clinton changes her mind about everything every three weeks. It's also nice to reminisce about the warmer weather, so it's pleasant to watch.
If you want a shorter taste, watch this three-minute excerpt of the pre-caucus "closing" speech. Tell your friends: Vote.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Real-Time Democracy
January 3, 2008 | Governance
C-span live at an Iowa caucus! It's amazing, watching people stand up, hold their hands up, count up a number, point to the next person to count, and drop their hands. Riveting, truly.
Update, from NY Times
7:54 p.m. | Our colleague Ashley Parker, who is in Des Moines at the Plymouth Congregational Church, Precinct 73, said the official count for tonight was 454 people, which the caucus chairwoman said was “a record for participation.” In the first round, it was 217 for Mr. Obama, while Mrs. Clinton was six short of the 68 she needed to crack the 15 percent viability. They were out in the hallway, trying to make deals.
She couldn't meet 15%?!? They were out in the hallway, trying to make deals. This is the moment when strong-arm politicos go to the mat.
Gruber: "Huckabee: The candidate for people who think George W. Bush has relied too heavily on science and reason."
Permalink | Comments (0)
Iowa Caucus Closers
January 2, 2008 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
I had my hair cut today, and the stylist told me she supported Barack Obama in the NH primary. We chatted about that, and I asked her if she had considered Hillary Clinton. She said, "Well, it's funny, because when I first heard she was running I got really excited. People came into the salon and we would talk about it — a woman president! Sometimes, I would close my eyes, and just imagine what it would be like, what it would mean, to have a woman president. And I would just feel great — [she relaxes and collapses her shoulders, rolling her eyes up all aflutter, as if in a dreamy dream] — and then I would open my eyes and it would be Hillary, you know? And I just got sick to my stomach, thinking, 'I'd have to listen to that woman for the next eight years.' It was like, 'no way.'"
In honor of Lisa, here's Hillary's closing TV ad for the Iowa caucus:
And here's Barack Obama's:
How about this Obama propaganda ? Marching music? Check. Aspirational imagery? Check. Oratorical escalation? Check. (Still, I'm voting for the guy.)
John McCain is the only credible Republican nominee:
Permalink | Comments (0)
On Obama
November 6, 2007 | Governance | People & Society
Andrew Sullivan has written a strong cover story for The Atlantic supporting Barack Obama. He describes how he came to this in a great interview. Combined, they provide pretty much everything you need to know about why I'm supporting Obama in the NH primary. Summary: Obama is a meta-candidate, attempting to re-frame not just the issues, but the mode of discourse. Might not work (just yet) but the time will come, and the sooner the better given the situation.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Our Generation’s Enlightened Contribution
November 6, 2007 | Governance | People & Society
I am moved by this post, which relates an unfortunate incident on a train from New Haven CT to the dominant cultural narrative currently unfolding. [Grammatical ambiguity intended.] In 2002 and 2003 – seems so long ago, now, doesn't it? – I remember thinking that the tone of America's leadership would have a trickle-down effect on everyday life. Like buying a new car and suddenly seeing the same model everywhere, I then noticed trickle-down effects every day. Increased minor road rage, even in my small New England hamlet. More status-seeking behavior as the College and Hospital swelled their administrative ranks. Increased "black and white" judgments – "you're either with us or against us." That smug tone from the 50.5% majority, still in evidence on Fox News, even as their influence wanes. The victim mentality of the so-called "left," still in evidence at the US Congress, despite Democratic majorities in both houses.
I want to live in a society where people are kind, where we assume the best in people, not the worst. I want to understand dangers and threats, but I want that balanced by the trade-offs required for increased marginal safety. I want honest leadership, that is open and transparent and genuine. I want us all to face up to our collective challenges and take individual action even if it has negative short-term impacts on our own economics. I want to be free of jingoism. I want to be able to write a post like this without wondering if I'll end up on some list somewhere.
I am naive. But I'd rather be a free man in my grave, than living as a puppet or a slave.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Except You
November 5, 2007 | Arts & Culture | Governance | People & Society
Bravo. Probably the most important factor in the next US Presidential election is getting young people to vote, no matter what. Maybe this campaign will help.
Permalink | Comments (0)
What many people criticize
October 1, 2007 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
Adam Nagourney at the New York Times on NH's independent voters:
As a rule, they are middle and upper income, college educated, socially moderate, fiscally conservative, anti-Washington and repulsed by what many people criticize as the overly partisan atmosphere there.
This is the first article I've read with any analysis that comes even close to what I observe. Most electoral commentary is completely vapid and virtually fictional. This article at least gets at some depth of the dynamics, even if it starts with oh-so-breathless coverage of the so-called swelling ranks of independents. Democrat? Republican? Does this have meaning anymore? Similar to the recording industry, all this is the last gasp (decades long) of a dying form of organization.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Leading with love, not fear
September 23, 2007 | Governance | People & Society
The mayor of San Diego struggles with gay marriage, and does the right thing. I read the brief speech yesterday, but the power of watching him speak, tearfully, brings some hope to my cynical perspective of today's politics.
Permalink | Comments (0)
3 links...
September 12, 2007 | Governance
...on the Iraq situation.
- Conservative commentator Andrew Sullivan, The Atlantic.
- Law professor and Harvard Fellow Oliver Goodenough , Rutland Herald.
- Software entrepreneur Dave Winer, Scripting News.
Bonus link: New York reporter Mark Shenk, Bloomberg.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Social Web Hits The Election Cycle
January 26, 2007 | Governance | People & Society | Software
Great post over at Bokardo Social Web Design, altering us that Hillary Clinton is using Yahoo answers to gather the prol's thoughts on health-care reform.
One, Clinton is actually asking the American people what they think, rather than assuming or generalizing from the party she’s a part of. (this doesn’t mean she’ll listen, but it’s a start)
Two, Clinton is using Yahoo Answers, a publicly-accessible social software app to ask the question. In the past year Yahoo Answers has been a runaway success for Yahoo, racking up millions of users.
Three, in just two days there are over 35,000 answers!.
Sure, it could be a publicity stunt, but that will be self-limiting in the long-run.
Then again, here's Kos' take on Hillary and her netroots support in general:
Here's what I think -- Hillary has no interest in truly making up ground in the netroots. Rather, she sees it as a place to make a good show, and then sell that to the traditional media. It's her campaign's version of "Shock and Awe". Lots of noise. Lots of flashing lights. Lots of smoke. But it's all for show.
In a straw poll taken after Hillary's announcement, she got 4% of the vote, with Obama at 28% and Edwards at 35%. For my money, it's an Edwards/Obama ticket, and they will kick some serious butt.
Okay, enough with the trivial politics.
Permalink | Comments (0)
The Speech
January 11, 2007 | Governance | People & Society
For my money, Andrew Sullivan sums it up perfectly.
What we will discover in the next few months, therefore, is simply whether the entire premise of this strategy is actually true. The president is asking us to find this out one more time. He seems to disbelieve the overwhelming evidence on the ground - that the dynamic has changed beyond recognition. His intellectual rubric - democracy versus terror - has not changed to deal with fast-changing events, or to take account of the sectarian dynamic that his appallingly managed occupation has spawned.
Andrew Sullivan is an interesting writer. He's conservative, supported the Iraq war, and Bush in 2000 (but not in 2004). He is disappointed with conservatives, the conduct of the war, and the intellectual dishonesty of political discourse. He's written what appears to be an interesting book (among others). He was one of the first bloggers to figure out how to earn ~$80K a year blogging, and parlayed that into a gig writing (daily) for Time online. He's smart, reasonable, and thoughtful, even when I disagree with his positions. If you're of the left-wing persuasion, he is a good addition to your input mix.
Permalink | Comments (0)
When You Act You Make New Facts
December 20, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Important intellectual analysis from Jay Rosen on how the Bush administration has played the media.
In Without a Doubt (subtitled “Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush”) Suskind was not talking about an age old conflict between realists and idealists, the sort of story line that can be re-cycled for every administration. It wasn’t the ideologues against the pragmatists, either. He was telling us that reality-based policy-making—and the mechanisms for it—had gotten dumped. A different pattern had appeared under George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. The normal checks and balances had been overcome, so that executive power could flow more freely. Reduced deliberation, oversight, fact-finding, and field reporting were different elements of an emerging political style. Suskind, I felt, got to the essence of it with his phrase, the “retreat from empiricism.”
Permalink | Comments (0)
Impossible to Write a PC Headline For This
November 30, 2006 | Governance
"Lohse, a social work master’s student at Southern Connecticut State University, says he has proven what many progressives have probably suspected for years: a direct link between mental illness and support for President Bush."
“Our study shows that psychotic patients prefer an authoritative leader,” Lohse says. “If your world is very mixed up, there’s something very comforting about someone telling you, ‘This is how it’s going to be.’”
“Bush supporters had significantly less knowledge about current issues, government and politics than those who supported Kerry,” the study says.
A nice authoritarian side-effect of trashing the public education system.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Axis of '70s Campus Republicans
November 7, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Like everybody else, I don't know what's going to happen today, but this election has already illuminated one critical truth: The modern GOP -- or, more specifically, the Axis of '70s Campus Republicans now running it -- really is just a criminal enterprise disguised as a political party.
Dirty tricks, large and small, are a sorry fact of life in American politics, but what the Republicans have done over the past few weeks -- the surrealist attack ads, the forged endorsements, the midnight robo calls, the arrest threats, the voter misinformation (did you know your polling station has been moved?) -- is sui generis, at least at the national level.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Keep An Eye On the Situation
November 7, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
CNN: Bonds rally on election bets: Market surges on hopes of fiscal discipline created by Democrat-controlled Congress; dollar mixed.
via Talking Points Memo, who's doing a great job covering the election tampering...
From the GOP handbook of Maryland politics:(1) Recruit homeless men in Philadelphia;
(2) Bus them into Maryland;
(3) Arrange for the Republican governor's wife to greet them upon their arrival;
(4) Outfit them in hats and T-shirts for the governor's re-election campaign;
(5) Have them pass out flyers in heavily Democratic areas that erroneously identify the GOP candidates for governor and U.S. senator as "Democrats."
...and voter intimidation:
Over at TPMMuckraker, Justin has an interview with a poll watcher in Arizona who reports that a trio of men--one with a firearm visible--are harrassing Hispanic voters at a polling station in Tuscon. The poll watcher is a member of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. The group has notified the Department of Justice and the FBI and were told by the feds--get this--to keep an eye on the situation.
Yup, that's how broken it is.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Election Protection
November 7, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Real-time tracking the election disruptions.
EIRS or the Election Incident Reporting System is a sophisticated voting incident tracking system that will be an invaluable tool for Election Protection coalition partners and the public on Election Day and beyond. Voting problems reported through the Voter Hotline (1-866-OUR-VOTE) by coalition members or by poll watchers involved in the Election Protection program will be entered into the system for analysis during and after Election Day.
Scroll down, click on the map.
Also, Talking Points Memo is keeping tabs on vote disruption stories. Example:
Just in case you're keeping tabs, I wanted to tell you that my wife tried to vote in our precinct in Tampa and was not on the list. After several tries to find out why, she was told that the voter database was "cleaned" and there must have been a mistake. I'm trying to find out who "cleaned" it.
When you hear the media talk about "get out the vote" operations, what you should hear is "shut down the vote" tactics.
I'll say it again, if we really care about free and fair elections, then the first place to start is 1) federal regulations on the number of voting machines per capita, per polling district; and 2) uniform poll hours.
At this point, we're in a pretend democracy, kinda the way "reality TV" is real life.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Vote Freedom
November 6, 2006 | Governance
Here's your election-eve music video. (4:22)
Permalink | Comments (0)
Does the News Matter?
October 20, 2006 | Arts & Culture | Governance | People & Society
Aaron Swartz speaks for me:
But finally, I'd like to argue that following the news isn't just a waste of time, it's actively unhealthy. Edward Tufte notes that when he used to read the New York Times in the morning, it scrambled his brain with so many different topics that he couldn't get any real intellectual work done the rest of the day.
I agree, and it's a hard habit to break.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Connect the Dots
October 16, 2006 | Governance | People & Society | Technology
The US election is November 7th. Three weeks away. Read this, then read this. Then, spend 12 minutes and watch this testimony under oath from a computer programmer who was hired to write software to flip the vote in electronic voting machines. Scary? Well, even worse is that he was hired by Tom Feeney, the Speaker of the House of Florida at the time, currently a US Representative.
Update: via TPM: Department of amazing coincidences: Saddam verdict to be read out on November 5th.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Sonny Boy
October 2, 2006 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
The meeting was 15 people, by invitation. Hosted in a very comfortable high-tech room. The guest speaker was from a famous university a few hours south. Worker bees and VPs gathered to talk shop and think big. 45 minute presentation, then lunch is served. We introduce ourselves. Discussion ensues.
Eventually I ask: "What kinds of governance and decision-making structures work for highly complex topics? I have evolved many processes and approaches to working with this, but frequently executives override the advice of their best domain experts, which is bad for morale, bad for projects, and bad for institutions."
[Paraphrasing and editing makes me sound better than I did at the time.]
A few people speak. Eventually the VP says, among other things, with a wry smile pointed in my direction, "Those of us who have been around a while know that politics can't be avoided." Smile.
"Yes," I thought, but didn't say, "my point is we need to subvert politics. It's bad for morale, bad for projects, and bad for institutions. How about if we make decisions based on the merits, instead of the patronizing hierarchical power?"
"Those of us who have been around a while...." Those of us who have been around a while.... Those of us who have been around a while....
[I should grow my beard a little longer to show off the gray hair.]
This is your brain on intelligence, honesty, and enthusiasm. This is your brain on politics and power. Any questions?
Permalink | Comments (1)
Just Ignore Any Conflicts
October 2, 2006 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
I'm scheduling interviews for a project and I received the following (lightly edited) email at 10 AM today, illustrating the problems of "groupware."
That works for Susan! If this works for others, please feel free to add it to Susan's calendar (I'm leaving at 10:30am today). Just ignore any conflicts that show at that time.
First of all, I'm not an internal employee (read the email sig much?), so I can't add it myself, she has to do it for me. And, uh, what does an assistant do if not manage the boss's schedule?? In this case, direct other people to add it to the schedule, I guess... Everyone needs someone to supervise.
But further, note the last line: "Just ignore any conflicts that show at that time." So, when the boss looks at her schedule she has to manually filter what she is doing when, instead of just having one item per time slot.
It's no wonder there are so many problems in the world. People don't do their jobs, or don't know what their jobs are, and then somehow people think they can do more than one thing, or be in more than one place, all at the same time. By the time they head home to find out their government is torturing people to manufacture evidence of terrorism to perpetuate it's own power, they're too exhausted to think. Mission accomplished.
Update: I requested that she add it, since I couldn't, and received the following reply:
Sorry, lost my mind. ;o)
Honesty duly noted.
Permalink | Comments (1)
Is that what you said?
October 1, 2006 | Governance
Nice rant from Brian Dear on the manipulations and distortions and hypocrisy of the US government.
Permalink | Comments (0)
The Harder They Come
September 29, 2006 | Governance | Life | People & Society
But I'll keep on fighting for the things I want
Though I know that when you're dead you can't
But I'd rather be a free man in my grave
Then living as a puppet or a slave
Garcia has a great version from 1978 in commercial release.
Permalink | Comments (0)
In 2006 Congress Passed a Tyrannical Law
September 29, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
I've had a really busy week at work, and now I find that since I took a blogging break the government has gone berserk.
Rafe Colburn: Prisoner of conscience
While some Republicans made a halfhearted show of conscience and Democrats hid in the most craven fashion imaginable, the Bush Administration managed to pass a bill that will enable the government to imprison people for as long as it likes without giving them a day in court, and to torture those prisoners as much as it likes. This law diminishes this country, sullies the values upon which it was founded, and rolls back many centuries of progress in how governments relate to the governed.
NY Times: Rushing Off a Cliff
We don’t blame the Democrats for being frightened. The Republicans have made it clear that they’ll use any opportunity to brand anyone who votes against this bill as a terrorist enabler. But Americans of the future won’t remember the pragmatic arguments for caving in to the administration. They’ll know that in 2006, Congress passed a tyrannical law that will be ranked with the low points in American democracy, our generation’s version of the Alien and Sedition Acts.
Brad DeLong: Neighbor, How Stands the Union?
This is bad. Very bad. I can't underscore how bad this is. This is our Fugitive Slave Act, our Sedition Act, our Korematsu. This is a danger to our domestic liberties and a terrifying threat to our national security--for its impact on our international standing and on our alliances may be terrible indeed.
digby: Rouge President
The truth is that there is a rogue presidency and there has been, since January, 2001 (earlier, if you count the stolen election). Certainly, everyone in Washington knows it, but no one dares to admit it. The bill legalizing torture merely enables Congress to pretend they still have some influence over an executive that from day one was governing, not as if they had a mandate, but as if Bush were a dictator. If, for some miracle, the bill didn't pass, every congress-critter knows Bush would keep on torturing.
Better to vote to pass and preserve the appearance of a working American government, the thinking goes. For the very thought that the US government is seriously broken - that the Executive is beyond the control of anyone and everyone in the world - is such a truly awesome and terrifying thought that it can never be publicly acknowledged. If ever it is, if the American crisis gets outed and Congress and the Supremes openly assert that the Executive has run completely amok and is beyond control, the world consequences are staggering. It is the stuff of doomsday novels.
Jon Husband posted a Canadian comment from the digby post:
I am remembering that the aged supporters of Gen. Franco still live in Madrid, still refusing to be civil to their erstwhile opponents on the Left. I think you are looking at decades of incivility or worse, of conflict on class lines, and maybe race and ethnic lines too. You are deep deep shit neighbours. I will wish you the best of luck with all this. We have our own neo-con dinosaurs to be rendered harmless up here. It will occupy my attention for, say, a decade or two. In the meantime, keep the embers glowing. Something will cause all this ugliness to burst into flame. Its just too grotesque to keep hidden forever.
Shame without limits, embarassment without restraint, regrets without number, apologies to the millions killed in your name, and a century of guilt to be worn and worked off. Get on with it.
Permalink | Comments (0)
NSA & NPS @ SoL
September 20, 2006 | Governance | People & Society | SoL
I had lengthy conversations today with two interesting people. One is very senior in the National Security Agency, the other is very senior at the Naval Postgraduate School. In both cases I had increased hope that there are people in government who are thinking deeply about long-term issues that I care about, and are trying to make a positive impact. They were not trying to persuade me of anything. It was in the topics, the depth of thinking, the sophistication of approach, their vision, and commitment to their work that made me realize things may not be as bad as they seem. Modulo the current executive branch, of course.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Steal an Election with a Diebold Voting Machine
September 15, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Princeton University scientists produce a video and post it on YouTube, demonstrating how you can hack a Diebold voting machine in less than one minute. They also provide to detailed technical paper.
There are exactly zero computer scientists who think a voting machine can be made unhackable. It's time to vote absentee, in all elections, so that you use a paper ballot. These machines should be illegal, and if you walk up to one you should assume that your vote is being thrown away.
Related: If the US government really cared about fair elections, there would be a federal standard for number of voting machines per capita on a voting district level. That would prevent poor and democratic precincts from, somehow, having far fewer machines available, making those people wait for ten hours, while the rich republican districts have so many machines the lines are only ten minutes.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Be All You Can Be
September 15, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Billmon has an excellent quote comparison post today. Who knew that in 1776 Edward Gibbon would write a book that so clearly described the state of our military in 2006?
Permalink | Comments (0)
Crony Capitalism at it's Finest
September 8, 2006 | Arts & Culture | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
Industry Note: The Rot at the Core, Special Disney Crony Capitalism Edition
Of course, neither move - coypright extensions or side payments to politicians in the form of propaganda - are in the least good for the economy, because they destroy more value than they create, through the stifling of potential innovation, competition, and new capital formation. This is crony capitalism at it's finest - we make your propaganda, you protect our assets; this is the kind of anti-capitalism that ends up destroying economies (hi Japan).
Right on.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Olbermann on Rumsfeld
August 31, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Every once in a while, it's worth noting that the majority of people continue to disagree with the Bush/Cheney administration and their approach to the so-called War on Terror, even if we don't talk about it much. Thank you, Keith Olbermann, for this searing critique. Transcript and video via the link.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Democratic Strategy
August 25, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
The smartest thing the US Democrats could do for the next two years is split the Republican Party down the middle between the church-focused social conservatives and the less-government economic conservatives. Karl Rove (has his middle name always been "Christian?") and Grover Norquist have been masterful at holding these two unrelated groups together in one party, but if we are able to show the social conservatives how they need to pay more taxes to support their social agenda, and show the economic conservatives how the lack of social programs and safety nets hurt the economy, then perhaps these two groups can be split apart fighting about what programs to fund.
The best-case scenario is that the social conservatives start a new Evangelical party which pulls people out of the Republican party—then it's a Democratic majority all the way down the line. This has got to be Rove's worst nightmare.
We need a sound bite, along the lines of, I lost my job to outsourcing, I lost my health insurance to an underfunded pension plan, I pay all these goddamn taxes, and I still can't buy liquor or porn at the grocery store.
Or something.
Permalink | Comments (2)
Weekend Fun, Friday Edition
August 18, 2006 | Arts & Culture | Governance
August 11: My anger at The New York Times subsides somewhat as I skim Foucault and Sartre. Surveillance serves its disciplinary function only if the populace is conscious of it. And if Americans aren't wrenched from being-pour-soi to being-en-soi (at least in relation to an observer who is Other) by the objectifying gaze of the state -- well, then the terrorists have won.
August 14: Back in Washington. Dick exults that the foiled London terror plot and the tightened airport security should keep voters' minds focused on national security through the midterms. Naturally, I think of Cottard, the shady entrepreneur in La Peste who comes into his own only when the city of Oran is under plague quarantine, and say so. Dick seems nonplussed.
It's absurd, and funny. And it's the only post this week, so having saved you a bunch of time, you'll just have to read it to humor me.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Creating and Destroying Mutual Understanding
August 4, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Daniel O'Connor has a brilliant post over at Catalaxis called The Political Economics of Stephen Colbert.
In simplest terms, when we communicate we tend to at least implicitly, if not explicitly, raise a set of three distinct validity claims regarding what is true, what is right, and what is sincere. When either one of us has a problem accepting any of the validity claims raised by the other, we may through dialogue challenge the claim and make an effort to come to a mutual understanding of what really is true, right, and sincere for each of us. In our ideal efforts to validate or invalidate one another's claims, we will refer to objective facts to determine what is true, intersubjective values to judge what is right, and subjective intentions to appreciate what is sincere. All three types of claims made by both of us would have to be validated before we could declare a shared understanding--and even then, we would not necessarily have a mutual agreement on all three claims.
He looks into Colbert's truthiness, and wikiality, then invents syncerity to summarize our political discourse today.
Just listen carefully to any political debate, whether it's between presidential candidates or media pundits who make a living expressing their opinions about politicians. There is so little personal sincerity and so very much deception and acrimony that it is a wonder we put up with it. Moreover, the fact that we do put up with it, that we are so easily deceived, or that we claim dishonestly to have been so frequently deceived, is evidence of our own dysfunctional syncerity, disowning the power we really do have to withdraw legitimacy from those who are systematically syncere, whether their syncerity is conscious and calculated or subconscious and incompetent.
Read the whole thing.
Permalink | Comments (0)
We Must Disenthrall Ourselves
July 9, 2006 | Governance | Nature & Environment | People & Society
There's a good interview with Al Gore in the July 13 issue of Rolling Stone. Some quotes:
I believe there is a hunger in the country to be part of a larger vision that changes the way we relate to the environment and the economy. Right now we are borrowing huge amounts of money from China to buy huge amounts of oil from the most unstable region of the world, and to bring it here and burn it in ways that destroy the habitability of the planet. That is nuts! We have to change every aspect of that.
But the debate over oil reserves misses the point. We have more than enough oil, not to mention coal, to completely destroy the habitability of the planet. The real constraint on oil and coal is not supply, but global warming. There's a saying: "The Stone Age didn't end because we ran out of stones."
As Lincoln said in the darkest days of America's darkest passage: "We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we shall save our country." Our biggest challenge, our biggest foe, is thrall. The word sounds ancient, but it means anything that imprisons our thinking and prevents us from seeing the reality of our situation. We're in thrall to oil. We've got to break out of it. We must disenthrall ourselves, and then we will save our planet.
I like Al Gore as a vocal citizen, devoid of political consultants and triangulation. A true leader, a public servant, an honest man.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Letting Go of Outcomes
July 7, 2006 | Governance | Life | People & Society
Over the past ten years I've become much more "process-oriented." Part of this learning comes from my work—as a consultant I'm often in situations where I don't know very much about the specific content, but contribute to change based on looking at the larger system. I used to say that a focus on process leads to a better outcome.
In the past year I dove even more deeply into process and facilitation, especially through participating in and leading Open Space and World Cafe sessions (and couples counseling, a longer story). Now I'd go further about the value of process: When I participate in the design and iteration of a process, I am comfortable with whatever outcome arises. Focusing on how something is decided allows me to let go of what is decided.
One way to think about this is using my favorite phrase from the past year, abstract up. Take a specific situation, then generalize it a bit and work at that level. Then generalize that, and go up one more level. Continue, until you can't make a general case that still contains the specific situation you're dealing with. At that point apply the rules you've learned from the general case, and see how the specific case plays out.
Simple example: Say you're going to buy a house from a friend. It's not listed on the market, and it's a private sale without real estate agents. How do you set the price? One way is to pick a number that feels good and fight for it trying not to compromise too much. Doesn't usually work out too well. Another way is to let the buyer get an appraisal, and use that number. If that doesn't seem quite right to either party, have the seller get another appraisal, and split the difference. At this point you will have two opinions by professionals, and you can choose to use them, or walk away from the deal, but it's not going to make much sense shooting for a number a lot higher or lower than the bounds of the two appraisals.
It's worth noting that letting go of outcomes is non-trivial, as they say in engineering. I would not yet say I am expert at this, only that when I am able to abstract up it works out, usually better than when I'm obsessed with "what's going to happen."
Permalink | Comments (0)
USA, Today
July 5, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Long Sunday deconstructs the meaning of 9/11 in the US psyche.
Billmon compares current US politics to those of Spain in 1936.
Brianstorms reminds us of the Bill of Rights.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Finds Neither Support nor a Passive Population
July 3, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Former Special-Ops guy John Robb writes Global Guerrillas, "an open notebook on the first epochal war of the 21st Century." The latest post, An Attack On Iran = Catalyst Of Chaos summarizes his current thinking on Iran, and the implications for the US.
The economic/societal wave: state failures. A gulf monarchy falls. Successful terrorist attacks on oil production systems have deepened the global energy crisis (and it appears it will continue indefinitely). The global economy goes into a severe and prolonged contraction. The worst finally happens: China's export oriented economy collapses. Protests, currently running at 200 a day, spike to thousands and they are increasingly violent (as protesters clash with domestic militias). The government attempts to crack down with the army but finds neither support nor a passive population during this attempt. Further, the scale of the unrest is too vast. Lacking legitimacy due to a decade of rampant corruption and an inability to deliver rapid growth anymore, the country fragments.
Summary: Possible return to states as the organizing principle, without much left of the federal government. The scary part: John really knows his stuff. Always nice to have a worst-case scenario in mind, if only to attempt avoidance.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Truly Making a Difference
June 25, 2006 | Business & Commerce | Governance | People & Society
Dave Pollard often gives detailed and passionate voice for my intuitive and information-overloaded thoughts. Today is no different.
So progressives need to acknowledge that, unless they devote most of their time and energy to activities other than electing and lobbying politicians, they will continue to accomplish nothing. Indeed, they will accomplish less than nothing, since in the meantime the corporate and political elite will be busy dismantling, rolling back, bribing their way out of, and circumventing laws and regulations, a much easier process than getting them passed, and enforced, in the first place.
I gave up on MoveOn et al a long time ago. Those organizations are good in the crunch-time of an election, but real change isn't going to happen there. And the Democrats are hopeless, look at the mess Bush is creating, in many—not several, but many different areas—and they still have no core to rally around. It's completely depressing.
The two big opportunities to make a high-leverage change are education and business. Help increase funding for local public schools. Help raise the literacy and numeracy level of our kids. Encourage parental involvement in education. Encourage deep study in science and math and music and art. Learn enough to make a direct contribution yourself. Consume less. Vote with your dollars. Start your own business or partner with a small team. Create instead of consume. Look at the bigger picture. Spend your time volunteering instead of shopping or watching TV. Engage in something outside your own self-interest. Make a contribution of time and mental energy, not money. Be the change you want.
Do all that stuff Dave tells you to do in his article, because he's thinking about this a lot more deeply than you or me.
Permalink | Comments (2)
Squeezing the Middle Class
June 16, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
An as-usual well-researched article from the Economist: The rich, the poor and the growing gap between them.
The one truly continuous trend over the past 25 years has been towards greater concentration of income at the very top. The scale of this shift is not visible from most popular measures of income or wages, as they do not break the distribution down finely enough. But several recent studies have dissected tax records to investigate what goes on at the very top.
The figures are startling. According to Emmanuel Saez of the University of California, Berkeley, and Thomas Piketty of the Ecole Normale Supérieure in Paris, the share of aggregate income going to the highest-earning 1% of Americans has doubled from 8% in 1980 to over 16% in 2004. That going to the top tenth of 1% has tripled from 2% in 1980 to 7% today. And that going to the top one-hundredth of 1%—the 14,000 taxpayers at the very top of the income ladder—has quadrupled from 0.65% in 1980 to 2.87% in 2004.
No surprises if you've been paying attention, but it's nice to have independent non-spun facts to consider.
Permalink | Comments (1)
Mission Accomplished
June 8, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
The critics have weighed in on the Zarqawi news:
greg.org: Wow, if there was any doubt about where the contemporary art market is going, they were dispelled this morning at Christie's Baghdad, where the US Government paid a record-setting $286 billion--plus $240 for framing--for this portrait of the dead Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Billmon: The Pentagon Channel today announced the cancellation of its long-running reality TV series, The Abu Zarqawi Hour, saying tonight's special-effects extravaganza, in which Keifer Sutherland and a team of secret agents trail the terrorist mastermind to his hideout and call in a massive airstrike, would be the show's last.
The show originally piloted in 2003, and found a regular place in the Pentagon Channel's prime-time lineup in February 2004, replacing the widely panned sitcom series Mission Accomplished, now in syndicated reruns on Fox News.
Doubts about the show's viability deepened in April, after Washington Post TV critic Tom Ricks questioned whether the supposedly spontaneous reality show was actually being scripted by its producers.
Flashback from the history channel:
- Washington Post (April 2006): The U.S. military is conducting a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to internal military documents and officers familiar with the program. The effort has raised his profile in a way that some military intelligence officials believe may have overstated his importance and helped the Bush administration tie the war to the organization responsible for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
For the past two years, U.S. military leaders have been using Iraqi media and other outlets in Baghdad to publicize Zarqawi's role in the insurgency. The documents explicitly list the "U.S. Home Audience" as one of the targets of a broader propaganda campaign.
Some senior intelligence officers believe Zarqawi's role may have been overemphasized by the propaganda campaign, which has included leaflets, radio and television broadcasts, Internet postings and at least one leak to an American journalist.
You can believe almost nothing in the media. Ignore it or satirize it, but don't believe it.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Mapping Dialogue
June 8, 2006 | Governance | People & Society | SoL
Fantastic 86 page research report on the fundamentals, forms, and usage of ten different dialogue approaches. [via Chris.]
Permalink | Comments (0)
So That Explains It
May 26, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
I always wondered why so many people voted for Bush when his policies are in direct opposition to their own interests. I remember this most vividly when a relative, who was pro-Bush and a big proponent of lower interest rates and taxes, realized in retirement that low interest rates meant that fixed-income returns were also low – that is, as the interest rates fell so did his income. You could hear the confusion in talking with him. Policies he'd advocated all his life suddenly worked against his own interests and lifestyle. If he got out of denial, it must have been some internal reckoning.
So this morning a summary & pointer to an essay by Jeffrey B. Perry crossed my screen which helps explain this phenomenon. It's a memorial of historian Theodore W. Allen and his book The Invention of the White Race, Vol. 1 and 2.
Specifically, Allen introduced the idea of the buffer social control group:
In 1996, on radio station WBAI in New York, Allen discussed the subject of "American Exceptionalism" and the much-vaunted "immunity" of the United States to proletarian class-consciousness and its effects. His explanation for the relatively low level of class consciousness was that social control in the United States was guaranteed, not primarily by the class privileges of a petit bourgeoisie, but by the white-skin privileges of laboring class whites; that the ruling class co-opts European-American workers into the buffer social control system against the interests of the working class to which they belong; and that the "white race" by its all-class form, conceals the operation of the ruling class social control system by providing it with a majoritarian "democratic" facade.
America is at a tipping point, but it's hard to see because in a culture it takes years to effect a change. It's happened over the last six years – which parts of peace and prosperity during the earlier Clinton years do people dislike so much? – and it's going to take a while to undo the deeper effects of the fundamentalist Bush policies. "Starving the government" through deep tax cuts and simultaneous warring is going to cut the middle class in two (this has already started) – further expanding the buffer social control group at the low-end of the elites (where my existence lies) and playing off the hopes and dreams of the top-end of the laborers (this would completely explain the email and comment spam phenomena, for instance). The increased anxiety of falling down to the lower tier, rather than simply carving out a comfortable middle-class existence, will help control people's behavior. This is why Bush/Cheney/Rove use fear so well as a political tool, and why "creating jobs" and "low prices" drive so many of our collective decisions, from local zoning and community planning to were we live and what we consume.
Only a small number of people are able to take a systemic and long-term view of things, and therefore most behavior is short-term and self-interested. But like the relative mentioned above, when the long-term implications hit it has a big personal impact, and by then it's too late to do anything about it. America as a county is going to find out what this looks like, but it will take a few more years and the people trying to fix the mess will likely have had nothing to do with creating it. If you want to take the really long view, then perhaps we should keep electing Fundamentalists for another decade or two so they're holding the bag when the charade goes south. That would be the crushing blow to this round of delusional policies and politics, if we don't become a nation of jingoistic Nazi-like nationalists along the way.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Which is Weirder, the Beard or the Tie?
May 25, 2006 | Arts & Culture | Governance | People & Society
VT Senator Patrick Leahy with Bob Weir, May 23, 2006. It looks like a good time was had by all. More.
Permalink | Comments (2)
The Principles Underlying Our System Are Actually Better
May 20, 2006 | Governance | Life | People & Society
This post at TPM sums up my feelings on the US national security situation exactly:
[...] is just this dogmatic post-9/11 insistence on acting as if human history began suddenly in 1997 or something. The United States was able to face down such threats as the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany without indefinite detentions, widespread use of torture as an interrogative technique, or all-pervasive surveillance. But a smallish group of terrorists who can't even surface publicly abroad for fear they'll be swiftly killed by the mightiest military on earth? Time to break out the document shredder and do away with that pesky constitution.
Last, there's the unargued assumption that civil rights and the rule of law are some kind of near-intolerable impediment to national security. But if you look around the world over the past hundred years or so, I think you'll see that the record of democracy is pretty strong. You don't see authoritarian regimes using their superior ability to operate in secret and conduct surveillance to run roughshod over more fastidious countries. You see liberalism prospering -- both in the sense that the core liberal countries have grown richer-and-richer and in the sense that liberal democracy has consistently spread out from its original homeland since people like it better. You see governments that can operate in total secrecy falling prey to crippling corruption. You see powers of surveillance used not to defend countries from external threats, but to defend rulers from domestic political opponents.
The U.S.S.R., after all, lost the Cold War, not because we beat them in a race to the bottom to improve national security by gutting the principles of our system, but because the principles underlying our system were actually better than the alternative. If you don't have some faith the American way of life is capable of coping with actual challenges, then what's the point in defending it?
I hope enough people are awake at the polls in November, and the flawed voting machines aren't actually rigged.
Permalink | Comments (0)
What The President Does
May 12, 2006 | Governance | People & Society
Here is what's in store for President Bush next week:
TONY SNOW: Okay, let's do the week ahead. Here we go. And thank you all for your forbearance.
Sunday, the presentation of a White House tree at the Australian Ambassador's Residence. Monday, remarks at the Annual Peace Officers' Memorial Service at the United States Capitol.
Tuesday, South Lawn arrival ceremony for Prime Minister Howard of Australia, and Mrs. Howard. The President will meet with the Prime Minister on Tuesday, have a joint press availability with the Prime Minister. He also will be meeting with the Sacramento Monarchs, the 2005 WNBA Champions. There will be an official dinner with the Prime Minister and Mrs. Howard on the evening of the 16th. Wednesday --
QUESTION: Official, not state dinner?
TONY SNOW: It says, official dinner.
Wednesday, photo opportunity and remarks to the 2006 United States Winter Olympic and Paralympic teams. He will sign H.R. 4297, the Tax Relief Extension and Reconciliation Act of 2006 -- so we do have a -- the answer is, Wednesday; I should have read my own paper, I apologize. Attends the Republican National Committee Gala at Constitution Hall.
Thursday, TBD. Friday, attend a Thelma Drake for Congress Reception in Norfolk, Virginia, then on to Northern Kentucky, remarks on the American Competitiveness Initiative in Highland Heights, Kentucky, and a Geoff Davis for Congress Reception in Florence, Kentucky. That's the week ahead.
Wow, he's pretty busy with photo opportunities, and signing into law some more tax breaks for millionaires [hat tip, Plausible Story]. I guess everything else is pretty well under control.
Permalink | Comments (1)
Political Action Videos
May 10, 2006 | Arts & Culture | Governance | People & Society
Wow. Check out this political ad (1:23) from a US Senate race in PA. "Our President is a criminal...."
Handheld, black & white + color, kids, aggressive language, no holds barred. Of course, in one sense it's still cynical – taking advantage of our unrest with The System, but still, you gotta hand it to the guy for taking a stand. All too rare today. Witness this anonymous blog, for instance.
Permalink | Comments (0)
Bush Does Not Laugh
April 30, 2006 | Arts & Culture | Governance | People & Society
The Happy Tutor educates us on the meaning of Steven Colbert's savage roast satarizing Bush. [video]
Permalink | Comments (0)
More on Police Solicitations
April 19, 2006 | Governance | Life | People & Society
Good morning Julia and Nicholas,
When I woke up today I had more questions about the police solicitations.
-- Is Jim Reid an employee of the Hanover Police Department? The voicemail said "with" the Hanover PD, so I assume he is, because if he isn't he should have said "for" the Hanover PD.
-- If he's NOT an employee, then I'm annoyed that I was lied to by someone representing the town. There should be much more careful monitoring of outside contractors. For instance, perhaps he should say his firm's name, along with "representing the Hanover PD." I'm sure you can understand why someone misrepresenting themselves to be a Hanover police department employee would be problematic, in both the present situation and in the long-term consequences.
-- If he IS an employee, is he being paid for this time soliciting businesses? That is, are taxpayers paying to have town employees call citizens and ask for money? I'm not sure what to think about that, but it's not an obvious win from my point of view.
-- If he IS an employee, and is NOT being paid, i.e. this is a volunteer effort, then I have concerns about the "wink wink, nudge nudge" aspect of "volunteering" for your employer. This is common in white-collar businesses, where salaried employees are regularly expected to work more than the specified 40 hours per week, violating all sorts of Federal labor act provisions and State labor laws. For some reason this is never enforced, presumably due to the power of Capital over Labor, but I would dislike the idea that a town government, especially one the size and quality of Hanover, would engage in this behavior.
Perhaps you can shed some light on the operation of this program and address my concerns, which I'm sure are shared by many others in our community. Thanks for your consideration.
Michael J.
Permalink | Comments (2)
Police Solicitations
April 18, 2006 | Governance | Life | People & Society
Hello Julia and Nicholas,
I received a voicemail today from Jim Reid. The message was (exact transcription), "Mike this is Jim Reid calling with the Hanover Police. Please give me a call at 448-1108. No emergency, just gotta talk to you. Thank you."
So, I'm sure you know where this is going: This was a solicitation for an ad for the crime prevention booklet. Okay, that's fine, I like to support community organizations. Jim's a nice guy, and he handled this well, and I registered no complaint with him. This is a policy issue.
My opinion is that the voicemail message should say, "I need to talk to you about our first-ever crime prevention booklet and how you can help," or somesuch thing. Because if it doesn't, you're diluting the value of the police depar